EU referendum

EU referendum

  • In

    Votes: 503 47.9%

  • Out

    Votes: 547 52.1%
  • Total voters
    1,050
Status
Not open for further replies.
BlueHammer85 said:
humble pie for a few 'financial experts' on here
Click to expand...

The IMF and other such global bodies/states will all take that line because in essence there are probable elements of truth in what they state, it's part of their mandate to ensure that there is global fiscal stability as they are the global lender of last resort. The question though that I think has to be asked is what is the medium term implication to the UK and EU - Short term even the leavers will agree that there will naturally be some disruption and negative impact on the economy in the UK- that's just a by-product of uncertainty. The real question is what will the UK look like in 3-5 years time once the dust has settled?

In my opinion the break up will effect the EU more in the medium term, the direction of policy and final goal is very well sign posted and openly salivated by many EU officials which is ever greater fiscal, monetary and political union with the goal of absorbing more Eastern/central states into the project, that can only create even further transferences of resources from the wealthier members to the more impoverished ones and that in turn will continue to ratchet up the growing social unrest that has been gathering pace in Europe as well as fuelling the ever increasing resentment we currently see.

The UK I believe will be starting to see the benefits of their actions as they have allowed themselves to diversify there trading options and remember the UK runs a substantial trade deficit with Europe anyhow, the UK dodged a bullet with the Euro (a universally agreed fact) - the question is will the UKs instincts serve her well again - on balance I think so.

This whole debate is going to boil down to peoples predictions of what life will be like post either event - I think that nutter Donald Rumsfield's fanous quote encapsulates the situation for both sides currently.

there are no "knowns." There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we do not know we don't know
 
grunge said:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36024492

The UK's exit from the European Union could cause "severe regional and global damage", warning the IMF.
Click to expand...

From what I can see, the comments do not represent a detailed analysis of the implications of Brexit. More a passing reference to it in a 230 page World Economic Outlook. Its included as potential downside, among a number of other potential negative factors. In that context it probably falls into the "what you would expect them to say" category.
 
The IMF does not serve the interests of the global economy, but those of American finance (FED, US Treasury) in the world. The irony is that it does this with Tax Payers money. The IMF and the US require the UK to stay within the EU. The IMF simply furthers American Imperialism. Is it 17.5 Billion USD going to the Ukraine for a so called bail out ?
 
hgblue said:
Great word that 'could'. A vote to leave could result in fire breathing dragons reducing the country to ashes.
Click to expand...

Funnily enough, that's about as likely as the end of the world financial meltdown they are predicting, in fact, there is more chance of the financial meltdown from these fuckers own actions on a daily basis than there is us voting out!
 
hgblue said:
Great word that 'could'. A vote to leave could result in fire breathing dragons reducing the country to ashes.
Click to expand...

Well then. No point the inners arguing there case at all then. Might aswell leave it to the Outers as everything with be Bright and Rosy. Despite what the IMF say.
 
Gelsons Dad said:
Global!
What they actually mean is that the EU economies will collapse and that will be bad for them given how much they have invested in Greece.
Click to expand...

You got it in one. I think they were hoping nobody would see it that way. Without our financial input the EU will become even more precarious than it is already leading to financial instability across the Union, but that 'aint our problem after Brexit is it.
Also If the UK is SO important to Europe and Global financial stability, why wasn't Cameron able to achieve more in his negotiations?
Quite simply it's because we cannot manoeuvre round the Treaties enshrined in EU law and they don't see 'the project' being spoilt by little Englanders. Now they are beginning to see the folly of their intransigence and push out the scare stories to support Cameron. See my earlier post on page 77
 
Last edited:
YPhrunts said:
You got it in one. I think they were hoping nobody would see it that way. Without our financial input the EU will become even more precarious than it is already leading to financial instability across the Union, but that 'aint our problem after Brexit is it.
Also If the UK is SO important to Europe and Global financial stability, why wasn't Cameron able to achieve more in his negotiations?
Quite simply it's because we cannot manoeuvre round the Treaties enshrined in EU law and they don't see 'the project' being spoilt by little Englanders. Now they are beginning to see the folly of their intransigence and push out the scare stories to support Cameron. See my earlier post on page 77
Click to expand...

They're not putting out a scare story. Just making a statement of the bleedin obvious. Albeit one that has been taken out of context by the media.

The IMF haven't undertaken a detailed analysis of Brexit over say a 20 year period and concluded that it will be a failure. They've simply updated their routinely produced World Economic Outlook and decided that, during the 5 year period that they're looking at, it represents a negative risk factor for the world economy. It would create uncertainty, protracted negotiations etc. Quelle surprise! Surely even the most fervent Brexiters would accept that Brexit isn't going to instantly transform the UK economy? Any economic benefits would be over the longer term.

And even if Brexit is hugely beneficial, economically, for the UK in the next 5 years, that doesn't mean that the IMF are wrong. Its the "World Economic Outlook", not the "UK economic Outlook". IF the UK instantly prospers outside of the EU, that would have negative consequences for the rest of the EU. The IMF's view that Brexit represents a negative risk factor for the world economy in the short term, seems to me to be undeniable.

Of course, the few sentences in the 230 page report have been taken out of context by the Stay campaign. But that doesn't mean that this report has been produced as part of a grand conspiracy.
 
cibaman said:
They're not putting out a scare story. Just making a statement of the bleedin obvious. Albeit one that has been taken out of context by the media.

The IMF haven't undertaken a detailed analysis of Brexit over say a 20 year period and concluded that it will be a failure. They've simply updated their routinely produced World Economic Outlook and decided that, during the 5 year period that they're looking at, it represents a negative risk factor for the world economy. It would create uncertainty, protracted negotiations etc. Quelle surprise! Surely even the most fervent Brexiters would accept that Brexit isn't going to instantly transform the UK economy? Any economic benefits would be over the longer term.

And even if Brexit is hugely beneficial, economically, for the UK in the next 5 years, that doesn't mean that the IMF are wrong. Its the "World Economic Outlook", not the "UK economic Outlook". IF the UK instantly prospers outside of the EU, that would have negative consequences for the rest of the EU. The IMF's view that Brexit represents a negative risk factor for the world economy in the short term, seems to me to be undeniable.

Of course, the few sentences in the 230 page report have been taken out of context by the Stay campaign. But that doesn't mean that this report has been produced as part of a grand conspiracy.
Click to expand...

Fair comment. The IMF have made their point. Lets see if they keep banging on about it up to the point of referendum. Then we'll know whether it's attempted scaremongering or just objective reporting.
 
cibaman said:
They're not putting out a scare story. Just making a statement of the bleedin obvious. Albeit one that has been taken out of context by the media.

The IMF haven't undertaken a detailed analysis of Brexit over say a 20 year period and concluded that it will be a failure. They've simply updated their routinely produced World Economic Outlook and decided that, during the 5 year period that they're looking at, it represents a negative risk factor for the world economy. It would create uncertainty, protracted negotiations etc. Quelle surprise! Surely even the most fervent Brexiters would accept that Brexit isn't going to instantly transform the UK economy? Any economic benefits would be over the longer term.

And even if Brexit is hugely beneficial, economically, for the UK in the next 5 years, that doesn't mean that the IMF are wrong. Its the "World Economic Outlook", not the "UK economic Outlook". IF the UK instantly prospers outside of the EU, that would have negative consequences for the rest of the EU. The IMF's view that Brexit represents a negative risk factor for the world economy in the short term, seems to me to be undeniable.

Of course, the few sentences in the 230 page report have been taken out of context by the Stay campaign. But that doesn't mean that this report has been produced as part of a grand conspiracy.
Click to expand...
It's going to be hilarious if we vote to leave watching these so called experts eating lashings of humble pie when we prosper outside the EU. Remind me again what these experts predicted would happen if we didn't join the Euro? The economy would collapse? Inward investment would cease? Sound familiar?
 
stonerblue said:
how do you work that one out?
Click to expand...

As your logic claimed that the vote to reject was somehow invalid because of only a 32% turnout, then it follows that not only did not that 68% NOT support the EU enough to get off there arse, but with the 20.33% of the turnout that did vote against it translates into 88.33% of available voters did not support the EU position.

Or you can accept that of the votes cast and counted the overwhelming majority were against, and that as it was being seen as a guild to how people feel on the EU, it was one big f*ck off.
 
blueonblue said:
As your logic claimed that the vote to reject was somehow invalid because of only a 32% turnout, then it follows that not only did not that 68% NOT support the EU enough to get off there arse, but with the 20.33% of the turnout that did vote against it translates into 88.33% of available voters did not support the EU position.

Or you can accept that of the votes cast and counted the overwhelming majority were against, and that as it was being seen as a guild to how people feel on the EU, it was one big f*ck off.
Click to expand...

Why do you presume the non-voters don't support the EU?
 
jimbopm said:
Funny how people are taking pot-shots at the IMF's warnings on A Brexit. Wonder if those same people would be criticising them if they had come out and said a Brexit would be good for the world economy?
Click to expand...

But then you wouldn't have been fawning over it I guess ;-)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top