EU referendum

[blueinsa]

Tampon tax scrapped as the EU let Dave have another little victory so he can claim how we can dictate from within.

 

[aguero93:20]

"UK's favourite TV Racist" Jeremy Clarkson says stay in and build a full United States of Europe!

No one saw that coming....

Not the worst idea at all if the EC either get disbanded or face elections and the presidency goes to a popular vote.

International unions are the way the wider world is moving anyway, so imo it's only a matter of time that it will happen, it should be how it happens and under what terms that take centre stage.

 

[aguero93:20]

Fair play, must have changed, I know some mates of mine did a 6 month stint retro fitting army vehicles in Kuwait and they had to pay all the tax and NI for it when they got back.

Still resident in the UK until you're permanently resident abroad for 188 days in a continuous 12 month period if it's the same as Ireland. Tax laws are pretty similar as well so it should be.

 

[TCIB]

I think a bit less red tape with out than in regarding business in the real world so out for me.
Even if that proves wrong i still want out due to the despicable scaremongering by certain sections of the "in" mp's.
There has been some from the opposite side but it seemed born out of a desire to try and fight bullshit with bullshit.
With that i mean they do not seem to have instigated the bullshitery and in general have stayed away from it.

When people try to scare me like a little lamb in these circumstances i feel there is at least a benefit to those speaking in such terms which ofc makes me wary.

To much "might happen" and "possibly maybe could happen's" from the "in" brigade for my liking.

 

[mat]

Not the worst idea at all if the EC either get disbanded or face elections and the presidency goes to a popular vote.

International unions are the way the wider world is moving anyway, so imo it's only a matter of time that it will happen, it should be how it happens and under what terms that take centre stage.

To be honest I think the same way. If we vote yes we go in balls deep in Europe. If no we stand alone.

 

[bluethrunthru]

Tonight IDS wraps himself in a Union Flag and launches himself as the Brexit darling ( over and above Boris ?) and launches an Exocet at the In campaigners of Dave and Gideon - sit back and watch this is like last nights dippers / rags second leg Lol !!

 

[roaminblue]

How Negative Interest Rates Will Turbocharge The Migrant Crisis.
In the 1989 Batman movie, the Joker (played by Jack Nicholson) showers a crowded Gotham street with free money.

In the scene, it looks like it’s raining hundred-dollar bills. The people love it. Little do they know, the money is actually a trap. Once the Joker has lured them into the street, he unleashes poisonous gas.

I think the latest gimmick to stimulate the economy is pretty much the same thing. It’s one of the most absurd ideas I’ve heard in a while. And that’s saying something, considering the outrageous schemes our economic luminaries have recently come up with, like…

Once European governments start handing every person thousands of dollars in free money each month (more than many in Africa make in a year), everyone will be scrambling for Europe.

A basic income is a sure recipe for economic disaster and increased cultural tensions. It’s an environment where blowhards and demagogues flourish. Unfortunately, this has happened repeatedly throughout Europe’s history. Once again, it’s going to lead to some very bad things.

I think a basic income will greatly accelerate this recurring trend.
Whether you call it free money, a basic income, or helicopter money, the idea is spreading. It’s the next potion the economic witch doctors will use once their latest scam—negative interest rates—not only fails to cure our economic ailments, but predictably makes them worse.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-03-16/how-negative-interest-rates-will-turbocharge-migrant-crisis

This is an incredibly bad article mate. It really is nonsense.

Zerohedge is incredibly hit and miss, its basically a click bait site for those with something of an eye on the financial markets

 

[roaminblue]

Our power in negotiations will come from the fact that we buy far more from them than we sell them, and we can buy our cars from Japan and our wine from South Africa if they decided to get shitty with us. This would stuff the Eurozone and they know it, so it just won't happen because self interest will previal over revenge.

This is argument is raised time and time again, and its such point taken as gospel by many of the out campaign, but it really tells very little of the story.

We buy more than we sell to the EU. Fine. However in macroeconomic terms what does this mean? In Isolation, not a lot.

The question you should ask is not "what are our trade statistics with the EU", but rather, "what is the extent of UK imports/exports within EU trade statistics"? I.e. Taking a macro lens rather than a micro lens.

This has been done by a few academics, but of course has been completely lost amongst the noise and the rhetoric. Now remember, this is done by backing out UK trade data from overall trading data. Its static, and doesn't take into account any increase or decrease in trades following renegotiation of trades post (potential) Brexit.

Taking trade, ex uk, exports to the world. The UK comprises c. 15% of the EU exports. Sure, we (using pre-brexit data) would be their largest exporter. However 15% really puts into perspective the scale of their portfolio, and reduces UK bargaining power. The US is around the same levels. Countries that on an individual basis post negligible trade stats comes in at around 40%. Diversified!

Now what this must highight, is two things. 1) its not clear cut that the EU would automatically give us everything they want. They still have 85% of exports going to other countries 2) with this in mind (and their under reliance on us than is perceived) we must look at their motivation: 2a) to prevent further breakdown of the EU 2b) to continue to strengthen the EU.

This means we are potentially in for a rougher ride than a lot of the out campaign would like to admit. Game theory dictates that punishments must be credible. As the first exit from the eurozone, the EU must punish credibly and commit to punishing credibly (this is expanded upon in sequential games - worth a read, its too much to go into here). So to suggest that the EU won't punish us is, quite frankly, wrong. They will because they have to. They don't want the breakdown of the EU and so to prevent it they must cause enough punishment to deter subsequent action. Even if this hurts them directly. Now before anyone says this would never happen, the world is littered with examples. One potentially being current oil price dynamics or loss leading product sales at supermarkets. Plenty of companies hurt themselves to prevent further action and secure a brighter future.

Now, even if they do NOT punish the UK for Brexit, what is their future incentive? To strengthen the EU. This would come in the shape of inward investment, and ringfencing of industries. It happens now, it will happen again. The EU will want to grow its industry from the inside. Whether its short term or long term, they will want to reduce intra EU trade barriers and will attempt to reduce the tarrifed trade that occurs with the rest of the world through developing the industries internally. So this will, over middle and long term potentially reduce (and the rest of the world's imports to the eurozone. Every trading bloc is doing such). They have dozens of countries who are keen to develop the industries. We have ourselves. Isolationism is not for the 21st century.

With the above in mind, where does that leave us? Well, we have established that we are a relatively small part of the EU's overall portfolio, what about us?

Well, on one hand we have c. two dozen countries exporting c. 15% of total exports to the UK. On the other we have us, one country, exporting c. 45% of our exports to c. two dozen countries. What is even more interesting is what the stats look like when we dig deeper into the granularity. Of the 27 countries and from an intra eu, one on one basis, we are the main trading partner for.....Zero. In fact, we comprise less than 10% of trade for......all but two countries (the mighty Cyprus being one). So even though at a macro level we are a not-insignificant trading partner, our nation makes a smaller impact to EU trade than we, perhaps, believe.

I also think its worth noting that trade data does not include services. I don't know how to find that data, but if someone does know feel free to let me know, I can have a look into it, time permitting.

However, services play a large part in a modern economy, and we know that the EU's total services exports are around half a trillion. So they should really be inlcuded in some format.

All of this can be viewed using trade data on eurostats, I'm sure, by memory, I've forgotten some points, or they have become hazy, so please feel free to verify.

Now, we're a great country, we're politically strong, fiscally strong, mature, and have a great mix of capitalism and public services. But the world is moving towards regional blocs, it's moving towards globalisation. We should be a part of this in order to evolve with dynamic economics and secure our place in a fast moving society. We should err away from isolationism, one only needs to look over at Japan. They are stuck in a quagmire of deflation due to faltering trade statistics, aging population, anti-immigration policies, and their central banks are quickly running out of ammunition.

I think we will probably be fine inside or outside, we're not about to fall off a deep dark precipice, but I strongly worry we are missing out on the opportunity to remain aligned with the future. We can become more engaged in europe and we can help to drive policies, shape it to our will. It makes more sense to be a part of it and, to my mind, nothing that has happened has outraged me enough to not want to be a part of it. Immigration is a misnomer, it will continue unabated regardless, in my opinion.

 

[PJMCC1UK]

Not the worst idea at all if the EC either get disbanded or face elections and the presidency goes to a popular vote.

International unions are the way the wider world is moving anyway, so imo it's only a matter of time that it will happen, it should be how it happens and under what terms that take centre stage.

Which international unions are these exactly? Unless we are classing the Russian annexations or China aggressively building islands to house military, then I am confused as to where else in the world there are closer political unions leading to a centralised government. I'd wager that if Obama had been asked to form a closer political union with Canada and Mexico he would have laughed them out of the White House. Had they even been allowed in. The N American people would have been in uproar. Apparently he thinks himself worthy of telling us we should stay in an EU that still hasn't justified it's spending for 20 years.
If China, Japan and Korea had been asked to form an ever closer political Union then they'd be closer to a state of war in the Far East.
There are literally no other places that are doing what the EU is doing without mandate ( or even with it). The EU is empire expanding. Barroso has even said it himself. Yet they constantly pop out with the ''trade'' argument. If they were about trade then the world would just rid itself of tarriffs and have free trade.

 

[hgblue]

This is argument is raised time and time again, and its such point taken as gospel by many of the out campaign, but it really tells very little of the story.

We buy more than we sell to the EU. Fine. However in macroeconomic terms what does this mean? In Isolation, not a lot.

The question you should ask is not "what are our trade statistics with the EU", but rather, "what is the extent of UK imports/exports within EU trade statistics"? I.e. Taking a macro lens rather than a micro lens.

This has been done by a few academics, but of course has been completely lost amongst the noise and the rhetoric. Now remember, this is done by backing out UK trade data from overall trading data. Its static, and doesn't take into account any increase or decrease in trades following renegotiation of trades post (potential) Brexit.

Taking trade, ex uk, exports to the world. The UK comprises c. 15% of the EU exports. Sure, we (using pre-brexit data) would be their largest exporter. However 15% really puts into perspective the scale of their portfolio, and reduces UK bargaining power. The US is around the same levels. Countries that on an individual basis post negligible trade stats comes in at around 40%. Diversified!

Now what this must highight, is two things. 1) its not clear cut that the EU would automatically give us everything they want. They still have 85% of exports going to other countries 2) with this in mind (and their under reliance on us than is perceived) we must look at their motivation: 2a) to prevent further breakdown of the EU 2b) to continue to strengthen the EU.

This means we are potentially in for a rougher ride than a lot of the out campaign would like to admit. Game theory dictates that punishments must be credible. As the first exit from the eurozone, the EU must punish credibly and commit to punishing credibly (this is expanded upon in sequential games - worth a read, its too much to go into here). So to suggest that the EU won't punish us is, quite frankly, wrong. They will because they have to. They don't want the breakdown of the EU and so to prevent it they must cause enough punishment to deter subsequent action. Even if this hurts them directly. Now before anyone says this would never happen, the world is littered with examples. One potentially being current oil price dynamics or loss leading product sales at supermarkets. Plenty of companies hurt themselves to prevent further action and secure a brighter future.

Now, even if they do NOT punish the UK for Brexit, what is their future incentive? To strengthen the EU. This would come in the shape of inward investment, and ringfencing of industries. It happens now, it will happen again. The EU will want to grow its industry from the inside. Whether its short term or long term, they will want to reduce intra EU trade barriers and will attempt to reduce the tarrifed trade that occurs with the rest of the world through developing the industries internally. So this will, over middle and long term potentially reduce (and the rest of the world's imports to the eurozone. Every trading bloc is doing such). They have dozens of countries who are keen to develop the industries. We have ourselves. Isolationism is not for the 21st century.

With the above in mind, where does that leave us? Well, we have established that we are a relatively small part of the EU's overall portfolio, what about us?

Well, on one hand we have c. two dozen countries exporting c. 15% of total exports to the UK. On the other we have us, one country, exporting c. 45% of our exports to c. two dozen countries. What is even more interesting is what the stats look like when we dig deeper into the granularity. Of the 27 countries and from an intra eu, one on one basis, we are the main trading partner for.....Zero. In fact, we comprise less than 10% of trade for......all but two countries (the mighty Cyprus being one). So even though at a macro level we are a not-insignificant trading partner, our nation makes a smaller impact to EU trade than we, perhaps, believe.

I also think its worth noting that trade data does not include services. I don't know how to find that data, but if someone does know feel free to let me know, I can have a look into it, time permitting.

However, services play a large part in a modern economy, and we know that the EU's total services exports are around half a trillion. So they should really be inlcuded in some format.

All of this can be viewed using trade data on eurostats, I'm sure, by memory, I've forgotten some points, or they have become hazy, so please feel free to verify.

Now, we're a great country, we're politically strong, fiscally strong, mature, and have a great mix of capitalism and public services. But the world is moving towards regional blocs, it's moving towards globalisation. We should be a part of this in order to evolve with dynamic economics and secure our place in a fast moving society. We should err away from isolationism, one only needs to look over at Japan. They are stuck in a quagmire of deflation due to faltering trade statistics, aging population, anti-immigration policies, and their central banks are quickly running out of ammunition.

I think we will probably be fine inside or outside, we're not about to fall off a deep dark precipice, but I strongly worry we are missing out on the opportunity to remain aligned with the future. We can become more engaged in europe and we can help to drive policies, shape it to our will. It makes more sense to be a part of it and, to my mind, nothing that has happened has outraged me enough to not want to be a part of it. Immigration is a misnomer, it will continue unabated regardless, in my opinion.

This isn't about trade, we have always traded with European countries and whether we are in or out of the EU we always will, most of the world is not a member and trades perfectly happily with it. The EU is an undemocratic, corrupt, overly regulated, bureaucrats paradise which has gradually eroded the supremecy of the British parliament and courts, and the pro EU side know that there is no affection for this organisation amongst the British people so they are resorting to scare tactics about economic meltdown, just as their predecessors did over the Euro. And we are not alone, across Europe the penny is dropping that the EU is a failing political and monetary project that is killing jobs and growth, and ignoring the will of the people. 48% of Dutch people recently said they wanted out of the EU, and anti EU parties are doing well in the very heartland of the project in France and Germany. It makes no sense for the EU to impose tariffs on British goods because they sell us much more than we sell them so their imposition would be a clear indication that this organisation seeks to punish those who express their democratic will to no longer be a member, Is that the type of organisation we want to be part of? What does this tell us about the type of organisation this is? The clear implication is that they know full well that a Britain freed of the chains of EU regulation and able to make our own trade deals with growing economies across the globe would prosper, and the need to protect their political project is more important than the well being of their own people and a country which despite having voted to leave will always be a close ally. I'm not sure using this argument does the pro EU side any favours.