EU referendum

[kevin horlocks wand]

Correct. Hardly any Remainians subscribe to the centrepiece EU policies of integration, monetary union, open borders, etc. Therefore the UK wouldn't be a member of the "inner circle" that drives such strategies. If they think that will give us huge influence, I beg to differ. Repeatedly playing the veto card to thwart Germany and France seems the best we can hope for.

I'd rather accept the risks of rebuilding outside the EU than settle for such a mind-numbingly negative case for staying.

Correct or voting out which causes sufficient wobble within the European Union that we can rebase it and establish it as an economic cooperation area.

Why do you think they are voting on Cameron's concessions after the referendum???? If we vote in it will be fook off if we vote out it will be , now let's have a look at these concessions you wanted again....

We vote in and that's it we are in and it's the uk backing of further integration. The remain voters may not see it that way but merkel and junker certainly do and this will be the blessing of the federal project as they want it.

 

[TRUE BLUE NO1]

An interesting read.


Cadbury moved factory to Poland 2011 with EU grant.
Ford Transit moved to Turkey 2013 with EU grant.
Jaguar Land Rover has recently agreed to build a new plant in Slovakia with EU grant, owned by Tata, the same company who have trashed our steel works and emptied the workers pension funds.
Peugeot closed its Ryton (was Rootes Group) plant and moved production to Slovakia with EU grant.
British Army's new Ajax fighting vehicles to be built in SPAIN using SWEDISH steel at the request of the EU to support jobs in Spain with EU grant, rather than Wales.
Dyson gone to Malaysia, with an EU loan.
Crown Closures, Bournemouth (Was METAL BOX), gone to Poland with EU grant, once employed 1,200.
M&S manufacturing gone to far east with EU loan.
Hornby models gone. In fact all toys and models now gone from UK along with the patents all with with EU grants.
Gillette gone to eastern Europe with EU grant.
Texas Instruments Greenock gone to Germany with EU grant.
Indesit at Bodelwyddan Wales gone with EU grant.
Sekisui Alveo said production at its Merthyr Tydfil Industrial Park foam plant will relocate production to Roermond in the Netherlands, with EU funding.
Hoover Merthyr factory moved out of UK to Czech Republic and the Far East by Italian company Candy with EU backing.
ICI integration into Holland’s AkzoNobel with EU bank loan and within days of the merger, several factories in the UK, were closed, eliminating 3,500 jobs
Boots sold to Italians Stefano Pessina who have based their HQ in Switzerland to avoid tax to the tune of £80 million a year, using an EU loan for the purchase.
JDS Uniphase run by two Dutch men, bought up companies in the UK with £20 million in EU 'regeneration' grants, created a pollution nightmare and just closed it all down leaving 1,200 out of work and an environmental clean-up paid for by the UK tax-payer. They also raided the pension fund and drained it dry.
UK airports are owned by a Spanish company.
Scottish Power is owned by a Spanish company.
Most London buses are run by Spanish and German companies.
The Hinkley Point C nuclear power station to be built by French company EDF, part owned by the French government, using cheap Chinese steel that has catastrophically failed in other nuclear installations. Now EDF say the costs will be double or more and it will be very late even if it does come online.
Swindon was once our producer of rail locomotives and rolling stock. Not any more, it's Bombardier in Derby and due to their losses in the aviation market, that could see the end of the British railways manufacturing altogether even though Bombardier had EU grants to keep Derby going which they diverted to their loss-making aviation side in Canada.
39% of British invention patents have been passed to foreign companies, many of them in the EU
The Mini cars that Cameron stood in front of as an example of British engineering, are built by BMW mostly in Holland and Austria. His campaign bus was made in Germany even though we have Plaxton, Optare, Bluebird, Dennis etc., in the UK. The bicycle for the Greens was made in the far east, not by Raleigh UK but then they are probably going to move to the Netherlands too as they have said recently.

Anyone who thinks the EU is good for British industry or any other business simply hasn't paid attention to what has been systematically asset-stripped from the UK. Name me one major technology company still running in the UK, I used to contract out to many, then the work just dried up as they were sold off to companies from France, Germany, Holland, Belgium, etc., and now we don't even teach electronic technology for technicians any more, due to EU regulations.

I haven't detailed our non-existent fishing industry the EU paid to destroy, nor the farmers being paid NOT to produce food they could sell for more than they get paid to do nothing, don't even go there.
I haven't mentioned what it costs us to be asset-stripped like this, nor have I mentioned immigration, nor the risk to our security if control of our armed forces is passed to Brussels or Germany.

Find something that's gone the other way, I've looked and I just can't. If you think the EU is a good idea,
1/ You haven't read the party manifesto of The European Peoples' Party.
2/ You haven't had to deal with EU petty bureaucracy tearing your business down.
3/ You don't think it matters.

Interesting read..cheers mate!

 

[Chippy_boy]

A lot of people in the remain camp are using the recent FTSE performance as a basis to prove economic catastrophe, when the reality is no-one knows for sure what will happen, as there is no comparative precedent.

The only certainty will be uncertainty if we vote leave, however Chippy Boy's comments, albeit mainly conjecture in my view, partly show how entwined we appear to be within the European system, and I feel further integration is more dangerous given the continued expansion of the EU, especially as we, as residents, don't have the proper representation to go with it - individual national values and needs will always come to the fore above political allegiances.

You can argue this from either perspective. Funnily enough I am a very strong supporter of right wing policies and I think Patrick Minford is a guy who talks a lot of sense in the main. He talks about the benefits of free trade vs protectionism and uses it to demonstrate how he believes the UK would be better off outside the EU, operating as a free and independent trading nation. Where he is wrong however (or perhaps just not "complete" in his thinking) is that his views are more or less theoretical. They are not founded on actual current realities and they lack pragmatism. Which brings me on to your point.

It is the very fact that the UK is so deeply intertwined with the EU that would make leaving so damaging. People often suggest that other countries, not in the EU, do perfectly well and they completely overlook the point that those countries have not had to extracate themselves from the EU! They don't have 44% of their exports going to the EU and I don't know what percentage of raw materials and other goods coming in.

In the long term - like 20 years plus - I am quite prepared to accept that we *may* be better off outside the EU. Maybe. But it's an awfully long time to wait and the turmoil and pain in the meantime is just not worth it.

Given that, in my view inevitable pain, I think it's far better to stay and try to reform the EU from within. The ground is rapidly shifting and I sense there are other like-minded nations who are also unhappy with the status quo. We should be leveraging their support to seek modifications, adjustments, improvements. I don't think our successfully negotiating some sort of cap on migration numbers (as a % of GDP, or population or whatever) is at all out of the question. LIkewise reform of how the EU operates democratically. All these things can be changed if the will of the people is to change them. And you know, we can always leave at any time we like if things take an adverse turn - we don't need a referendum in fact.

 

[halfcenturyup]

I'll answer it for him.

The UK's economy will be knocked sideways. Since Friday when the Brexit camp pulled ahead in the polls, we've seen £76bn wiped off the value of FTSE 100. That's just the FTSE 100 - not the whole market - and that's just on a *possibility* that Brexit might win. The markets will crash if Brexit win, and if you think that's pure speculation, it isn't - there's very good reasons why. First, it means that we'll have years of uncertainty ahead with businesses not knowing what the trading relationship with Europe is going to be like and therefore unable to make strategic investment decisions. investments will be put on hold and growth will stall. We'll probably fall back into recession, at least in the short term. In the medium term, businesses that have invested in the UK so that they can export to Europe will review there strategies and some of them will decide to shut plants or move production overseas. If the reason they came to the UK was in part because the UK is in the EU and is a gateway to European exports then if that ceases to be the case, we can't expect all of these businesses to stay put, can we.

Professor Minford - just about the only notable economist the Brexit camp has managed to field - said in 2012, “Over time, if we left the EU, it seems likely that we would mostly eliminate manufacturing <from the UK>".

International confidence in the UK's economy will be dented and the value of the pound will fall considerably. Whilst this will actually help our exports, it will push up the costs of our raw materials, food etc. Inflation will rise, and we'll probably have to put up interest rates. Costs of mortgages will go up so people will have less money to spend and that will depress the economy further. Labour costs will increase, also fueled by a decline in EU migrants filling the low paid jobs, leading to increased labour shortage (we ALREADY have more vacancies in the economy than unemployment). HIgher costs makes our productivity even lower (it's already much lower than the world's leading economies), making our products less competitive and sales will decline. We'll struggle to meet current budget commitments (actually we'll simply fail) and since we don't want to increase borrowing (it's already perilously high and failing to keep it under control would result in our credit rating being downgraded and interest rates going higher still), we'd have to make even deeper cuts to public services and extend austerity for several years longer than planned.

If we are ever to recover from this, it will be through increased international (non-EU) trade, but it will take years to negotiate all of the trade deals we need and even then there's no guarantee that these currently non-existant deals will yield enough extra revenue to plug the gap.

On the EU side, they'll lose a chunk of exports to the UK since their goods will be much more expensive, both due to the exchange rate and the tariffs that will inevitably be applied. The UK's leaving will very likely fuel the desire for referendums in other countries, particularly the Netherlands and France. Conceivably, countries such as Italy which are already in a precipitous position could be pushed into bankruptcy. If the Italian banks were to fail, the amount of money needed to support them would be many times greater than that for Greece and with strained finances in Germany already (heightened by their loss of exports to the UK), they would have no choice but to allow Italy to leave the Euro and devalue. Greece would surely follow, and then Portugal and Ireland. The Euro would be dead. If that happens, the whole of the EU is thrown into turmoil and that alone would take decades to recover from.

I could go on.

Yes I am sure you could. But what you are saying is that the EU, out of spite, would impact their trade with the UK to such an extent that they would be "fucked for decades"? That would be madness. That was my question to the OP. Not you by the way.

Look, I am not saying there will be no economic impact, but no one knows what the medium to long term impact will be. It won't be a doomsday scenario though. Economic and political expediency on both sides will see to that.

 

[dickie davies]

Given that, in my view inevitable pain, I think it's far better to stay and try to reform the EU from within. The ground is rapidly shifting and I sense there are other like-minded nations who are also unhappy with the status quo. We should be leveraging their support to seek modifications, adjustments, improvements. I don't think our successfully negotiating some sort of cap on migration numbers (as a % of GDP, or population or whatever) is at all out of the question. LIkewise reform of how the EU operates democratically. All these things can be changed if the will of the people is to change them. And you know, we can always leave at any time we like if things take an adverse turn - we don't need a referendum in fact.

Isn't that the problem. To get any kind of major legislation like that passed, it's going to take everyone to vote in favour and that will never ever happen when so many "poorer" nations citizens will lose out

In my opinion the Eurozone is fucked and at some point it will fuck us, so we may as well leave now and suffer the short term consequences for our long term benefit. Plus this will give us a head start on the other EU nations when it does go tits up

 

[smudgedj]

Here are a few who strongly believe the UK should remain a member of the EU:

• Governor of the Bank of England
• International Monetary Fund
• Institute for Fiscal Studies
• Confederation of British Industry
• Leaders/heads of state of every single other member of the EU
• President of the United States of America
• Eight former US Treasury Secretaries
• President of China
• Prime Minister of India
• Prime Minister of Canada
• Prime Minister of Australia
• Prime Minister of Japan
• Prime Minister of New Zealand
• The chief executives of most of the top 100 companies in the UK including Marks and Spencer, BT, Asda, Vodafone, Virgin, IBM, BMW etc.
• Kofi Annan, the former Secretary General of the United Nations
• All living former Prime Ministers of the UK (from both parties)
• Virtually all reputable and recognised economists
• The Prime Minister of the UK
• The leader of the Labour Party
• The Leader of the Liberal Democrats
• The Leader of the Green Party
• The Leader of the Scottish National Party
• The leader of Plaid Cymru
• Leader of Sinn Fein
• Martin Lewis, that money saving dude off the telly
• The Secretary General of the TUC
• Unison
• National Union of Students
• National Union of Farmers
• Stephen Hawking
• Chief Executive of the NHS
• 300 of the most prominent international historians
• Director of Europol
• David Anderson QC, Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation
• Former Directors of GCHQ
• Secretary General of Nato
• Church of England
• Church in Scotland
• Church in Wales
• Friends of the Earth
• Greenpeace
• Director General of the World Trade Organisation
• WWF
• World Bank
• OECD

A roll-call of defeat and deceit.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Yes I am sure you could. But what you are saying is that the EU, out of spite, would impact their trade with the UK to such an extent that they would be "fucked for decades"? That would be madness. That was my question to the OP. Not you by the way.

Look, I am not saying there will be no economic impact, but no one knows what the medium to long term impact will be. It won't be a doomsday scenario though. Economic and political expediency on both sides will see to that.

I didn't say there would be no trade agreement out of spite. There will be no trade agreement because the two sides have irreconcilably opposing positions and we've seen already how long these agreements take to negotiate even when there's broad agreement. We cannot go back to the British electorate having successfully won a Brexit vote and say, "sorry but we are having to agree to free movement of labour, the working time directive and other social legislation and we also are agreeing to the supremecy of the European courts. Surely you will agree that the UK outside the EU is not going to accept those terms? (And if you don't agree, what the hell are we thinking of leaving for???) And on the EU side, how on earth can they accept us withdrawing £9bn/year of net contributions, and being allowed to freely export to all the EU countries whilst they have the costs and restrictions of EU social legislation to bear, whereas we do not. Why would Estonia for example - which exports to us very little and has nothing to gain from the UK having such an agreement, agree to allowing UK firms to unfairly compete in it's own market with it's own domestic businesses? A trade agreement need the support of 20 member states, the majority of whom wouldn't want one.

If what you suggest was allowed, car manufacturers such as Nissan and Toyata for example, might in fact *close* European plants and move them to the UK, where they could enjoy all the benefits of access to the EU market, and yet none of the EU workers' rights legislation. If what you suggest was allowed, other EU countries would want the same as the UK, and that could leave to the break up of the EU.

That's why there will be no trade deal. There's enough leaders across Europe telling us, out means out, and the best the Brexit camp can say is "well they would say that wouldn't they".

 

[Chippy_boy]

Isn't that the problem. To get any kind of major legislation like that passed, it's going to take everyone to vote in favour and that will never ever happen when so many "poorer" nations citizens will lose out

In my opinion the Eurozone is fucked and at some point it will fuck us, so we may as well leave now and suffer the short term consequences for our long term benefit. Plus this will give us a head start on the other EU nations when it does go tits up

That's all well and good, but what if "suffer the short term consequences" means you're out of work and unable to find another job? Maybe losing your home? Does that fall into the category of "may as well leave now"? Whilst I am not suggesting you are not strongly principled and prepared to make a stand (maybe you are), talk's cheap and many of the Brexit side might not be quite so enthusiastic if they realised the likely consequences.

Businesses are trying to drop as strong hints as they can. No business leader likes to tell their workforce they may be out of a job if the vote goes the wrong way - it does nothing for staff morale and the last thing they want is all the workers getting into a frenzy, thinking about striking and/or brushing up their CV's. So they couch their warnings in more gentle words about "the benefits of staying in the EU" and "having to revisit our strategy if we were to leave". But it's not very subtle, what they mean is "we might be shutting if we leave the EU".

 

[CityStu]

Could have included 88% of 600 independent economists think "stay" is better for the country as well mate, so I think this list was well balanced!;)

Seriously tho....putting joking aside, I've switched off to a lot of "leavers" comments for the very same reason, so it does work both ways...No one knows what is going to happen either way, so for outs to imply they know more than alot of the experts, seems very strange.....If we all kept to a "I disagree and provide proof/analysis of why they feel that way" we are all likely to listen to what people have to say. For any of us to discredit/belittle people's posts isnt helpful for anyone..

Didn't only a tiny percentage of the economists asked respond? I'm not sure if you've counted them as supporting Remain (which is totally disingenuous) or ignored them (which is a bit less disingenuous), but most economists asked didn't come out fighting for either side.

 

[smudgedj]

Didn't only a tiny percentage of the economists asked respond? I'm not sure if you've counted them as supporting Remain (which is totally disingenuous) or ignored them (which is a bit less disingenuous), but most economists asked didn't come out fighting for either side.

It´s been pointed out before and he ignored it. Doesn´t fit the construct of total extinction on a Brexit.

"Reported figures are based on unweighted data and so should only be taken as representative of those who responded."

That means that you cannot use it to say what economists feel as a whole, only the individuals who responded.
83% of the economists could not be bothered to return their questionnaires. 83% of economists are lazy fuckers.

 

[Pino]

“Corpus Juris” is the name for the EU’s system of justice, providing one European Legal Area, A European Public Prosecutor and a European Criminal Code and in my view it’s one of the principle reasons to vote for Brexit. Apart from doing away with jury trials it abolishes habeus corpus, i.e. the concept of “innocent until proven guilty”. Criminal investigations make no distinction between imprisonment for prosecution purposes or investigative purposes.

It transcends British law when a British person is under investigation by the European Public Prosecutor (EPP) who can request his remand in custody. . .for a period of up to 6 months, renewable for 3 months, where there are reasonable grounds to suspect the accused has committed one of the offences defined, or good reasons for believing it necessary to stop him committing such an offence. . .” (Page 90, Article 20 of the EU’s own book, Corpus Juris). the EPP can incarcerate someone for months without charge and it appears there’s no limit to the number of 3-month extensions. You may remember the case of Andrew Symeou from Enfield, who was extradited to Greece and languished in jail there, based on the signature of a magistrate, that no UK judge could overturn despite the evidence against him being obtained under duress. He was in a Greek prison for almost a year and denied bail until the trial was adjourned. It turns out he was wrongly arrested and framed for a crime he didn’t commit whilst on holiday in Greece.

 

[Citizen of Legoland]

That's why there will be no trade deal. There's enough leaders across Europe telling us, out means out, and the best the Brexit camp can say is "well they would say that wouldn't they".

You've counterpointed your own argument at the end. There are two main reasons why EU member representatives don't want us to leave. One is that it will weaken the EU and create a significant trading competitor. The other is the amount of work required in negotiating new deals so member states can continue trading with what will still be a major consumer. Of course the latter is their decision, but if they really wanted to put their own economies at risk they wouldn't be acting very responsibly.

As you say, they're highly unlikely to be in favour of all this.

 

[smudgedj]

I didn't say there would be no trade agreement out of spite. There will be no trade agreement because the two sides have irreconcilably opposing positions and we've seen already how long these agreements take to negotiate even when there's broad agreement. We cannot go back to the British electorate having successfully won a Brexit vote and say, "sorry but we are having to agree to free movement of labour, the working time directive and other social legislation and we also are agreeing to the supremecy of the European courts. Surely you will agree that the UK outside the EU is not going to accept those terms? (And if you don't agree, what the hell are we thinking of leaving for???) And on the EU side, how on earth can they accept us withdrawing £9bn/year of net contributions, and being allowed to freely export to all the EU countries whilst they have the costs and restrictions of EU social legislation to bear, whereas we do not. Why would Estonia for example - which exports to us very little and has nothing to gain from the UK having such an agreement, agree to allowing UK firms to unfairly compete in it's own market with it's own domestic businesses? A trade agreement need the support of 20 member states, the majority of whom wouldn't want one.

If what you suggest was allowed, car manufacturers such as Nissan and Toyata for example, might in fact *close* European plants and move them to the UK, where they could enjoy all the benefits of access to the EU market, and yet none of the EU workers' rights legislation. If what you suggest was allowed, other EU countries would want the same as the UK, and that could leave to the break up of the EU.

That's why there will be no trade deal. There's enough leaders across Europe telling us, out means out, and the best the Brexit camp can say is "well they would say that wouldn't they".

No trade agreement. Let´s look at that.

The EU is a rules-based organisation bound by treaty and convention to negotiate in good faith. Their rules yes?

Article 50 commits the EU to negotiate with any departing EU Member State

http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/th.../title-6-final-provisions/137-article-50.html


Article 8 commits the EU to a “good neighbourliness” policy “founded on the values of the Union and characterised by close and peaceful relations based on cooperation”.

http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/th...ts/title-1-common-provisions/6-article-8.html

And Article 3 affirms the EU’s commitment to promoting “free fair trade”

http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/th...ts/title-1-common-provisions/4-article-3.html

But they are vindictive spiteful twats? So no trade agreement.

 

[inbetween]

An interesting read.


Cadbury moved factory to Poland 2011 with EU grant.
Ford Transit moved to Turkey 2013 with EU grant.
Jaguar Land Rover has recently agreed to build a new plant in Slovakia with EU grant, owned by Tata, the same company who have trashed our steel works and emptied the workers pension funds.
Peugeot closed its Ryton (was Rootes Group) plant and moved production to Slovakia with EU grant.
British Army's new Ajax fighting vehicles to be built in SPAIN using SWEDISH steel at the request of the EU to support jobs in Spain with EU grant, rather than Wales.
Dyson gone to Malaysia, with an EU loan.
Crown Closures, Bournemouth (Was METAL BOX), gone to Poland with EU grant, once employed 1,200.
M&S manufacturing gone to far east with EU loan.
Hornby models gone. In fact all toys and models now gone from UK along with the patents all with with EU grants.
Gillette gone to eastern Europe with EU grant.
Texas Instruments Greenock gone to Germany with EU grant.
Indesit at Bodelwyddan Wales gone with EU grant.
Sekisui Alveo said production at its Merthyr Tydfil Industrial Park foam plant will relocate production to Roermond in the Netherlands, with EU funding.
Hoover Merthyr factory moved out of UK to Czech Republic and the Far East by Italian company Candy with EU backing.
ICI integration into Holland’s AkzoNobel with EU bank loan and within days of the merger, several factories in the UK, were closed, eliminating 3,500 jobs
Boots sold to Italians Stefano Pessina who have based their HQ in Switzerland to avoid tax to the tune of £80 million a year, using an EU loan for the purchase.
JDS Uniphase run by two Dutch men, bought up companies in the UK with £20 million in EU 'regeneration' grants, created a pollution nightmare and just closed it all down leaving 1,200 out of work and an environmental clean-up paid for by the UK tax-payer. They also raided the pension fund and drained it dry.
UK airports are owned by a Spanish company.
Scottish Power is owned by a Spanish company.
Most London buses are run by Spanish and German companies.
The Hinkley Point C nuclear power station to be built by French company EDF, part owned by the French government, using cheap Chinese steel that has catastrophically failed in other nuclear installations. Now EDF say the costs will be double or more and it will be very late even if it does come online.
Swindon was once our producer of rail locomotives and rolling stock. Not any more, it's Bombardier in Derby and due to their losses in the aviation market, that could see the end of the British railways manufacturing altogether even though Bombardier had EU grants to keep Derby going which they diverted to their loss-making aviation side in Canada.
39% of British invention patents have been passed to foreign companies, many of them in the EU
The Mini cars that Cameron stood in front of as an example of British engineering, are built by BMW mostly in Holland and Austria. His campaign bus was made in Germany even though we have Plaxton, Optare, Bluebird, Dennis etc., in the UK. The bicycle for the Greens was made in the far east, not by Raleigh UK but then they are probably going to move to the Netherlands too as they have said recently.

Anyone who thinks the EU is good for British industry or any other business simply hasn't paid attention to what has been systematically asset-stripped from the UK. Name me one major technology company still running in the UK, I used to contract out to many, then the work just dried up as they were sold off to companies from France, Germany, Holland, Belgium, etc., and now we don't even teach electronic technology for technicians any more, due to EU regulations.

I haven't detailed our non-existent fishing industry the EU paid to destroy, nor the farmers being paid NOT to produce food they could sell for more than they get paid to do nothing, don't even go there.
I haven't mentioned what it costs us to be asset-stripped like this, nor have I mentioned immigration, nor the risk to our security if control of our armed forces is passed to Brussels or Germany.

Find something that's gone the other way, I've looked and I just can't. If you think the EU is a good idea,
1/ You haven't read the party manifesto of The European Peoples' Party.
2/ You haven't had to deal with EU petty bureaucracy tearing your business down.
3/ You don't think it matters.

The vast majority of those companies are not British owned and never have been, Jaguar Land Rover is now Indian, Peugeot is French, Ford is American, Cadbury's is American, Hornby's fate has nothing to do with the EU, Gillette is American, Bombardier is Canadian, Texas Instruments is American, Mini is German.... Need I go on? Try focusing on the positive aspects of real British businesses and not the marquees which will sell to the highest bidder and you will see nothing but success stories. Your enemy in all of the above is capitalism, not the EU.

All of the above can be attributed directly to economics - any company choosing to outsource to the EU does it either for logistics or most often for cost and cost alone. In or out they will do it again if it means lower costs, it has nothing to do with membership of a political union which ironically is something I so often hear of brexiters when talking of trade.

As for the awarding of contracts well if you are happy to accept tax rises to pay for British made buses then sure they will be made here. Councils act (hopefully) in the best way for the taxpayers so why wouldn't they pay £50k for a German bus than £85k for a British one, which will you be most happy to accept? If Optare is unable to price itself in it's own market then it is dead in the water, that is the society we live in, find a way to make buses cheaper and compete and maybe they might of sold. Maybe even if we had a government which supported those industries they might be able to stand up but there is no such support and we want to give them more sovereign power...

I'm sure if I asked brexiters where they shopped, the majority will shop to some element in Aldi or Lidl so why are you supporting German business?? This analogy is no different to the above, you did it because of cost. It won't happen with Aldi but if we left, are you happy to pay more at Waitrose because the equivalent of Aldi never came to exist as a result of leaving the EU? For shopping and consumers the EU has been incredible really, not so for British business who supply product but then are you happy to give up your cheap Aldi shop for the farmers market.... I thought not and judging by the Aldi car park this morning the vast majority of people are more than happy to remain ignorant.

Doesn't the above illustrate further the risks of leaving. If big British/European businessses are here and involve themselves here, surely it would be dangerous to annex ourselves from that. Jobs are mainly what is at risk. This isn't 1980, we don't have some massive steel/manufacturing industry that is being held back because of the EU, they are dead because the economic climate no longer permits that industry taking place in this country. If we leave the EU we aren't going to see a steel revolution because we cannot compete with China, again it has nothing to do with membership of the EU. Ok on fisheries maybe it is holding those folk back but are fisheries such a great contributer that 70M people should vote out and take the potential risk, no.

As for electronic technology teaching well that is absolute rubbish, anyone can study electronic engineering both at college or university. EU regulation has nothing to do with things being taught in a classroom, we have an academy here at our company which teaches British standards which just so happen to be harmonised with EU regulation. Harmonised regulation actually benefits engineering because it means an engineer learning their trade in the UK can apply the same standards to work across the continent meaning they can work for any company in the EU and be recognised as equivalent. Put them in the US for example and the standard they were taught to no longer applies meaning they are useless.

 

[Chippy_boy]

No trade agreement. Let´s look at that.

The EU is a rules-based organisation bound by treaty and convention to negotiate in good faith. Their rules yes?

Article 50 commits the EU to negotiate with any departing EU Member State

http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/th.../title-6-final-provisions/137-article-50.html


Article 8 commits the EU to a “good neighbourliness” policy “founded on the values of the Union and characterised by close and peaceful relations based on cooperation”.

http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/th...ts/title-1-common-provisions/6-article-8.html

And Article 3 affirms the EU’s commitment to promoting “free fair trade”

http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/th...ts/title-1-common-provisions/4-article-3.html

But they are vindictive spiteful twats? So no trade agreement.

Clearly you don't read any of my posts. Had you done so, you would have noted the phrase "vindictive, spiteful twats" didn't feature. I explain why from an ideological as well as practical point of view, a no-strings trade agreement cannot happen. Maybe you'd like to engage on any of the points I raised, rather than by seeking to divert attention? Go on, give it your best shot.

There will be no trade agreement because the two sides have irreconcilably opposing positions and we've seen already how long these agreements take to negotiate even when there's broad agreement. We cannot go back to the British electorate having successfully won a Brexit vote and say, "sorry but we are having to agree to free movement of labour, the working time directive and other social legislation and we also are agreeing to the supremecy of the European courts. Surely you will agree that the UK outside the EU is not going to accept those terms? (And if you don't agree, what the hell are we thinking of leaving for???) And on the EU side, how on earth can they accept us withdrawing £9bn/year of net contributions, and being allowed to freely export to all the EU countries whilst they have the costs and restrictions of EU social legislation to bear, whereas we do not? Why would Estonia for example - which exports to us very little and has nothing to gain from the UK having such an agreement, agree to allowing UK firms to unfairly compete in it's own market with it's own domestic businesses? A trade agreement need the support of 20 member states, the majority of whom wouldn't want one.

If what you suggest was allowed, car manufacturers such as Nissan and Toyata for example, might in fact *close* European plants and move them to the UK, where they could enjoy all the benefits of access to the EU market, and yet none of the EU workers' rights legislation. If what you suggest was allowed, other EU countries would want the same as the UK, and that could leave to the break up of the EU.

That's why there will be no trade deal.

 

[YPhrunts]

The remain campaign keep banging on about how we should be 'in there and influencing' Correct. Hardly any Remainians subscribe to the centrepiece EU policies of integration, monetary union, open borders, etc. Therefore the UK wouldn't be a member of the "inner circle" that drives such strategies. If they think that will give us huge influence, I beg to differ. Repeatedly playing the veto card to thwart Germany and France seems the best we can hope for.

I'd rather accept the risks of rebuilding outside the EU than settle for such a mind-numbingly negative case for staying.

This post needs another airing as it is spot on. The only way we could influence events in Brussels is to be completely a part of it and we are never going to be that. We have very little influence and the idea of reforming the cabal is so off kilter that it's just laughable.
We are going to be bossed. Some people love being bossed about. Sad.

 

[smudgedj]

Clearly you don't read any of my posts. Had you done so, you would have noted the phrase "vindictive, spiteful twats" didn't feature. I explain why from an ideological as well as practical point of view, a no-strings trade agreement cannot happen. Maybe you'd like to engage on any of the points I raised, rather than by seeking to divert attention? Go on, give it your best shot.

You wrote there would be no trade agreement. I wrote lets look at that then i gave the EU rules and regulations, with the links. Putting my point across that I think you´re wrong. At the end I wrote But they are vindictive spiteful twats? Which is a question i´m asking. Not a statement that you made.

 

[YPhrunts]

I see the argument (for limited resources) but this is something that our government could do something about.

So in a small Island that has a high population density for its land mass you think the government are going to build more roads and car parks? Where? Some of our towns and cities just don't have the space available. I have had to return from shopping trips because I couldn't find a place to park. Unless we start to waste more agricultural land by putting it under tarmac and concrete then things are not going to get better. You're happy with that idea?

 

[grunge]

It´s been pointed out before and he ignored it. Doesn´t fit the construct of total extinction on a Brexit.

"Reported figures are based on unweighted data and so should only be taken as representative of those who responded."

That means that you cannot use it to say what economists feel as a whole, only the individuals who responded.
83% of the economists could not be bothered to return their questionnaires. 83% of economists are lazy fuckers.

While its a disappointment not more responded, over 600 did and that's a decent cross section, sufficiently large enough that it shouldn't be ignored.

 

[Millwallawayveteran1988]

So in a small Island that has a high population density for its land mass you think the government are going to build more roads and car parks? Where? Some of our towns and cities just don't have the space available. I have had to return from shopping trips because I couldn't find a place to park. Unless we start to waste more agricultural land by putting it under tarmac and concrete then things are not going to get better. You're happy with that idea?

The UK is less than 10% urban. It just feels more when you live in an urban area. Scotland is less than 2%.

There is room, there is just no desire or money!

I get your point though as I've said before I can see both arguments.

Working in finance I have read some scary predictions for the next 4/5 years and I just think it could affect a lot of people more than immigration does.