flud, you should visit our top universities, their research teams are all multi-national. I am sure we'll do well as a country whatever the outcome but I do think Brexiters are short-sighted.

But we are a net provider for EU ??? ( We put far more in than take out).

 

I agree, and that urgently needs correcting since it continuously adds to our excessive national debt. But I cannot see how abandoning ship will help. Spending the next ten years in frustrating negotiations with the infuriating EU to leave, ending up either being effectively still in or out with nothing makes no sense. Better we concentrate our energies on getting more business from wherever we can find it. The money we give the EU is trifling in comparison, millions are irrelevant, we need at least tens of billions coming in to cope with our national debt and become the stronger country we once were very long ago.

 

I don't see that the EU is stopping us doing that, it's our lack of inclination, effort and ability that is. After all, Germany suffers exactly the same EU rules and restrictions as us, but that hasn't stopped it becoming the world's most economically and environmentally successful nation.

.

The eu cant afford for us not to be a net provider.

Its been accepted for years Portugal,Italy, Greece and Spain are a sneeze from oblivion. France is in a slightly better situation and Germany would fine if it were not unification which has cost, is costing billions.We are aligning ourselves not with the powerhouses but the poorhouses..we will always pay more , EU cant cope without our contribution. That's why Greece and Italy are moaning most. They know without us their payouts would go.We have access to a market that's actually going bankrupt..Drive through massive swathes of Europe and you realise it.

The possible additions will only make situation worse.

flud, I don't know where you've got your facts from, but our net contribution to the EU is a tiny 0.05% of our GDP, litterally a tiny drop compared to the economic power of the single market. Sure, the EU will lose one of its most important members and the EFTA countries have the most to gain with Brexit but wake up, we need the EU more than they need us. What we pay them to stay in the club is small beer compared to the cost of finding new markets.

Trex

We can all read what various economists have to say. Those hub very same economists 15 years ago saying exactly same about not adopting euro,which has proved a marvellous bonus to our economy and was totally against many so called experts advice.

I think the stayers should wake up and do some real research,not the stuff fed to us. Read about Italian banking. Mafia control of ports. Greece and tax. France and beurocracy. Germany and its motives. Likely effect on single market when borders are closed. .

Europe is in a massive mess. The uk less so.

Read " The economic impact of Brexit. Woodford Investment."

They know more than all of us put together. They don't offer answers.

Edited May 29, 20169 yr by (NoLongerRegistered#15675)

flud, 9 out of 10 economists will tell you that Brexit is bad for the economy. They don't predict that we are about to go bust or anything like that, just slow growth until we sort ourselves out. That may be 10 years, probably more like a generation. Slow growth affects disproportionally the poorer classes. Also unlike you, I don't think we couldn't join the Euro then because the Euro was bad but because our problem then was (and still is) over borrowing. We constantly needed a higher interest rate to attract foreign money.

If we had joined, perhaps we could have vetoed the decision to force the new accession countries into adopting the Euro and Schengen.

Edited late Trex. Read the report and then Google some of things I mentioned.

For virtually every possible loss there is possibility of bigger replacements. The single market works both ways.

Don't really think its a worthy argument anyway. There is no way on earth Cameron would survive an exit. We wont be leaving. Too many politicians with vested interests in businesses needing to stay.

Blair with his crony Campbell convinced nation it made sense to go to war with a lunatic ( Bush), Cameron convincing a susceptible public to stay is easy. He,s even got folk doing work for him now...

Edited May 29, 20169 yr by (NoLongerRegistered#15675)

flud, I have just read that report that you mentioned.

https://woodfordfunds.com/economic-impact-brexit-report/

 

It's pretty much middle of the road, and I broadly agree with its conclusions.

Without getting into a specialist economists debate, I refer to a useful plot at the end of that report:

That plot clearly shows that our economy is utterly linked to the EU's and we've done very well inside.

 

 

the extrapolated portion of this plot is for a remain outcome.

If Brexiters win, there will be a drop in GDP while we adjust to the loss of investment and trade, the so called 'self inflicted technical recession' that Osborne talked about. I can't tell you what percentage of drop in GDP that will be (I guess about 1% to 2%), so you need to add a 'nike' section to the projection and slide the dotted plot to the right maybe by 5 to 15 years.

Edited May 29, 20169 yr by trex

Both options, Leave or Stay are a step into the unknown. I am saying that you can't predict what will happen if we leave, you can guess but that is all. Your forecast is no more certain than any other prediction.

My guess is that we can maintain a friendly and peaceful relationship with Europe whilst selling to the countries which want our goods and services. Similarly, we can buy goods from those countries which offer something appealing to us. That has happened since the beginning of time and it will continue with or without the EU, history is on our side.

 

The EU stance seems to indicate that friendship, cooperation and trade will be stamped out, extinguished and not be allowed to flourish unless we surrender increasing amounts of our independence to this faceless system which no one seems to identify with. It does not have to be like that, we can be friends with the EU after Brexit. Of course, if another EU nation repays our friendship and help with acts of open hostility and aggression in the form of an invasion (as seems to be prophesised by the IN Campaign), we have our Trident missile system with which to defend ourselves.

 

If I was an aggressive power mad European dictator threatening to invade the UK do you think I would believe that the UK Government would employ Trident against me?

I would simply call its bluff, knowing that any Tory Government would do as it did in 1939 and try to surrender.

Remember then that we had "Doomsday" weapons like Anthrax, gas, plague and other equally foul weapons, at that time but sensibly did not use them for fear the enemy would retaliate in kind.

So what is different now? Absolutely nothing, and the decision not to employ WMD's would be exactly the same.

if it hadn't been for Churchill allying with the Labour party we would be speaking German now.

As to these "New Customers" we would end up dependent on them instead of the EU, so much for "independence"

Edited May 29, 20169 yr by oldgroaner

Europe is in a massive mess.

 

Flud, you've concentrated on the failing countries and disregarded the successful ones. Germany, The Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden and Austria are all successful under EU rules, exporting and fiscally buoyant. The new entrants from the Eastern bloc all have growing economies, some rapidly.

 

Now I have no objection to us being successful outside the EU if we can, but there are both silly and sensible ways of going about it.

 

The silly way is to jump ship now into the unknown, given our record of failure over many decades.

 

The sensible way, if you believe we can make it, is to first find the world markets we need to become independently viable long term and successfully create product for them. The EU isn't stopping anyone doing that, as the successful countries I listed above have shown. All we need do is to work as hard and creatively as they've done.

 

Then, when and if we achieve that success, leave the EU with the assurance that we will succeed. If on the other hand we can't make it, we can just stay safely as we are.

.

Edited May 29, 20169 yr by flecc

I am pleasantly surprised by the nice debate here. I don't often now look at the the Electric Bike forum but I did yesterday and was astonished at how mean-spirited it was (I bought my dream bike - haha, it's going to break - did you lose a relative in the war??)

I keep a close eye on exchange rates, and the GBP has crept up again in the last couple of weeks which suggests that the market anticipates an IN vote.

Because of an accident of birth (like Boris) my children could not get British nationality (they were born abroad as well) and instead take French from their mother. It would be nice, though, if they could live and work in the UK at some point - so my vote is an IN.

I also have a postal vote in the US Presidential election which must make me a member of a small group with votes in each - especially out here in the middle of the Pacific.

Flec and Lectural...both very good posts. Agree in principle with both...I,m still voting out tho.

Edited May 29, 20169 yr by (NoLongerRegistered#15675)

As one who has been on the streets of Herts and Essex, leafletting and canvassing support for the 'Remain' camp, I think I have heard probably every argument from the anti-EU lobby and I'm bound to say, the vast, vast majority that I have engaged with sound dangerously close to the ultra-fascist, Britain First grouping, masquerading as a political party.

 

Other than a contribution in the early days of this thread, I have deliberately abstained from further comment but I'd just like to formally acknowledge my empathy with 'oldgroaner' and 'flecc' who seem to have a better, more informed grasp of the pros & cons than most of those who have populated the thread.

 

In my travels disseminating the 'Remain' message, the biggest problem I have faced is trying to get people to understand the difference between the policies of the tory party and EU initiatives. The tories love this deliberate blurring of distinction and their media wing has created and taken great advantage of this myth that everything is the EU's fault.

 

I am not going to regurgitate material that has been covered in many areas previously, other than to state that an awful lot of people simply fail to recognise, (or are in denial), that the demise of Britain's industries, particularly the exporting ones, and the diminished effectiveness of our great institutions like the NHS, rail, power and other public utilities has nothing whatsoever to do with people in Brussels. All these things result from the very deliberate policies of tory government.

 

If the 'Brexit' camp were to triumph in the referendum, what would we do? Would we embark once more on over-fishing; set artificial territorial limits to keep out those fishermen from other countries? Start another cod-war with tiny Iceland?

 

Were it not for the EU, there would be no control over fishing quotas and it wouldn't just be a handful of Icelandic trawlers we'd be competing with; the Russians would step in, taking advantage of any perceived split in the EU. It's the same EU that has provided the means through sensible control and a compensation system by which farming right across the community has been able to continue in a meaningful way.

 

Nothing is perfect but the strength of any collective or union lies in unity. Outside of the EU, the UK has very little bargaining power and no means at all of being heard in debate. There is no going back - we've been there and it wasn't really all that good. The world has changed, continues to change and the future of our children is unlikely to be best served as an independent, non-exporting country, unable to free itself of a self-developed, post WW2, superiority complex.

 

All the jingoism and xenophobia which colour the Brexit campaign are exactly the same mantra we have come to expect from England football fans and its worth can be measured in the number of world cups and European championships won by the country over the last half-century.

 

Sadly, the most telling thing I have learned on the streets is that a great number of people don't understand the difference between migrant and refugee. A common qualification in speech patterns goes along the lines of, 'I'm not racist but.....'. There is also a perception abroad that the UK has already taken on more than its fair share of 'these people' and we should slam the door on any others headed our way. That misconception becomes so exaggerated in the minds of some people that they don't understand and seemingly cannot accept that many other countries, even less affluent and much smaller than the UK, have absorbed far more immigrants than us.

 

So, while we seem able to overcome the language barrier inevitable when discussions between more than a couple of dozen countries occur, we seem to have a real difficulty with our own language - migrant/refugee, xenophobia/racism.

 

In a little over three weeks time, we shall have an answer to the great question but, much as I dislike 'Ca-moron', I hope the 'Remain' camp wins the day and perhaps brings an end to the political aspirations of the buffoon, Johnson, and the two disloyal and despicable, opportunist, fascist Scots, Gove and Duncan-Smith. Whether in or out of the EU, Britain deserves better than than these self-serving individuals.

 

Tom

Edited May 31, 20169 yr by oldtom

Well written post Tom. Don't agree with everything but good points well made.

As one who has been on the streets of Herts and Essex, leafletting and canvassing support for the 'Remain' camp, I think I have heard probably every argument from the anti-EU lobby and I'm bound to say, the vast, vast majority that I have engaged with sound dangerously close to the ultra-fascist, Britain First grouping, masquerading as a political party.

 

Other than a contribution in the early days of this thread, I have deliberately abstained from further comment but I'd just like to formally acknowledge my empathy with 'oldgroaner' and 'flecc' who seem to have a better, more informed grasp of the pros & cons than most of those who have populated the thread.

 

In my travels disseminating the 'Remain' message, the biggest problem I have faced is trying to get people to understand the difference between the policies of the tory party and EU initiatives. The tories love this deliberate blurring of distinction and their media wing has created and taken great advantage of this myth that everything is the EU's fault.

 

I am not going to regurgitate material that has been covered in many areas previously, other than to state that an awful lot of people simply fail to recognise, (or are in denial), that the demise of Britain's industries, particularly the exporting ones, and the diminished effectiveness of our great institutions like the NHS, rail, power and other public utilities has nothing whatsoever to do with people in Brussels. All these things result from the very deliberate policies of tory government.

 

If the 'Brexit' camp were to triumph in the referendum, what would we do? Would we embark once more on over-fishing; set artificial territorial limits to keep out those fishermen from other countries? Start another cod-war with tiny Iceland?

 

Were it not for the EU, there would be no control over fishing quotas and it wouldn't just be a handful of Icelandic trawlers we'd be competing with; the Russians would step in, taking advantage of any perceived split in the EU. It's the same EU that has provided the means through sensible control and a compensation system by which farming right across the community has been able to continue in a meaningful way.

 

Nothing is perfect but the strength of any collective or union lies in unity. Outside of the EU, the UK has very little bargaining power and no means at all of being heard in debate. There is no going back - we've been there and it wasn't really all that good. The world has changed, continues to change and the future of our children is unlikely to be best served as an independent, non-exporting country, unable to free itself of a self-developed, post WW2, superiority complex.

 

All the jingoism and xenophobia which colour the Brexit campaign are exactly the same mantra we have come to expect from England football fans and its worth can be measured in the number of world cups and European championships won by the country over the last half-century.

 

Sadly, the most telling thing I have learned on the streets is that a great number of people don't understand the difference between migrant and refugee. A common qualification in speech patterns goes along the lines of, 'I'm not racist but.....'. There is also a perception abroad that the UK has already taken on more than its fair share of 'these people' and we should slam the door on any others headed our way. That misconception becomes so exaggerated in the minds of some people that they don't understand and seemingly cannot accept that many other countries, even less affluent and much smaller than the UK, have absorbed far more immigrants than us.

 

So, while we seem able to overcome the language barrier inevitable when discussions between more than a couple of dozen countries occur, we seem to have a real difficulty with our own language - migrant/refugee, xenophobia/racism.

 

In a little over three weeks time, we shall have an answer to the great question but, much as I dislike 'Ca-moron', I hope the 'Remain' camp wins the day and perhaps brings an end to the political aspirations of the buffoon, Johnson, and the two disloyal and despicable, opportunist, fascist Scots, Gove and Duncan-Smith. Whether in or out of the EU, Britain deserves better than than these self-serving individuals.

 

Tom

 

A masterful post Tom, packed with many excellent points.

.

Have you heard of Matthew Elliott? he is the one who masterminded the AV referendum in 2011 for the conservatives. He's turned public opinion 27% in favour of AV to 36% against by the time the referendum took place. He's the man who is masterminding now the leave campaign. His tactic is simple enough, like in the previous referendum, an exagerated price tag was put on the cost of AV and pictures of better uses of money did all the talking. This time his tactic is the same, exagerating the cost of membership and suggesting better uses for the money. The remainers are making the same mistake as his previous opponents. They head straight to the bait, pointing out the obvious error in the amount, thus repeating themselves the core message that there is a price to pay and the money can be better used elsewhere.

Have you heard of Matthew Elliott? he is the one who masterminded the AV referendum in 2011 for the conservatives. He's turned public opinion 27% in favour of AV to 36% against by the time the referendum took place. He's the man who is masterminding now the leave campaign. His tactic is simple enough, like in the previous referendum, an exagerated price tag was put on the cost of AV and pictures of better uses of money did all the talking. This time his tactic is the same, exagerating the cost of membership and suggesting better uses for the money. The remainers are making the same mistake as his previous opponents. They head straight to the bait, pointing out the obvious error in the amount, thus repeating themselves the core message that there is a price to pay and the money can be better used elsewhere.

 

Matthew Elliott understands that widespread modern human weakness, knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing.

.

Edited May 30, 20169 yr by flecc

the OECD predicts that the EU need 50 million immigrants by 2050 to keep things like they are and the UK need probably 10% or 5 millions, just to replace those in the workforce that reach retirement. Where do you want to get them from? Africa, Middle East, Asia or EU?

the OECD predicts that the EU need 50 million immigrants by 2050 to keep things like they are and the UK need probably 10% or 5 millions, just to replace those in the workforce that reach retirement. Where do you want to get them from? Africa, Middle East, Asia or EU?

I tend to steer clear of political discussion on this forum, but importing immigrants to maintain the status quo is not a good arguement. Somewhere along the line, the immigrants will require exactly the same and the problem increases exponentially.

 

The solution to this problem requires fundimental changes in the way we live our lives, resulting in a more sustainable existance. Opening the gates to the masses as a solution is simply kicking the can further down the road.

we need to develop robots very quickly.

we need to develop robots very quickly.

In the long distant past (1970's) I was a member for the company I worked for of a Think tank named "The Home of the Future" organised by the Research institute for Social Change (That bit worried me at the time, but I digress) we brainstormed the sort of future that would be appearing around the year 2000, and we got some things right, like solar and wind power and tablet computers, but failed woefully to anticipate the appearance of the internet, and optimistically foresaw the appearance of automated manufacturing facilities that would free people from the need to work, and bring about a revolution in leisure, research and the arts.

Ah well as Father used to say, remarking about me I might add

"Nothing is foolproof to the talented fool!"

But seriously, how could we have envisioned that the greed and cowardice of the moneyed classes would impel them to invest in what is virtually slave labour in the far east, rather than bite the bullet and invest in automation here?

In our defence I plead "Diminished Responsibility" though "insanity" will do when we dared to imagine that these millstones around the neck of Humanity would do the right and honourable thing.

And their greed has transformed China into a Nightmare megapower affecting our future and everyone elses too, and inevitably the Chinese will bite the hand that fed them.

Robots and automation are essentially software engineering and our education does not produce enough engineers to compete worldwide. Progress in electronics is not matched by much slower progress in software.

Robots and automation are essentially software engineering and our education does not produce enough engineers to compete worldwide. .

 

And the few we do produce go into the computer games creation industry, where the opportunities and money are in the UK.

.

Not forgetting the many crap systems developed for the NHS.

if the Brexiters win, what will the pro-EU parliament do? how many EU laws are going to be dropped?