Should We Leave the EU?

[ComUtoR]

In 2014 the % of GDP from exports was 28.4% and was a decline on the previous years.

Yes I can accept that we will lose some exports I just don't see the huge economic crash being touted by the yes camp.

Maybe I'm a narrow minded racist

 

[Iskra]

In 2014 the % of GDP from exports was 28.4% and was a decline on the previous years.

Yes I can accept that we will lose some exports I just don't see the huge economic crash being touted by the yes camp.

Maybe I'm a narrow minded racist

It's not just about losing exports, it's about big business leaving the UK for Europe, thus causing mass job losses.

Unfortunately, the debate thus far seems to be more about attitudes to migrants than economics. Although, I suppose migrants won't want to come here if we're an economic basket case. Perhaps that's the plan...

 

[tony_mac]

In 2014 the % of GDP from exports was 28.4% and was a decline on the previous years.

Yes I can accept that we will lose some exports I just don't see the huge economic crash being touted by the yes camp.

Maybe I'm a narrow minded racist

How do I work out which is the 'Yes' and which is the 'No' camp?
Is the question to leave or stay?

Realistically, I expect that the aim will be for as little as possible to change - at least initially.
Instability and uncertainty is bad for the economy, and there will be plenty created just by a decision to leave, without lots of other changes at the same time.

 

[ComUtoR]

It's not just about losing exports, it's about big business leaving the UK for Europe, thus causing mass job losses.

Sorry but the "mass job losses" is still using fear to generate support. I've been watching the various news reports and political debates and there is still a distinct lack of definitive language. Its all possibly, potentially, maybe. Even the news last night was talking about the use of fear as a tactic.

I don't doubt there will be job losses but certainly not this "mass" level of losses

This country recently suffered a huge financial crisis and is still recovering from the effects. This was whilst we are in the EU. The fact is that job losses happen for many many reasons. There have been various companies who relocated from the UK as they are following the best tax incentives. Because we are in the EU it has given them that level of mobility. I would like to know if our rate of corporation tax is dictated by the EU. If we left could we reduce our corporation tax and various other taxes to incentive buisness to stay, as currently, that is something we have failed to do.

 

[ExRes]

Unfortunately, I don't trust the British public to understand the economics of the situation and I'm deeply concerned that we will be dragged to our demise due to narrow-minded racism towards migrants.

Perhaps then, the yes campaigners should concentrate on pointing out the benefits of staying in and not, like some are already happily doing, screaming racist at everyone who is considering voting no

While some no leaning people undoubtedly are racist it should be realised very many are not and simply believe that the financially corrupt EU juggernaut leaves much to be desired
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Where did I say people can't speculate?! Absolutely people can speculate. But we must separate speculation from fact, and be aware that it is only speculation. Therefore, writing off my concerns as "scaremongering" with no evidence is horribly complacent. There are peoples' livelihoods, families and friends at stake here - things that dare I say are more important than money.

a) Why don't you reread your post #382

b) Where did I mention scaremongering?

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

Maybe I'm a narrow minded racist

Assuming that is referring to Iskra's comment, I guess I would be. I found his/her comment to be utterly disgraceful and insulting

 

[Iskra]

Assuming that is referring to Iskra's comment, I guess I would be. I found his/her comment to be utterly disgraceful and insulting

I think you're jumping the gun somewhat. Nowhere did I say everyone who want to leave the EU is a racist, or anything like that. There are of course valid arguments for leaving the EU, but unfortunately they aren't the ones dominating in the press.

Do you think the coverage of the migrant issue regarding Brexit is proportional to its actual impact? I certainly don't feel it is.

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

Unfortunately, I don't trust the British public to understand the economics of the situation and I'm deeply concerned that we will be dragged to our demise due to narrow-minded racism towards migrants.

Your comment, Iskra, implies that i can not be trusted to make an informed decision on which way I wish to vote. For that reason, I find the remark insulting.

 

[Iskra]

Your comment, Iskra, implies that i can not be trusted to make an informed decision on which way I wish to vote. For that reason, I find the remark insulting.

Be as insulted as you like then. Vote whichever way you like. The only people who would get offended by that comment are: a) those unable to understand the economic consequences of leaving the EU b) those wishing to leave the EU due to racist views on migrants.

I don't think the entire British population can be trusted to vote intelligently. Do you?

 

[radamfi]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35641496

suggests the better educated you are, the more likely you are to be favourable towards the EU.

 

[Iskra]

Sorry but the "mass job losses" is still using fear to generate support. I've been watching the various news reports and political debates and there is still a distinct lack of definitive language. Its all possibly, potentially, maybe. Even the news last night was talking about the use of fear as a tactic.

I don't doubt there will be job losses but certainly not this "mass" level of losses

This country recently suffered a huge financial crisis and is still recovering from the effects. This was whilst we are in the EU. The fact is that job losses happen for many many reasons. There have been various companies who relocated from the UK as they are following the best tax incentives. Because we are in the EU it has given them that level of mobility. I would like to know if our rate of corporation tax is dictated by the EU. If we left could we reduce our corporation tax and various other taxes to incentive buisness to stay, as currently, that is something we have failed to do.

It's quite likely there will be job losses if we leave the EU. Thus, why is there anything wrong with pointing that out? Personally, I believe a number of big companies will choose to vacate the UK if we leave the EU. That would then mean a large number of jobs being lost.

It's very difficult to be definitive about something that isn't definitively going to happen.

It was (and still is) a global crisis, that started in the US and would have affected us whatever unions we were or weren't in.

We are the EU base for a lot of companies. Not being in the EU would give those companies very little reason to have their EU HQ's/factories/service centres etc here. They may keep outposts here for convenience, but it would make exporting goods to EU harder.

Corporation tax is not dictated by the EU and it is currently lower in the UK than in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Norway, Holland, China, America, Japan, Denmark, Sweden, Austria, Luxembourg, Australia, India and Brazil.

Our corporation tax is currently very generous.

 

[Tetchytyke]

That's wrong - it's excluding the exports to other EU countries; otherwise those figures make no sense.

You're quite right. That means the UK take 16% of the share of non-EU trade (counting the UK as non-EU for this purpose). Which is less.

Yes I can accept that we will lose some exports I just don't see the huge economic crash being touted by the yes camp

45% of our export trade is with the EU. That is a significant part of our business. It is also true that we are a net importer from the EU.

I am sure that we can negotiate trade treaties with the EU. However we would not be negotiating from a position of strength, either economically or politically. We would be reliant on the club we've just given two fingers to to treat us nicely.

Unfortunately, the debate thus far seems to be more about attitudes to migrants than economics.

That is my worry too.

Membership of the EU is political as much as it is economic. But the level of discourse from the "leave" camp is not talking about economics, it is talking about "the threat of terrorism" and "immigration". It's not talking about how we'll put the bread on the table, it's talking about nebulous ideas like "sovereignty", as though we don't need anyone else.

That's not to say people who are against the EU are racist, it is that many of the arguments being raised by the "leave" camp are worryingly xenophobic in nature.

 

[Iskra]

Perhaps then, the yes campaigners should concentrate on pointing out the benefits of staying in and not, like some are already happily doing, screaming racist at everyone who is considering voting no

While some no leaning people undoubtedly are racist it should be realised very many are not and simply believe that the financially corrupt EU juggernaut leaves much to be desired
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


a) Why don't you reread your post #382

b) Where did I mention scaremongering?

It's very difficult to argue the benefits of the status quo though, isn't it.

I agree the EU project is far from perfect, but that's why Cameron's rejection of 'ever closer union,' is appealing, to me anyway.

 

[deltic]

While some no leaning people undoubtedly are racist it should be realised very many are not and simply believe that the financially corrupt EU juggernaut leaves much to be desired

What evidence is there that EU is financially corrupt compared to for example the UK. There is certainly corruption within EU member states to varying degrees but is the EU as a civil service corrupt?

 

[anme]

a) Why don't you reread your post #382

b) Where did I mention scaremongering?

I don't really like to get into these arguments, but given the above...

a) I assume you mean post 383:

"That is entirely speculation on your part. It could well be that people are required to leave."

I don't see any command there for anyone to stop speculating? It's pointing out that someone *was* speculating. I'm not sure how that could be unclear, but I humbly apologise if it was.

b) I was accused of scaremongering in an earlier post, indeed not by you. You will no doubt have noticed that there are several posters on this thread. I believe this is a very unfair accusation as the fear I was expressing is very real and justified. Obviously none of us can tell whether it will come to pass or not (I hope not), but it's still rational to be afraid of something which has a probability of less than 100%.

 

[Oswyntail]

As an aside, why is "scaremongering" so frowned upon? No one at this stage can do much other than speculate about end results, and it is a quite legitimate tool to imagine "worst case" scenarios. So long as they are presented as such, they are as intellectually valid as any other hypothesis - only scarier.

 

[Antman]

As an aside, why is "scaremongering" so frowned upon? No one at this stage can do much other than speculate about end results, and it is a quite legitimate tool to imagine "worst case" scenarios. So long as they are presented as such, they are as intellectually valid as any other hypothesis - only scarier.

Well that's fair comment up to a point but does anybody really think we can't stand on our own feet? The rest of the EU need us far more than we need them.

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

Well that's fair comment up to a point but does anybody really think we can't stand on our own feet? The rest of the EU need us far more than we need them.

Well it wouldn't be the first time a united Europe has been against the UK, would it...?

 

[DelayRepay]

Well that's fair comment up to a point but does anybody really think we can't stand on our own feet? The rest of the EU need us far more than we need them.

I agree with your first point - we can stand on our own two feet. I think if we leave, things will get worse but I don't think the world will end.

However I disagree with your second point. Can you elaborate on why you think the EU need us more than we need them? I don't think they do.

 

[Steveman]

Blair,
Corbyn
Cameron
The BBC
The Guardian

All hideously pro EU, who needs any more evidence an OUT vote is the only sensible one.

 

[Iskra]

Well it wouldn't be the first time a united Europe has been against the UK, would it...?

A few things:

Europe was hardly united, more occupied. (Also, Spain, Switzerland, Sweden and Ireland weren't openly hostile to UK interests at the time).

That was the UK and its massive empire, which was a trading bloc in itself.

And we then got the help of two superpowers...

Unless you were talking about Eurovision

 

[WestCoast]

Blair,
Corbyn
Cameron
The BBC
The Guardian

All hideously pro EU, who needs any more evidence an OUT vote is the only sensible one.

Farage
Gove
Boris
Daily Mail

All hideously anti-EU, who need any more evidence an IN vote is the only sensible one.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

As an aside, why is "scaremongering" so frowned upon? No one at this stage can do much other than speculate about end results, and it is a quite legitimate tool to imagine "worst case" scenarios. So long as they are presented as such, they are as intellectually valid as any other hypothesis - only scarier.

I would suggest it's a matter of degree and of how accurately the possible bad scenarios are presented. Nothing wrong with pointing out that choosing X is quite likely to lead to bad consequence Y if that realistically is the case, and I personally wouldn't call that scaremongering. But too often you hear things along the lines of

1. X will lead to Y (where actually the chance of Y is fairly remote, or dependant on lots of other things happening as well as X), or
2. X will lead to Y (where the Y the speaker is claiming is significantly exaggerated beyond what is realistically likely).

I would say both of those are scaremongering, and bad because they are misleading. I personally have some suspicion that the claims about lots of lost jobs if we leave the EU fall into category (2) above. In other words, some jobs will be lost in the event of a Brexit (which is certainly a bad thing) but nowhere near as many as the 'In' campaign is by and large making out.

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

Unless you were talking about Eurovision

Exactly

 

[tony_mac]

but nowhere near as many as the 'In' campaign is by and large making out.

When you say 'In campaign', do you mean serious public figures who have said they are campaigning, unnamed media 'sources', or random people on the internet?

I think most of the nonsense is coming from the third group (with some help from the second).
Or do you have a specific claim in mind?

 

[southern442]

As an aside, why is "scaremongering" so frowned upon? No one at this stage can do much other than speculate about end results, and it is a quite legitimate tool to imagine "worst case" scenarios. So long as they are presented as such, they are as intellectually valid as any other hypothesis - only scarier.

Scaremongering is used all the time in newspapers, including but not limited to:

• Leaving the EU
• Staying in the EU
• How AWFUL Corbyn is, dear
• Russia (they are, in reality, less of a threat to the UK than the parties in Northern Ireland are to freedom in the UK
• Terrorist attacks (why the newspapers are so quick to believe a terrorist organisation taking reponisbility for an attack is beyond me)
• How AWFUL our healthcare system is, dear

 

[Busaholic]

Blair,
Corbyn
Cameron
The BBC
The Guardian

All hideously pro EU, who needs any more evidence an OUT vote is the only sensible one.

Jeremy Corbyn was against the UK joining the Common Market and has remained in a basically anti-EU position ever since. He has obviously made a calculated decision, based on his new responsibilities, to let the Conservative Party implode and not to add his two pence. In this way, he may be trying to follow Harold Wilson's lead from 1975, except it was of course then Labour that would implode shortly after that referendum, with the breakaway SDP.

Where is your evidence re the BBC?

 

[RichmondCommu]

Well that's fair comment up to a point but does anybody really think we can't stand on our own feet? The rest of the EU need us far more than we need them.

Oh please do you really think that? In actual fact its quite the opposite. And yes, in the age of the global economy I don't think that we could stand on our own two feet without membership of the EU.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Clearly you're the one losing the plot!

What we have at the moment is a race to the bottom, higher wages means less profit for big business!

And that of course is less profit that can be reinvested into the business. I really don't understand why you have a problem with big business.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Your comment, Iskra, implies that i can not be trusted to make an informed decision on which way I wish to vote. For that reason, I find the remark insulting.

Perhaps Iskra has called it right?

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

Perhaps Iskra has called it right?

How so?

 

[RichmondCommu]

How so?

For the reasons that Iskra has already laid out. You seem to have a chip on your shoulder regarding all of this.