EU Referendum | UK residents vote today.

[Zarlak]

Post a Brexit vote the UK will not accept free movement. The rest is up to the EU but the leading players in the EU have a massive vested interest in minimising the economic shock and no leverage on the UK govt which has been mandated by the UK population. The threats might work and twist enough arms in the vote but post Brexit the UK is all in with regards to free movement and whatever tariffs are introduced the UK will match them up. What is there to gain for the EU at that point. Shoot itself in the foot to loose the UK a leg. It probably could do that but it is actually Germany's foot and what is the point as you still don't get free movement and while you laugh at the UK's wooden leg it won't be that funny when you are getting measured for your specially fitted shoe.

The evidence for false threats before negotiation in the EU is every other negotiation with and within the EU.

Which means that post Brexit the UK will continue to suffer economically and indefinitely until such time as it has to accept the free movement in order to gain back what it lost and access the single market. It's not a threat, it's just how the world works. It's how bargaining works. It's what has happened to other countries. It is exactly what happened to the most competitive economy in the world who endured their worst recorded recession for over 10 years before having to crawl back to the EU and accept the concessions that the EU wanted. If they hadn't done and refused it as you say Britain will probably do, then they are the ones who continue to suffer. It's nothing to do with threats and laughing at us, it's simply common sense. The one with the power will extract as much value as is possible because they know that the other side is more desperate and therefore likely to agree to get what they want/need.

This vested interest in minimising economic shock, what evidence is there for this besides conjecture and wishful thinking that somehow we're so great that we will be different to the norm? Because we've seen the reverse already. If we leave the EU France will be a bigger economy than we will. We will fall several places, we will not be this mega force you seem to think we will. Nobody is talking about anybody laughing at us, simply getting a deal that is in their interest. With terms that are in their interest. The one with the most power walks away with the best deal, and it is not in the EU's interest to give us what we want and not get what they want, which is freedom of movement. We are the desperate party in this situation, not the EU. The EU have very little reason to back down on what they want. Not to mention pissing off other member states with us having been given special treatment where other countries with better run economies have not.

EDIT: Should say the worlds most competitive economy rather than number 1 economy in the world, that was incredibly lazy of me.

 

[Don't Kill Bill]

Which means that post Brexit the UK will continue to suffer economically and indefinitely until such time as it has to accept the free movement in order to gain back what it lost. It's not a threat, it's how the world works. It's how bargaining works. It's what has happened to other countries. It is exactly what happened to the number 1 economy in the world who endured their worst recorded recession for over 10 years before having to crawl back to the EU and accept the concessions that the EU wanted. If they hadn't done and refused it as you say Britain will probably do, then they are the ones who continue to suffer.

This vested interest in minimising economic shock, what evidence is there for this besides conjecture and wishful thinking that somehow we're so great that we will be different to the norm? Because we've seen the reverse already. If we leave the EU France will be a bigger economy than we will. We will fall several places, we will not be this mega force you seem to think we will. Nobody is talking about anybody laughing at us, simply getting a deal that is in their interest. With terms that are in their interest. The one with the most power walks away with the best deal, and it is not in the EU's interest to give us what we want and not get what they want, which is freedom of movement. We are the desperate party in this situation, not the EU. The EU have very little reason to back down on what they want. Not to mention pissing off other member states with us having been given special treatment where other countries with better run economies have not.

If you look at the trade figures, then you would see that of the 68 billion trade surplus with the UK, Germany and the Netherlands account for most of it. They have the self interest in trading with the UK and they are the ones who lose out if large tariffs are introduced. If this was the case for Greece or Spain I could see the EU perhaps going through with it, not with it being Germany. That is the point you keep making isn't it, self interest. So your argument for punitive tariffs is based on Germany ignoring its self interest on principle. Like with the recent deal with Turkey over migrants where principle won a major victory.

The EU would get its fig leaf, I've no doubt about that but free movement into a UK which has left the EU at the expense of tariffs on all exports to the UK isn't in the main players interests. If immigration is so certainly massively beneficial to economies then why is forcing the UK into accepting free movement so important anyway? Let the stupid British lose out and the EU can keep all the benefits of even more net immigration.

Anyway its not going to happen because the UK is voting to remain and all this is going to be pure conjecture.

 

[endless_wheelies]

Cameron deserved to be called out on his campaign and past record, wouldn't you feel a tad smug in her place?

A tad might have been acceptable. The amount she exhibited was vomit-inducing.

Didn't really make any good points anyway. Some hippy naive rubbish about immoral dealings with the Middle East and trying to accuse Cameron of swerving her Turkey question before he'd had a chance to answer it. But then I suppose with her English Lit undergradship must give her a level of expertise on this matter that mere economics PHDs can only dream of.

 

[golden_blunder]

Wonder what will happen in relation to footballers coming to play in UK. Presumably they will all need work permits. The likes of a young Ronaldo might not qualify.

Edit: in the case of leaving off course

 

[Nytram Shakes]

They will want to come to a deal, you're right. But you are massively inflating how important we are to them, how big or small an economy is isn't significant. This 5th largest economy stuff is thrown around by the leave side but in reality it doesn't amount to anything. Our economy is run terribly, Switzerland's is the best in the world. They have a trade surplus, we have a massive trade deficit. These things are significant. The reason we are the 5th largest economy in the world is in part down to the fact that we are in the EU. We will not be the 5th largest economy in the world once we leave. We will move down a fair few places. If economic size brought people rushing to the table for trade agreements then there would be one between the two worlds largest economies, China and the US. It's a completely irrelevant point about economic size, that's floated around to make people go 'yeah... YEAH!!! SEE!!! We're fecking amazing we will get whatever we want' when really it's irrelevant. This is conveniently ignored by many on the leave side. At the time of sitting down to sort out an agreement with the EU we are not as powerful as we think we are, we will not be as big of an economy as we think we will and we will be more desparate for a deal than the EU will. This is unfavourable to us. If this means that the price we pay is the reason that we want to leave in the first place, then it is completely pointless. You are going through with economic pain to end up where you started, only with less than when you started. That is lunacy. You are still providing no evidence for this special treatment we are going to receive, only your opinion and optimistic hopes. We cannot make deals that affect our future and our children's future on something as flimsy as that. Especially when actual evidence exists to say that's probably not what is going to happen.

The funniest part is that if we leave the EU, suffer a recession and our economy goes to shit before we swallow our pride and go back to the EU and sign an FTA like Switzerland and Austria had to do, allowing free movement across Europe and contributing 60% of what we currently do to Brussels like Switzerland has to, to immediately notice a boost in growth then the people on the leave side who pushed for this all along despite being told that this is what would happen will not accept responsibility for it and will place the blame elsewhere.

and are the people on the stay campaign going to say sorry to our children when in 10 20 years we have a massively over populated country, and no way near enough jobs to support them?

your argument is that it is too much of a risk to leave the EU becuase it will mess up the eccoomy, and i whole heartedly agree that it will mess up the ecconomy, (but i think that is repairable, as we a very inviting trade parter for other countries, and it does matter how big you ecoonmy, ask your self, if you where a leader of a country would you not want to trade with the 5th largest ecconmy, who mainly want to buy stuff of you rather then sell?)

But even if i though it wasn't reparable (which you obviously think) and the country will never be a productive as it is now, i would still vote leave, because i personally dont think the mess we would find ourselves in now if we left, would be anywhere as bad as it will be down the line, if we don't get control of the immigration problem. because no one on the stay campaign has given a single argument of how they are going to deal with finding jobs (not to mention housing schools, hospitals, place on the roads, or even long term water) for that amount of increase in population year on year in a society that needs less people to run it then ever before. and untill some one does im gonna vote out cos it seems like the only way possible to deal with it.

so yes if we leave (which it is lucking very VERY unlikly that we will) yes i will hole heartedly say to my kids yes i voted for this and this is why.

 

[Zarlak]

and are the people on the stay campaign going to say sorry to our children when in 10 20 years we have a massively over populated country, and no way near enough jobs to support them?

your argument is that it is too much of a risk to leave the EU becuase it will mess up the eccoomy, and i whole heartedly agree that it will mess up the ecconomy, (but i think that is repairable, as we a very inviting trade parter for other countries, and it does matter how big you ecoonmy, ask your self, if you where a leader of a country would you not want to trade with the 5th largest ecconmy, who mainly want to buy stuff of you rather then sell?)

But even if i though it wasn't reparable (which you obviously think) and the country will never be a productive as it is now, i would still vote leave, because i personally dont think the mess we would find ourselves in now if we left, would be anywhere as bad as it will be down the line, if we don't get control of the immigration problem. because no one on the stay campaign has given a single argument of how they are going to deal with finding jobs (not to mention housing schools, hospitals, place on the roads, or even long term water) for that amount of increase in population year on year in a society that needs less people to run it then ever before. and untill some one does im gonna vote out cos it seems like the only way possible to deal with it.

so yes if we leave (which it is lucking very VERY unlikly that we will) yes i will hole heartedly say to my kids yes i voted for this and this is why.

A massively over populated country can be fixed without leaving the EU. It's a UK government issue, not an EU issue. You're trying to cut your leg off because you hurt your ankle. It's a ridiculous knee jerk.

Your point about would you not want to trade with the 5th largest economy is irrelevant. For two reasons. One, we will not be the 5th largest economy when we leave. We are the 5th largest economy because we are in the EU and we depend on them for 45% or our exports. If we leave we drop several places. We are barely above France in terms of our economic size as it is, and all it takes is a very slight loss in exchange rates to make us the sixth largest economy. If we leave the EU we will drop several places. Then we are the 7th, 8th, 9th largest economy therefore your point suddenly doesn't sound so good does it??? Second, it's this simple, YES they would want to trade with us. Nobody is disputing that. BUT it is on THEIR terms. THEY are the ones in power, and they are the ones who can say to us 'we do want to trade with you, but you have this accept this' and if we say no, WE are the ones who suffer.

You saying that even if we ended up in economic ruin and could not recover back to where we are today if we left you would still vote to leave tells me all I need to know. There's no point in discussing it with you, you would still harm our countries economy and potentially force a recession on us and your children just to stop some immigration that we need, and benefits us. I can't wrap my head around that. Not that I'm saying that's going to happen, but you just said that even if it does you'd still take it. Wow.

I'd rather us have no plan to address one issue, than have no plan to address 15 issues. Which is what the leave campaign want.

 

[BringNaniBack]

and are the people on the stay campaign going to say sorry to our children when in 10 20 years we have a massively over populated country, and no way near enough jobs to support them?

your argument is that it is too much of a risk to leave the EU becuase it will mess up the eccoomy, and i whole heartedly agree that it will mess up the ecconomy, (but i think that is repairable, as we a very inviting trade parter for other countries, and it does matter how big you ecoonmy, ask your self, if you where a leader of a country would you not want to trade with the 5th largest ecconmy, who mainly want to buy stuff of you rather then sell?)

But even if i though it wasn't reparable (which you obviously think) and the country will never be a productive as it is now, i would still vote leave, because i personally dont think the mess we would find ourselves in now if we left, would be anywhere as bad as it will be down the line, if we don't get control of the immigration problem. because no one on the stay campaign has given a single argument of how they are going to deal with finding jobs (not to mention housing schools, hospitals, place on the roads, or even long term water) for that amount of increase in population year on year in a society that needs less people to run it then ever before. and untill some one does im gonna vote out cos it seems like the only way possible to deal with it.

so yes if we leave (which it is lucking very VERY unlikly that we will) yes i will hole heartedly say to my kids yes i voted for this and this is why.

I wouldn't bother mate I think most on here live in the Northumberland countryside where you don't see a human for miles so they don't get it lol.

On a more serious note I am ok with immigration if we slow it down drastically for the next 5 years or so and build up our public services. Rather than keeping the stream going as it is and the population increasing at a ridiculous rate without our infrastructure being ready for it.

 

[BringNaniBack]

Wonder what will happen in relation to footballers coming to play in UK. Presumably they will all need work permits. The likes of a young Ronaldo might not qualify.

Edit: in the case of leaving off course

I've spoken to a few idiots who are using that as their only reason to vote remain.

 

[Silva]

I bet they don't believe in chemtrails though.

 

[BringNaniBack]

Which means that post Brexit the UK will continue to suffer economically and indefinitely until such time as it has to accept the free movement in order to gain back what it lost and access the single market. It's not a threat, it's just how the world works. It's how bargaining works. It's what has happened to other countries. It is exactly what happened to the most competitive economy in the world who endured their worst recorded recession for over 10 years before having to crawl back to the EU and accept the concessions that the EU wanted. If they hadn't done and refused it as you say Britain will probably do, then they are the ones who continue to suffer. It's nothing to do with threats and laughing at us, it's simply common sense. The one with the power will extract as much value as is possible because they know that the other side is more desperate and therefore likely to agree to get what they want/need.

This vested interest in minimising economic shock, what evidence is there for this besides conjecture and wishful thinking that somehow we're so great that we will be different to the norm? Because we've seen the reverse already. If we leave the EU France will be a bigger economy than we will. We will fall several places, we will not be this mega force you seem to think we will. Nobody is talking about anybody laughing at us, simply getting a deal that is in their interest. With terms that are in their interest. The one with the most power walks away with the best deal, and it is not in the EU's interest to give us what we want and not get what they want, which is freedom of movement. We are the desperate party in this situation, not the EU. The EU have very little reason to back down on what they want. Not to mention pissing off other member states with us having been given special treatment where other countries with better run economies have not.

EDIT: Should say the worlds most competitive economy rather than number 1 economy in the world, that was incredibly lazy of me.

No it's not, its how the EU works. There is a world outside the EU and the single market which is the slowest growing economic continent in the world.

 

[BringNaniBack]

I bet they don't believe in chemtrails though.

You're boring mate.

 

[Silva]

No it's not, its how the EU works. There is a world outside the EU and the single market which is the slowest growing economic continent in the world.

The rest of the world aren't a massive economic block on our doorstep. What are we going to sell to Canada that we can't already sell them?

 

[Nytram Shakes]

A massively over populated country can be fixed without leaving the EU. It's a UK government issue, not an EU issue. You're trying to cut your leg off because you hurt your ankle. It's a ridiculous knee jerk.

Your point about would you not want to trade with the 5th largest economy is irrelevant. For two reasons. One, we will not be the 5th largest economy when we leave. We are the 5th largest economy because we are in the EU and we depend on them for 45% or our exports. If we leave we drop several places. We are barely above France in terms of our economic size as it is, and all it takes is a very slight loss in exchange rates to make us the sixth largest economy. If we leave the EU we will drop several places. Then we are the 7th, 8th, 9th largest economy therefore your point suddenly doesn't sound so good does it??? Second, it's this simple, YES they would want to trade with us. Nobody is disputing that. BUT it is on THEIR terms. THEY are the ones in power, and they are the ones who can say to us 'we do want to trade with you, but you have this accept this' and if we say no, WE are the ones who suffer.

You saying that even if we ended up in economic ruin and could not recover back to where we are today if we left you would still vote to leave tells me all I need to know. There's no point in discussing it with you, you would still harm our countries economy and potentially force a recession on us and your children just to stop some immigration that we need, and benefits us. I can't wrap my head around that. Not that I'm saying that's going to happen, but you just said that even if it does you'd still take it. Wow.

I'd rather us have no plan to address one issue, than have no plan to address 15 issues. Which is what the leave campaign want.

How is it a uk government issue? Currently within the EU we have no power to stop any EU citizen coming and living in the country, how does the government address an issue of over population when it's has no control over it?

And I see your point of view that you think the other issues are more important and so should stay, I disagree, I don't think thier is going to be bigger problem to the world then migration and over population in the coming years, as the only resource that the world is has too much of and is constantly making more of is man power. And what resource are we needing less and less of as technology gets better... Man power... Any one who thinks this isn't going to be a one of if not they biggest problem to face the world is living in dream land, as long term it is going to be far bigger problem the trade deficits or any other problem we are currently discussing.

But if you think differently that's your point of view.

 

[Nytram Shakes]

I wouldn't bother mate I think most on here live in the Northumberland countryside where you don't see a human for miles so they don't get it lol.

On a more serious note I am ok with immigration if we slow it down drastically for the next 5 years or so and build up our public services. Rather than keeping the stream going as it is and the population increasing at a ridiculous rate without our infrastructure being ready for it.

I would have no problem with imigration if the country had the infrastructure to deal with it, but thier simply is no way long term where ever gonna be able to provide enough jobs for the amount off people who are wanting to come and live here.

 

[BringNaniBack]

The rest of the world aren't a massive economic block on our doorstep. What are we going to sell to Canada that we can't already sell them?

My point was to Zarlak who was pretty much saying that to trade with a certain area you have to have free movement of people and that's 'just how the world works' but that's not how the world works, that's how the EU works.

 

[Zarlak]

No it's not, its how the EU works. There is a world outside the EU and the single market which is the slowest growing economic continent in the world.

My point was to Zarlak who was pretty much saying that to trade with a certain area you have to have free movement of people and that's 'just how the world works' but that's not how the world works, that's how the EU works.

I take it you don't know anything about the NAFTA? Which exactly the same thing happened. It is not the way the EU works, it is the way that negotiating contracts work. The side with the most power extracts the most favourable terms. It's naive to believe otherwise. I did not say that in order to trade with a certain area you need to allow free movement, you clearly didn't read my posts if that's what you believe. I made it perfectly clear that the side with the power adds the concession that is important to them, which historically for the EU when trade agreements are set up is free movement of EU citizens. For the US it was control of Canada's waters. I made this quite clear, so how you managed to construe something else I'm unsure.

 

[Nytram Shakes]

The rest of the world aren't a massive economic block on our doorstep. What are we going to sell to Canada that we can't already sell them?

you also have to look at it the other way thou, it's what can Canada sell us, we import far more then we export, so you go to a country and say hey where the worlds 5th biggest ecconmy we buy far more then we sell want to make a trade agreement ..... Then most countries are going to listen to what we have to say.


Will we get as good deal as we have with EU? No! Will it stop the uk ecconmy taking a a big knock in the short term? No.


But thinking we won't be able to make any deal with any countries outside of the EU continue to have a working relationship with the EU is nuts, of course we will. some one said said 45% of our trade is with the EU where not going to lose all of that, as they will not want to lose all thier trade with us as we are a massive market and they sell us more then we sell them! But we will for sure lose some of that trade and it going to be hard for a while at lease while we try and compensate for that.

The question for me comes down to is leaving the EU and the loss of the benefits that provides worth it to regain control over our borders? And for me that's a big YES as I think long term imigration, over population and lack of jobs is going to be a bigger issue then finding trade partners.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Haven't been in this thread for a while, still the naïvety, stupidity and prejudice survives.
17 days to go till decision time for millions of voters who understand practically nothing about what they're voting for, insanity

 

[Zarlak]

you also have to look at it the other way thou, it's what can Canada sell us, we import far more then we export, so you go to a country and say hey where the worlds 5th biggest ecconmy we buy far more then we sell want to make a trade agreement ..... Then most countries are going to listen to what we have to say.


Will we get as good deal as we have with EU? No! Will it stop the uk ecconmy taking a a big knock in the short term? No.


But thinking we won't be able to make any deal with any countries outside of the EU continue to have a working relationship with the EU is nuts, of course we will. some one said said 45% of our trade is with the EU where not going to lose all of that, as they will not want to lose all thier trade with us as we are a massive market and they sell us more then we sell them! But we will for sure lose some of that trade and it going to be hard for a while at lease while we try and compensate for that.

The question for me comes down to is leaving the EU and the loss of the benefits that provides worth it to regain control over our borders? And for me that's a big YES as I think long term imigration, over population and lack of jobs is going to be a bigger issue then finding trade partners.

You keep saying the worlds 5th economy does not make it true, when as soon as we leave the EU we are no longer the worlds 5th largest economy. We do not go to Canada and say 'hey we are the worlds 5th biggest economy' we go to Canada and say 'hey we used to be the 5th biggest economy in the world but then we decided not to be, and now we're like 6th 7th 8th or 9th. Do us a good deal?' There's a very large difference.

Also I don't know why you don't understand that they. will. not. lose. the. trade. They will keep the trade, with terms that favour them because we will be desperate to do business with them to save the amount of export that we lost. Every time you say 'surely they won't want to lose the trade' you are showing that you just are refusing to understand this. They will not lose the trade. Nobody is saying they will lose the trade, I don't know why you keep insisting that they won't lose the trade when nobody is even disputing that. They will be sat at the table rubbing their hands in glee as we come to negotiate trade deals with them because they can get favourable terms given that we are desperate to recover a 45% loss in our exports as well as all the other areas of economic impact.

 

[Don't Kill Bill]

Haven't been in this thread for a while, still the naïvety, stupidity and prejudice survives.
17 days to go till decision time for millions of voters who understand practically nothing about what they're voting for, insanity

I noticed you haven't been in this thread at all,

https://www.redcafe.net/threads/is-france-the-next-eu-trouble-spot.418284/

Tell me more about how superior France is to the UK, how stupid we are not to want to go back to the this kind of self defeating shit. Or do you think this is the way forward in a reformed EU, open to change and the challenges of the world. I know we are going to reform the EU from within right.....

 

[Nytram Shakes]

You keep saying the worlds 5th economy does not make it true, when as soon as we leave the EU we are no longer the worlds 5th largest economy. We do not go to Canada and say 'hey we are the worlds 5th biggest economy' we go to Canada and say 'hey we used to be the 5th biggest economy in the world but then we decided not to be, and now we're like 6th 7th 8th or 9th. Do us a good deal?' There's a very large difference.

Also I don't know why you don't understand that they. will. not. lose. the. trade. They will keep the trade, with terms that favour them because we will be desperate to do business with them to save the amount of export that we lost. Every time you say 'surely they won't want to lose the trade' you are showing that you just are refusing to understand this. They will not lose the trade. Nobody is saying they will lose the trade, I don't know why you keep insisting that they won't lose the trade when nobody is even disputing that. They will be sat at the table rubbing their hands in glee as we come to negotiate trade deals with them because they can get favourable terms given that we are desperate to recover a 45% loss in our exports as well as all the other areas of economic impact.

I keep saying we are the 5th largest ecconmy .... Because we are the 5th largest ecconmy. Will that take a hit if we leave the EU .... Probably but we will still be one off the largest ecconmy is the world, that countries are going to want to deal with as we are a massive market that wants to buy more then it wants to sell.

And again you make it out that where going to lose all 45% of our exports to the eu if we leave, of course where not.

it is a too way street lots of EU countries export a massive amount to us, the arnt going to want to lose that as it will effect thier ecconmy too.
Not to mention it's not like the EU is thriving right now, the have countries on the verge of bankruptcy, the single currency is a mess, they have a massive imigration problem themselves, massive problems with unemployment.... And things would only get worse if the lose and ecconmy the size of the U.K. from within thier ranks. So if we did leave it is in the interests of both parties to arrange a deal, but I am fully aware that will not be as good a deal as we currently have.
But like I say I think that is worth it in order to have control over our border, as I believe that is the bigger problem going forward.

And again you consentrate on the trade which I get you think is the biggest issue, but not everyone agrees with you, thier are at least ideas how to deal with loss of some trade with Europe, thier are no ideas on how to deal with the fact every year we have an extra 300,000 people in the country and not enough jobs for the ones already here and it's only going to get worse year on year. And the stay campaign is just ignoring this.

If some one from the stay campaign came up with a viable option to deal the problems mass immigration like were experiencing at the moment is going to cause in the long term, then I would vote to stay in, but currently thier has been zero, and the issues has been roundly ignored by the stay campaign( like you your self are ignoring it) becos they havnt a clue what to do about it.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

I noticed you haven't been in this thread at all,

https://www.redcafe.net/threads/is-france-the-next-eu-trouble-spot.418284/

Tell me more about how superior France is to the UK, how stupid we are not to want to go back to the this kind of self defeating shit. Or do you think this is the way forward in a reformed EU, open to change and the challenges of the world. I know we are going to reform the EU from within right.....

I've had enough political argument for a while but

This self-defeating shit was exactly what the Uk was like from the early 70's or even earlier until the 80's, I lived through that , the unions are far too powerful, the leaders like Hollande, Sarkozy are weak - what France needs is someone like Thatcher, this will go down well.... .

This has yet again very little to do with Europe and even actually proves a point that the countries do have their own sovereignty and their own rules to a very large extent. France and the Uk could not be much more different
The UK workers are not clamouring for a 35 hour week, retirement at 60, not working on Sundays, working when it suits them and not the company they work for, getting lengthy holidays, could go on forever. This has nothing to do with practices being forced on them by being in the EU. I've even run a company in France, you cannot imagine how difficult it is. The workers have so much protection and will strike for the least little reason - not saying that it's not always justified.
But the Uk will not go back to this formula whether it stays in or leaves the EU.

Being in the EU will not make the UK like the French system. I love France for the way of life , that's why I live here - but getting into the employment sector, a different kettle of fish, France needs major reforms and it will not happen until they get a strong leader, and the election next year will change little, whether it be Hollande or Sarkozy who gets elected.

 

[Penna]

Haven't been in this thread for a while, still the naïvety, stupidity and prejudice survives.
17 days to go till decision time for millions of voters who understand practically nothing about what they're voting for, insanity

I agree. This really is a vote where you have to look beyond immediate self-interest. Personally, I can't believe it's come to this.

 

[2mufc0]

A tad might have been acceptable. The amount she exhibited was vomit-inducing.

Didn't really make any good points anyway. Some hippy naive rubbish about immoral dealings with the Middle East and trying to accuse Cameron of swerving her Turkey question before he'd had a chance to answer it. But then I suppose with her English Lit undergradship must give her a level of expertise on this matter that mere economics PHDs can only dream of.

Aye she came across as a massive cnut and i don't even like Cameron.

 

[Smores]

I would have no problem with imigration if the country had the infrastructure to deal with it, but thier simply is no way long term where ever gonna be able to provide enough jobs for the amount off people who are wanting to come and live here.

There really isn't any evidence that immigration particularly EU negatively affects jobs and unemployment though so you'll need to expand on your reasoning?

For a start 2/3rds of EU migrants already have jobs secured before they arrive.

If we want to control migration the way to do it is looks at non-European migration which we already can do but don't sufficiently. It's an important issue but with the EU debate it should be a minor consideration

 

[Smores]

I'm hoping the sterling volatility (which I actually think is down to political uncertainty rather than brexit fears) will scare a number of people into voting remain. Those scare tactics worked on the same people when it came to Ed Milliband so it'll be interesting.

 

[lynchie]

and are the people on the stay campaign going to say sorry to our children when in 10 20 years we have a massively over populated country, and no way near enough jobs to support them?

your argument is that it is too much of a risk to leave the EU becuase it will mess up the eccoomy, and i whole heartedly agree that it will mess up the ecconomy, (but i think that is repairable, as we a very inviting trade parter for other countries, and it does matter how big you ecoonmy, ask your self, if you where a leader of a country would you not want to trade with the 5th largest ecconmy, who mainly want to buy stuff of you rather then sell?)

But even if i though it wasn't reparable (which you obviously think) and the country will never be a productive as it is now, i would still vote leave, because i personally dont think the mess we would find ourselves in now if we left, would be anywhere as bad as it will be down the line, if we don't get control of the immigration problem. because no one on the stay campaign has given a single argument of how they are going to deal with finding jobs (not to mention housing schools, hospitals, place on the roads, or even long term water) for that amount of increase in population year on year in a society that needs less people to run it then ever before. and untill some one does im gonna vote out cos it seems like the only way possible to deal with it.

so yes if we leave (which it is lucking very VERY unlikly that we will) yes i will hole heartedly say to my kids yes i voted for this and this is why.

The vast majority of our population growth has nothing to do with the EU, so leaving does precisely nothing to help with any problem of overpopulation.

What we need are lots of motivated, money-earning people to come and earn and spend to create demand for services, so that we can support the growth of our economy. Amazingly, we have exactly the mechanism to achieve that - Britain's best companies can pick and choose the best graduates and experts from around Europe, without having to worry about visa restrictions. They come, they earn good money, they pay their taxes and buy our goods, and they share a diverse breadth of knowledge and experience that make our companies better.

 

[Zarlak]

I keep saying we are the 5th largest ecconmy .... Because we are the 5th largest ecconmy. Will that take a hit if we leave the EU .... Probably but we will still be one off the largest ecconmy is the world, that countries are going to want to deal with as we are a massive market that wants to buy more then it wants to sell.

Therefore your point is moot. We will not be the 5th largest economy when we come to do our trade, so it is idiotic to say 'they will want to do business with the 5th largest economy' because that will be France at that time. That's like me asking United for a trial and if they say I'm too old I tell them well I used to be 16. What we are now is irrelevant, because we won't be that when it comes to negotiating a contract. What matters is what we will be at that point.

it is a too way street lots of EU countries export a massive amount to us, the arnt going to want to lose that as it will effect thier ecconmy too.

This is where you are mistaken. Individual EU countries export less than 10% to us. It's not a massive amount at all, sure they will feel it and they won't like it but they will not bend over to us to give us what we want as we will be more desparate to replace our much larger export than they are to replace their much smaller export. This means unfavourable terms to us, because we are the desparate ones.

And again you consentrate on the trade which I get you think is the biggest issue, but not everyone agrees with you, thier are at least ideas how to deal with loss of some trade with Europe, thier are no ideas on how to deal with the fact every year we have an extra 300,000 people in the country and not enough jobs for the ones already here and it's only going to get worse year on year. And the stay campaign is just ignoring this.

If some one from the stay campaign came up with a viable option to deal the problems mass immigration like were experiencing at the moment is going to cause in the long term, then I would vote to stay in, but currently thier has been zero, and the issues has been roundly ignored by the stay campaign( like you your self are ignoring it) becos they havnt a clue what to do about it.

There are no ideas from the leave campaign on how to deal with anything. Not one plan put forward, no ideas for anything. No plan for trade, no plan for business, no plan for farmers, no plan for scientists, no plan for education, no plan for EU citizens in the UK, no plan for UK citizens in the EU, no plan for investors.

If someone from the leave campaign came up with a viable option to deal with all of the above then people would vote to leave. But as it stands, all they can say is 'come on guys, we'll be loads better off. We're an amazing economy everyone will want to do business with us.' Despite there being no proof of that anywhere or evidence to say that will happen, and evidence against it. I mean, I asked Nick for it and he just disappeared.

 

[Nytram Shakes]

There really isn't any evidence that immigration particularly EU negatively affects jobs and unemployment though so you'll need to expand on your reasoning?

For a start 2/3rds of EU migrants already have jobs secured before they arrive.

If we want to control migration the way to do it is looks at non-European migration which we already can do but don't sufficiently. It's an important issue but with the EU debate it should be a minor consideration

my reasoning is common sense, you add 300,000 to the population every year, to a county that doesnt have enough jobs for the people who are here, then eventually it going to tell. we have an over abundance of workers and not enough jobs(espically full time jobs) for them all.

 

[Penna]

my reasoning is common sense, you add 300,000 to the population every year, to a county that doesnt have enough jobs for the people who are here, then eventually it going to tell. we have an over abundance of workers and not enough jobs(espically full time jobs) for them all.

My main experience of European workers is in the NHS. Qualified nurses, doctors, therapists, dentists - all have come and helped to fill our skills-shortage, bringing real benefits for British people. If they no longer have the right to live and work in the UK, I think you'll soon see a massive impact on our health service.

There are also many European workers in the private care sector, both residential and domiciliary.

 

[Nytram Shakes]

The vast majority of our population growth has nothing to do with the EU, so leaving does precisely nothing to help with any problem of overpopulation.

What we need are lots of motivated, money-earning people to come and earn and spend to create demand for services, so that we can support the growth of our economy. Amazingly, we have exactly the mechanism to achieve that - Britain's best companies can pick and choose the best graduates and experts from around Europe, without having to worry about visa restrictions. They come, they earn good money, they pay their taxes and buy our goods, and they share a diverse breadth of knowledge and experience that make our companies better.

if free immigration is such a great thing why doesn't every country in the world do it?

an the problem is you don't just get the best you get the worst as well you get everyone, and we don't need any more unskilled labour as we have far to many as it is. and to be honest we don't need more graduates unless they are in specific areas as most graduates in this country struggle to find jobs graduate level jobs.
But your right we do need skilled workers, we need nurses, we need engineers desperately, but i don't see any evidence that If someone wants to come an live in this country and has a set of skills we need that they will have a problem applying for a visa, everywhere else in the world manages to deal with that i don't see why we can't?

as for immigration not been an issue in over population, last year the population grew by 491,000(http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33266792) and net imigration was 330,000(http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34071492) so that leaves only 160,000 that was natural population growth the rest was immigration. how is immigration not causing a problem to over population?

 

[Smores]

my reasoning is common sense, you add 300,000 to the population every year, to a county that doesnt have enough jobs for the people who are here, then eventually it going to tell. we have an over abundance of workers and not enough jobs(espically full time jobs) for them all.

But your common sense seems to be based on the idea that there's a limited number of jobs? These people bring needs and wants thus creating jobs, a lot of the EU immigrants are proffesionals filling a skills gap with abundant spare cash. The others will accept low wages thus creating the opportunity for businesses to arise utilising this.

How do you think the UK has grown by circa 10 million in the last 50 years?

It isn't as simple as I've laid out and sudden influxes create a burden but growth is growth whether that's internal or migration.

 

[Nytram Shakes]

My main experience of European workers is in the NHS. Qualified nurses, doctors, therapists, dentists - all have come and helped to fill our skills-shortage, bringing real benefits for British people. If they no longer have the right to live and work in the UK, I think you'll soon see a massive impact on our health service.

There are also many European workers in the private care sector, both residential and domiciliary.

yes and we simply apply a visa system that the rest of the world does, if we you have skills we need then you can come and live in our country, works in the rest of the world no reason it can't work here.

 

[x42bn6]

my reasoning is common sense, you add 300,000 to the population every year, to a county that doesnt have enough jobs for the people who are here, then eventually it going to tell. we have an over abundance of workers and not enough jobs(espically full time jobs) for them all.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy

It's not quite as simple as that. Migrants also spend money, which contributes to the economy. Some migrants come here for other reasons, like studying. Some migrants create more jobs than they take (i.e. setting up businesses). Some migrants take jobs that local people are not qualified for or unwilling to perform.

UK unemployment has gone down since 2008, but is basically flat since 2000.

My belief is that automation is killing more low-skilled jobs than migrants. I mean look at this - this is why manufacturing jobs are gone, why freight and driving jobs are at risk and why even thinking jobs could be gone by this lifetime.

The EU actually protects workers better than the UK. Consider, say, steel - the EU wanted to protect those jobs, but the UK opposed it!.

 

[Nytram Shakes]

But your common sense seems to be based on the idea that there's a limited number of jobs? These people bring needs and wants thus creating jobs, a lot of the EU immigrants are proffesionals filling a skills gap with abundant spare cash. The others will accept low wages thus creating the opportunity for businesses to arise utilising this.

How do you think the UK has grown by circa 10 million in the last 50 years?

It isn't as simple as I've laid out and sudden influxes create a burden but growth is growth whether that's internal or migration.

i'd argue that in a country where the one resource that we have way too much of (man power) having people come in and work for low wages and minimum hour contracts, where it is very hard to surveive on in this country, only keeps wages low and hurts the people who are already living here and trying to make a life, buy a house, raise kids pay a pention, when so many of the jobs that are on offer it is near impossible to live off.

 

[Nytram Shakes]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy

It's not quite as simple as that. Migrants also spend money, which contributes to the economy. Some migrants come here for other reasons, like studying. Some migrants create more jobs than they take (i.e. setting up businesses). Some migrants take jobs that local people are not qualified for or unwilling to perform.

UK unemployment has gone down since 2008, but is basically flat since 2000.

My belief is that automation is killing more low-skilled jobs than migrants. I mean look at this - this is why manufacturing jobs are gone, why freight and driving jobs are at risk and why even thinking jobs could be gone by this lifetime.

The EU actually protects workers better than the UK. Consider, say, steel - the EU wanted to protect those jobs, but the UK opposed it!.

i complexly agree with that, but you can't see that thier isnt a correlation between a shrinking job market due to automation and an increasing population...... surely anyone can that is unsustainable?
in the old days if you had a large population you need a large work force, but as the years go by that is becoming less and less true, the number of people it takes to run a society from bottom to top is decreasing, and you end up with a surplus of people who arn't really needed, how do you proide for them long term when thier number will only increase as the population increases?

not to mention a lot of the jobs that are created are minimum hour contracts which has increased massively since 2008, you also have to consider kids are made to stay in school till their 18 now, thats has affected the numbers, ive tried to look for numbers on how many people are employed in full time contracts.

but i agree with that EU is better at looking after its citizens then UK government is, they have wrote so much good legislation on workers rights, health and safty in the work place, human rights..... that i would hate to lose if we left the EU as i can't see the UK government replacing a lot of them, however i can't see any other way of limiting the work force in this country, then leaving the EU so we can limit migration.

honestly if someone has a solution i would love to hear it, i just can't see any way where that about of migration is sustainable ?

 

[Nytram Shakes]

Therefore your point is moot. We will not be the 5th largest economy when we come to do our trade, so it is idiotic to say 'they will want to do business with the 5th largest economy' because that will be France at that time. That's like me asking United for a trial and if they say I'm too old I tell them well I used to be 16. What we are now is irrelevant, because we won't be that when it comes to negotiating a contract. What matters is what we will be at that point.

we firstly france is in mess so thier is no grantee they will be the 5th largest economy.
secondly what ever happens we will be a massive economy, that countries will be happy to deal with because we buy more then we sell, you acting like if we leave the EU no country will want to deal with us, which is not true.

This is where you are mistaken. Individual EU countries export less than 10% to us. It's not a massive amount at all, sure they will feel it and they won't like it but they will not bend over to us to give us what we want as we will be more desparate to replace our much larger export than they are to replace their much smaller export. This means unfavourable terms to us, because we are the desparate ones.

and you think the EU countries are going to want to lose that 10% ? you think they can afford to lose that 10%? NO course not, so like i said we will come to a deal but it wont be as good as the one we have now.

There are no ideas from the leave campaign on how to deal with anything. Not one plan put forward, no ideas for anything. No plan for trade, no plan for business, no plan for farmers, no plan for scientists, no plan for education, no plan for EU citizens in the UK, no plan for UK citizens in the EU, no plan for investors.

If someone from the leave campaign came up with a viable option to deal with all of the above then people would vote to leave. But as it stands, all they can say is 'come on guys, we'll be loads better off. We're an amazing economy everyone will want to do business with us.' Despite there being no proof of that anywhere or evidence to say that will happen, and evidence against it. I mean, I asked Nick for it and he just disappeared.

and you can say exactly the same about the stay campaign thye have no idea how to long term deal with immigration problem

so it comes down to what you think the biggest problem is, and again i think over population with a shrinking job market is a big a problem then finding trade partners

 

[Smores]

i'd argue that in a country where the one resource that we have way too much of (man power) having people come in and work for low wages and minimum hour contracts, where it is very hard to surveive on in this country, only keeps wages low and hurts the people who are already living here and trying to make a life, buy a house, raise kids pay a pention, when so many of the jobs that are on offer it is near impossible to live off.

You do have a valid point and I think you've hit the most affected here. My original point was only that it's impact isn't as general as you were perhaps implying. The vast majority of EU migrants don't negatively impact but a smaĺl amount will unless countered by good policy.

The issues you've listed are ones the goverment needs to handle in order to ensure workers don't abuse the abundance of resource. Perhaps that's a better target for change than removing the free movement principles that have largely served us well?

I think your sentiments are quite popular in this debate. The goverment has done well in portraying they have no power or will to help the working class on this issue, thus it's reasonable for them to want to control one of the causes themselves by removing EU migrants. I just don't think many will forsee the economic impacts of that.

They won't forsee we'll end up with free movement even if we do leave. I'm 99% certain of that.

 

[Zarlak]

we firstly france is in mess so thier is no grantee they will be the 5th largest economy.
secondly what ever happens we will be a massive economy, that countries will be happy to deal with because we buy more then we sell, you acting like if we leave the EU no country will want to deal with us, which is not true.


and you think the EU countries are going to want to lose that 10% ? you think they can afford to lose that 10%? NO course not, so like i said we will come to a deal but it wont be as good as the one we have now.


and you can say exactly the same about the stay campaign thye have no idea how to long term deal with immigration problem

so it comes down to what you think the biggest problem is, and again i think over population with a shrinking job market is a big a problem then finding trade partners

I didn't say that they wanted to lose that 10%. Please point me to where I said that, because it's getting annoying now that I keep saying to you I AM NOT SAYING THAT and then in your very next reply you try to say that that's my point. I can only conclude that you are now doing it on purpose. I have never said that no country will want to deal with us. You are making this up, and since I credit you with enough intelligence to not be misunderstanding what I'm saying, I can only assume that you're doing it on purpose.

What I said is that they will not want to lose it, and they will be only too happy to discuss with us a trade deal. Please understand this so that we can move on, because I don't want you to reply back to me saying 'you think they will want to lose that 10%?' when for the 8th time that's not what I said.

Now, because they don't want to lose the trade deal they will happily set up a trade agreement with us. BUT. This is the important bit. They are in a position to ask for the terms they want, because leaving the EU hurts us more than it hurts them. It hurts our economy more. We are the desperate ones. We are the ones who are more likely to say 'OK we will accept this deal, we don't really like this bit, but there's nothing we can do because we really need the money'.

Here is a post that explains the 5th largest economy fallacy:

The whole "5th largest economy" stuff is misleading anyway. It completely ignores the actual mechanics of trade and trade deals. A country isn't going to just say to us "Oh, you're ranked number 5? Well I suppose I should just accept all your terms!"

What matters in a specific trade deal are those factors relevant to the countries in question. It's not the whole economy that matters, it's that fraction of the economy which is engaged in trade with the specific country you're negotiating with. The rest of your economy might as well not exist for all the good it will do. There are plenty of countries in the world - including within the EU - with which we do not trade much at all. The ranking of our economy will do little to impress those countries. And within the EU, the consent of every EU member state will be needed to approve a UK-EU trade deal. We can't rely on our strong trade with Germany and Spain to get us a quick, good trade deal. The other Member States have to be happy with it too.

But another important factor is the relative political positions of the countries in question. It's not just about size, it's also about need. After Brexit, the UK will need trade deals because suddenly we'll have none. This is going to have a cumulative effect on the UK economy. For any given country we're negotiating with, that country is having to deal with the loss of a trade deal with a single country. Britain, on the other hand, will be dealing with the loss of its trade deals with the entire world. That puts us at a significant disadvantage and everyone will know it: we will need them more than they need us.

You cannot make simple statements like 'countries will want to trade with us' 'france is a mess so they won't become a bigger economy'. These statements are stupid. They're sweeping statements that simply do not mean anything. You need to delve into a statement and look at everything that makes it up. There are many factors that influence this, you cannot use a sweeping statement to suddenly make everything seem okay.

With regards to your last line, you may be right that they have no idea how to deal with an immigration problem, but not having a plan to deal with one problem is a lot better than not having a plan to deal with 10 problems. That's common sense, which you said you were a fan of.

 

[x42bn6]

i complexly agree with that, but you can't see that thier isnt a correlation between a shrinking job market due to automation and an increasing population...... surely anyone can that is unsustainable?
in the old days if you had a large population you need a large work force, but as the years go by that is becoming less and less true, the number of people it takes to run a society from bottom to top is decreasing, and you end up with a surplus of people who arn't really needed, how do you proide for them long term when thier number will only increase as the population increases?

not to mention a lot of the jobs that are created are minimum hour contracts which has increased massively since 2008, you also have to consider kids are made to stay in school till their 18 now, thats has affected the numbers, ive tried to look for numbers on how many people are employed in full time contracts.

I wish I knew where this person got the numbers from but he/she does this breakdown on reddit every time job figures are released. https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/4jvpyo/uk_unemployment_falls_by_2000/

I agree it's unsustainable but reducing immigration is just the most simplistic answer. If cheap labour is gone from the UK, some companies will move - will that make the poor any better off? It depends on the numbers but it's not just a simple "yes".

Of course, cheap labour in itself is a problem, especially when there is a race to the bottom in terms of wages. However, I'm unconvinced the UK will do any better on this outside the EU. The EU is better on workers' rights. Boris Johnson has a hard-on for TTIP. Jeremy Hunt wants us to work harder, because we're all just plebs. Labour no longer represents large portions of the working class, so even if the Conservatives lose, would Labour really do any better?

Personally, I think a lot of these problems are down to the UK, not the EU. Austerity has made things worse for people at the bottom. Tuition fees make it really hard for people to retrain when they become redundant. The Conservatives have slashed everything, such as the NHS, making it more expensive (proportionally) for the poor. It's expensive to be poor - literally. We could use a massive infrastructure building programme (and not fob and overpay it to a crony for once) to create jobs. Developing outside of the M25 would also be helpful. All UK issues.