EU Referendum | UK residents vote today.

[NinjaFletch]

Indeed the Government have asked for such, and been told they shall have to accept a smaller figure. But why do you suppose that they ahd reason to ask for those efficiencies, spite borne out of ideology?

I think the point is a spending 'increase' of £8bn - £22bn is no increase at all.

 

[Stanley Road]

Because its an utterly daft thing to say.

Whether the NHS is a 'first world health system' or not (I mean it so blatantly is that I'm not sure how you can argue against it, but maybe I'll have to defer to your knowledge of Sierra Leonean hospitals) the idea that privatisation would be anything other than an excuse to carve up the health system, sell off the profitable bits to some Tory cronies and drive up costs for everyone else is a bit weird.

Maybe you're right that privatisation done right could help, I don't agree with you but whatever, the idea that would happen just isn't backed up by any UK example.

Probably wouldn't work in the UK cos nothing ever does, they just seem to waste money on stuff than no-one wants, useless

 

[711]

Boris? Cameron will be forced to step down.

If the vote is Leave then Boris will be favourite for leader, despite his poor referendum campaign.

If the vote is Remain I can't see Boris ever being leader, he will have both performed badly and lost.

 

[golden_blunder]

the questions I'd like to see answered (aside the debate on immigration etc) are;

whats the short-medium term financial impact to the regular joe bloggs if they leave the EU? Surely taxes would be raised in an emergency budget?
whats the impact to their overall vision if Scotland then opts out of the UK as they want to remain in the EU?
Whats going to be the impact on agriculture? Currently a lot of farmers get EU subsidies
Whats going to happen with the NI question? Irish nationalists will not take kindly to borders being rebuilt in Northern Ireland.

 

[sun_tzu]

Indeed the Government have asked for such, and been told they shall have to accept a smaller figure. But why do you suppose that they ahd reason to ask for those efficiencies, spite borne out of ideology?

Actually thats not quite what happened
the NHS Chief Exec (Simon Stevens) said in 2014 there was a £30bn shortfall in NHS funding (projected for 2020)
He himself said he believed £22BN could be found in savings (this figure is generally considered to be at best optimistic and at worst preassure was applied to inflate it)
He said this left an £8bn short fall which the conservatives pledged to fund whilst Labour pledges £2BN in the election
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-35857815
It seems £15bn savings and £15BN finding may have been more realistic - either way there is a £30bn gap to plug so either under the labour proposal they put in £2BN and there is a £28bn gap which has to be found by bigger cuts or you have to cut services.

Frankly the NHS is a mess and as people live longer and medicine costs more we are going to have to radically look at pension and NHS provision simply due to demographics

 

[Nick 0208 Ldn]

I think the point is a spending 'increase' of £8bn - £22bn is no increase at all.

It's not much of one if Labour themselves would have enacted efficiencies, but from a lower staring point. Additionally, a sizeable portion of the increase is to be in effect by the end of this year, whereas the bulk of requested savings remain just that, requested.

People can either accept that we have a problem which transcends party hue, or continue to play petty rivalries which get us nowhere.

 

[NinjaFletch]

It's not much of one if Labour themselves would have enacted efficiencies, but from a lower staring point. Additionally, a sizeable portion of the increase is to be in effect by the end of this year, whereas the bulk of requested savings remain just that, requested.

People can either accept that we have a problem which transcends party hue, or continue to play petty rivalries which get us nowhere.

Well quite, but that somewhat contradicts your original statement that Labour would have been even worse as justification for the Conservatives not doing enough.

 

[Nick 0208 Ldn]

Well quite, but that somewhat contradicts your original statement that Labour would have been even worse as justification for the Conservatives not doing enough.

Mozza (and others) claimed that a new Conservative government would not re-invest savings in public services, that was where this all started. If Tories were all as he supposed them to be, then the NHS would never have seen the money it has.

 

[lynchie]

On immigration, this gives a pretty solid argument as to why the "migration in the 10s of thousands" rhetoric is nonsense.

https://flipchartfairytales.wordpress.com/2016/06/10/migration-time-to-tear-up-leaves-last-card/

 

[GloryHunter07]

Schauble has put a bit of a dent in the whole Brexit plan.. No benefits from the single market without membership..

"That wont work, it would require the country to abide by the rules of a club from which it currently wants to withdraw." ... "In is in. Out is out."

The EU will want to try to deter further leavers.

 

[NinjaFletch]

A prominent Leave campaigner has said he is considering launching a legal challenge to that decision.

Leave.EU founder Arron Banks said there were grounds for a judicial review of the "unconstitutional" move.

Lets leave for the sake of democracy guys...

 

[Stanley Road]

If there's one single person I'd like to punch its Wolfgang Schauble, no wonder he got shot

 

[Zarlak]

Schauble has put a bit of a dent in the whole Brexit plan.. No benefits from the single market without membership..

"That wont work, it would require the country to abide by the rules of a club from which it currently wants to withdraw." ... "In is in. Out is out."

The EU will want to try to deter further leavers.

It's not really so much 'try to deter further leavers' as 'common sense in the first place'. The remain campaign have said this all along and the leave campaign have touted us as arrogantly as some irresistible piece of meat that everybody will bend at the knee to to offer us what we want, everything else is scaremongering and that we can have our cake and eat it too. It was always wishful thinking.

 

[GloryHunter07]

It's not really so much 'try to deter further leavers' as 'common sense in the first place'. The remain campaign have said this all along and the leave campaign have touted us as arrogantly as some irresistible piece of meat that everybody will bend at the knee to to offer us what we want, everything else is scaremongering and that we can have our cake and eat it too. It was always wishful thinking.

Yeah but, China & stuff.

 

[Ronetta]

If the vote is Leave then Boris will be favourite for leader, despite his poor referendum campaign.

If the vote is Remain I can't see Boris ever being leader, he will have both performed badly and lost.

Boris is toast either way. Lose and he's on the backbenches (at best) forever. Win and he gets to be PM of a bitterly divided party for 2 minutes before losing the next general election... only to be consigned to the back benches (at best) forever. Either way, he's toast...and no great loss, I might add. What little respect I had for him (not much) has gone out of the window and I've come to the conclusion he is a divisive and self-serving fool rather than just being a fool.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

But not because of the EU, its wonderful in Holland too, Not because of the EU

If anything was good 'Because of the EU' UK wouldn't be the backward country it is, the sooner they raise taxes to a European level and start investing in infrastructure the better.

Oh, I almost forgot, it took me 45 minutes to get through Bristol Airport customs on Tuesday although everyone had UK or EU passports

I totally agree with you, it's not because of the EU that the French and Dutch health services are far ahead of the NHS, but that's exactly my point, we have these services because they are implemented by the respective governments , and the reason the NHS is poor or will be privatised or underfunded is not the fault of the EU either despite Brexit's claims. I wish they'd stop using the EU as an excuse, more misinformation.

Regarding the delays coming back into the UK, I get it all the time at Stansted as well, but supposedly the borders are open to all and sundry, even British people can't get back in easily.
All this has at least made my mind up, I'm taking French citizenship whatever happens - I wonder if I will need a visa to get back into the country I was born in if the Uk leaves.

I've managed to get my pension out of the Uk just in time in case they leave.

 

[Zarlak]

Interesting read, fecking 1,000 character limit.

https://www.facebook.com/nicholasjohncarter/posts/10153467946496736 Say what you like about the person writing it, but solid use of sources to back up his argument which is a damn sight more than you can say for most of the shite you get told by both the official leave campaign and the remain campaign. Even if you ignore the romanticism at the end which is of course his own opinion.

Immigration has been in the news a lot lately, especially with the EU referendum coming up.

So let's use the tools and data of political science to understand the topic better.

Last year, 270,000 EU citizens immigrated to the UK, and 85,000 returned to the EU. So EU net migration was around 185,000 (1). Additionally, a similar number came from outside the EU, so 330,000 in total.

That was the highest ever level of EU migration – going all the way back to when we joined the EEC in 1975. Indeed during the 1980s the trend was the other way – British workers moved overseas, particularly to Germany, as their economy was doing better than ours at that time. You might remember the TV show ‘Auf Wiedersehen Pet’. Currently our economy is doing better than many European ones so more people are coming than going. But there's no reason to think that will always be the case.

The Leave campaign claim that EU migration is putting unsustainable pressure on our public services, worsening the housing crisis, putting pressure on the NHS, on schools and on our roads. Their latest TV broadcast for instance shows a sick older lady receiving NHS treatment much faster in an imaginary hospital if we leave the EU. Are they right?

Imagine that we left the EU and banned EU immigration completely. Nobody else allowed – no footballers, no entertainers, no chefs, no businessmen, no nurses, no cleaners, nobody. And we kept that door shut for ten years. And for comparison let’s say that we stayed in the EU and immigration continues at this year’s record level (the highest ever) for the next ten years. How would that impact our population and our public services?

In terms of population, we’d end up with 1.85m fewer people living in our country after the 10 years. That sounds like a lot of people, which it is. But we’re a big country – 64.6m in total at the moment (2). So even under these very extreme assumptions the difference is only 2.8%. Less than 1 in 35.

Would you notice the difference if there were 34 instead of 35 people in your doctors’ waiting room? If there were 34 instead of 35 cars ahead of you in the traffic jam? Would your child’s education suffer in a class of 34 instead of 35? I doubt it.

And don’t forget that we’re making crazily unrealistic assumptions about how much we could reduce immigration if we left the EU. Because even the most ardent Leave campaigners don’t say that we should stop immigration altogether. They usually talk of using a points system to reach the government’s net target of 100,000 per year. So the difference in population after 10 years wouldn’t be anything like as much as 1 in 35.

Let’s say we could hit the net target of 100,000 – half from the EU and half from non-EU countries for the sake of argument. In that case, the difference in population after 10 years would be 1.35m or 1 in 49.

And don’t forget that we’re also making another very aggressive assumption – that migration will continue at the same level as last year, our highest ever. It would be more realistic to take the average of the last five years migration (3). If we do that, then the difference in our population after ten years would be only 790,000 or 1 in 82.

1 in 82.

I can’t tell the difference between a crowd of 81 and 82 people (even when they were my own wedding guests!). Can you?

So here’s the thing: however you feel about EU immigration, even under extreme assumptions the impact on our overall population just isn’t very large.

Now at this point some of you might be thinking – “This can't be right - step outside and look with your own eyes! Britain is full of foreigners! The place I grew up is like another country! How can you claim that EU immigration is not significant?”.

I live in inner London so I can sense where you might be coming from. A few things to bear in mind:

1) The overwhelming majority of immigration to the UK over the last 40 years has been from outside the EU (3). However you feel about that, it has nothing to do with our EU membership;

2) Whether you like it or not, Britain has been a multicultural country for several generations at least. You can’t tell whether somebody is an immigrant just by looking at them (sorry if this is an obvious point). You might hazard a guess at their ethnicity or race but that’s a very different thing;

3) Historically, immigrants have clustered in particular areas of the country, so your neighbourhood may not be representative of the country at large;

4) British people from all backgrounds have become much more cosmopolitan in their tastes over the last 40 years. We drink in pubs much less, but enjoy wine at home or go to restaurants and cafes a lot more. Instead of just eating British food, we enjoy flavours from all over the world. So the retail and commercial landscape of our country has changed - to reflect our changing tastes, not just because of new arrivals.

“But wait! What when Turkey, Montenegro and Albania join the EU? We’ll be swamped!”

No we won’t.

Mainly because Turkey and Albania are nowhere near being eligible to join the EU, and Montenegro is tiny. Also don't forget there are 27 other countries in the EU to choose from if residents of those countries did fancy a change of scene.

And even if in the distant future many other countries did join and we did find ourselves swamped, Britain could leave. We’re free to leave the EU whenever we want. But if we leave and then want to rejoin, we’d need the consent of all 27 other member states. Better to stay and keep our options open than leave in fear of something that is very unlikely to happen.

And so far we’ve also not factored in the contribution that immigrants make to our country, and specifically our public finances. EU migrants contribute more in taxes than they use in public services, as they are much more likely to be of working age than the general population (4). So if we used that extra tax revenue to hire more doctors, build more schools, invest in transport and so on, we’d actually have better public services than we would without any EU immigration.

It takes time to hire and train teachers and doctors, build schools and roads, and so forth. So it’s true that a sudden influx of people into an area can put short-term pressure on services. But the fundamental reason for the issues we identified at the start – NHS pressure, oversubscribed schools, congested roads, the housing crisis – is not EU immigration.

We are now six years into a government austerity programme to attempt to balance the books. So it’s not surprising that our public services are feeling the pinch.

An ageing population and new advances in medicine put particular strain on the NHS.

For the last thirty years, we have failed by a wide margin to build enough houses in the UK. Interest rates have been at an ‘emergency’ rate of 0.5% for the last seven years. That is why house prices are so high.

And this story of decades of underinvestment is repeated for our roads and railways too.

All of these issues are home-grown. And all of those policy areas are entirely within the control of our government in Westminster. They have nothing to do with the EU and are not the fault of EU migrants.

Finally, there’s been plenty of academic research into this issue, including a summary paper just published by the London School of Economics (5).

The research shows, contrary to many tabloid headlines, that

1) Immigrants do not take a disproportionate share of jobs created by our economy;
2) There is no evidence of an overall negative impact of immigration on wages;
3) There is no evidence that EU migrants affect the labour market performance of native-born workers (i.e. make it harder for native-born workers to get promoted, get a pay rise, etc)

So it is clear from examining the evidence that fears of immigration have been blown out of all proportion by the Eurosceptic press and the Leave campaign.

But what about all that money we send the EU? Couldn't we use that to improve public services?

Yes, but it wouldn't go very far, and it would be outweighed by the economic damage from leaving.

Our net contribution to the EU was £8.5bn last year (6) which works out at 36 pence per person per day. That is a drop in the ocean compared to our annual NHS budget of £116.4bn (7).

And if you’re trying to work out the impact of leaving the EU on our public services, you can’t just look at our net contribution. You also need to consider the effect that leaving would have on the size of our economy, and hence the tax revenue the government can generate.

Seven highly respected independent economic organisations have tried to work this out (8). And all seven of them have reached the same conclusion: that the economic damage caused by Brexit would more than offset the saving from our EU contribution.

The best estimate suggests that the government would have between £20bn and £40bn less to spend on public services than if we remained in the EU (9). So our public services wouldn't be better if we left the EU - they would be much worse.

So if we left the EU to ‘take control of immigration’, and then reduced it as discussed above, we’d still have all the same problems we have today – the housing crisis, an overstretched NHS, oversubscribed schools, heavy traffic, etc.

 

[Zarlak]

But we’d also have two even more serious problems to add to the list: a recession and the unknown consequences of destabilising the very institution which has secured peace in Europe for the last 70 years.

People are sceptical of economists’ forecasts. But you don’t even need to estimate many of the economic problems that will arise from Brexit – you can see them already in the currency markets.

The pound suffered its biggest one day fall in seven years when Boris and other MPs joined the leave campaign (10). You can watch the impact of movements in the referendum opinion polls in the EUR/GBP exchange rate. A major bank recently warned that Brexit could wipe 20% off the value of the pound through devaluation (11).

Devaluation sounds like a dry and abstract concept. So let me explain what that means:

20% of your life savings wiped out overnight.

The numbers in your bank account will be the same, but what you can buy with it will be 20% less, since most things we buy these days come from overseas.

Only the other day the Financial Times reported that hedge funds are planning to run their own private exit polls on referendum day to speculate on the currency markets ahead of the official result (12).
Just as during the ERM crisis of 1992, the vultures are circling, waiting to feast on our self-inflicted wounds.

And here’s another very clear threat: to our jobs. Only last Friday, Jamie Dimon, CEO of JP Morgan, warned his staff in Bournemouth that one, two or even four thousand of them would be made redundant if we leave the EU (13). Imagine how his staff are feeling today. And as a manager, let me tell you: that’s not the kind of thing you tell your employees unless you’re deadly serious.

Even leading Leave campaigner Michael Gove admitted just a few days ago that jobs are at risk if we leave the EU (14). Multimillionaire UKIP donor Arron Banks described this economic damage as ‘a price worth paying’ (15).

Arron Banks, Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage might be rich enough to gamble their jobs on Brexit - but are you?

It is quite possible that some of your friends and family will lose their jobs as a direct result of Britain leaving the EU. Do you want to be responsible for that?

We took an evidence-based look at the immigration and EU issue above. But the Leave campaign and Eurosceptic press (Express, Sun and Mail in particular) choose to paint a very different picture. A picture which blows these statistics out of all proportion. 'Strangers in Our Own Country' 'Our borders are out of control!'. You know the stuff I mean. Pictures which invite us to eye our friends and neighbours with suspicion and even hostility. Editorial which pins the blame for every problem from housing to wages to traffic to NHS waiting times on immigrants.

And it's not even because they don't know any better. The leaders of the Leave campaign and the political editors of those newspapers are clever, well-educated people. They know the facts I set out above just as well as I do.

Yet instead of presenting a balanced view, they choose to deliberately whip up fear and suspicion of immigrants for their own political purposes.

Shame on them.

Why? Because appealing to people's basest prejudices sells newspapers and gathers votes. Just ask Donald Trump.

And what greater contrast could there be between the divisive rhetoric of the leave campaign and the noble vision of the EU's founding fathers.

Men who, amid the ashes of World War Two, set their national differences aside and dared - not just to dream but to build - a better Europe for us all.

A Europe in which war was “not only unthinkable … but materially impossible” (16).

Here’s Winston Churchill addressing the Congress of Europe in 1948:

“A high and a solemn responsibility rests upon us here ... If we allow ourselves to be rent and disordered by pettiness and small disputes, if we fail in clarity of view or courage in action, a priceless occasion may be cast away for ever. But if we all pull together and pool the luck and the comradeship - and we shall need all the comradeship and not a little luck … then all the little children who are now growing up in this tormented world may find themselves not the victors nor the vanquished in the fleeting triumphs of one country over another in the bloody turmoil of … war, but the heirs of all the treasures of the past and the masters of all the science, the abundance and the glories of the future.”

And - against all the odds - we did it.

We pooled the luck and the comradeship and achieved Churchill’s vision.

Those “little children” are now retired – the first generation in a thousand years to grow up without the horror of war in Europe.

Instead of building weapons, our scientists work together to solve the greatest problems of our age.

We enjoy a standard of living unimaginable to people in 1948.

All the cities, art, history, people, food and culture of this wonderful continent are open to us whenever we want to visit, to live or to work.

Hundreds of millions of European people who until only a few decades ago were ruled by dictators or communists now enjoy democracy, human rights, the rule of law and the abundance of the free market.

I think that’s worth 36 pence a day.

And yet here we stand, about to turn our backs on this great project, thanks to cynical newspaper owners and barefaced lies from the Leave campaign.

Forget what the Sun says.

Forget what’s good for Boris’ and Farage’s careers.

Listen to every current and former British Prime Minister (17). Every other major UK political party leader (18). To Barack Obama, to Hillary Clinton, to Angela Merkel and a host of other world leaders (19). To Stephen Hawking and 83% of scientists (20). To 40 religious leaders (21). To 300 leading historians (22). To the Trades Union Congress and our six largest trades unions (23). To 88% of economists (24). To the National Farmers Union (25). To the Chief Executive of NHS England (26), to the Royal College of Midwives (27) To British businesses of all sizes (28).

For there is an overwhelming consensus among experts of all kinds that Britain is stronger in Europe.

And what does the Leave campaign say to this?

“I think people in this country have had enough of experts” (Michael Gove, Friday 3rd June)

What an extraordinary response.

If you were sick, you’d want to see a doctor. If you had a plane to fly, you’d want a pilot. So when we have the most important political, economic and foreign policy decision of our lifetime to make I think we should listen to the people who are in the best position to evaluate what to do. And they’re all telling us the same thing – we’re much better off in Europe.

It might not be what Michael Gove wants to hear. But it sounds like the right answer to me.

So when you’re in the polling station on Thursday 23rd - with that stubby little pencil in your hand –Vote Remain.

Not in fear, but with pride – about what we, the people of Europe, have achieved together.

Not in ignorance, but with science firmly on our side.

And not alone, but with the greatest statesmen of the past three generations urging us on.

And then in years to come, when your children ask you how you voted in the referendum of 2016, you can look them in the eye and tell them you were on the right side of history.

Thank you for reading

 

[Zarlak]

(1) https://fullfact.org/immigration/eu-migration-and-uk/
(2) https://www.ons.gov.uk/…/populationandm…/populationestimates
(3) http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/statistics-net-migration-…/…
(4) http://www.economist.com/…/21631076-rather-lot-according-ne…
(5) http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/ea019.pdf
(6) https://fullfact.org/euro…/our-eu-membership-fee-55-million/
(7) http://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngla…/thenhs/about/Pages/overview.aspx
(8) http://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/publications/comms/r116.pdf
(9) http://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/publications/comms/r116.pdf
(10) https://next.ft.com/co…/7fa04d70-d911-11e5-a72f-1e7744c66818
(11) https://www.theguardian.com/…/brexit-could-wipe-20-percent-…
(12) https://next.ft.com/co…/7e26d896-241c-11e6-9d4d-c11776a5124d
(13) BBC Radio 4, 3rd June 2016; see also http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36450460
(14) http://www.thetimes.co.uk/…/i-can-t-guarantee-everyone-will…
(15) https://www.politicshome.com/…/arron-banks-%C2%A34300-loss-…
(16) http://www.robert-schuman.eu/en/declaration-of-9-may-1950

 

[Zarlak]

(17) David Cameron http://www.theguardian.com/…/david-cameron-launches-tory-ca… ; Gordon Brown http://www.theguardian.com/…/inspiring-view-britishness-def…; Tony Blair http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36408239; John Major http://www.telegraph.co.uk/…/John-Major-Voting-to-leave-wil…
(18) Jeremy Corbyn (Labour) http://labourlist.org/…/europe-needs-to-change-but-i-am-vo…/ Tim Farron (Lib Dem) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/…/Britain-impoverished-backwater… Caroline Lucas (Green) http://europe.newsweek.com/caroline-lucas-brexit-european-r… Nicola Sturgeon (SNP) http://www.thesun.co.uk/…/Nicola-Sturgeon-vows-to-back-argu…
(19) Barack Obama http://www.telegraph.co.uk/…/as-your-friend-let-me-tell-you… ; Hillary Clinton http://www.theguardian.com/…/hillary-clinton-britain-should… Angela Merkel http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36436726; Shinzo Abehttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/…/japanese-prime-minister-shinz…/
(20) https://www.theguardian.com/…/stephen-hawking-donald-trump-… ;http://www.nature.com/…/scientists-say-no-to-uk-exit-from-e…
(21) http://www.theguardian.com/…/religious-leaders-oppose-brexit
(22) http://www.theguardian.com/…/vote-to-leave-eu-will-condemn-…
(23) http://uk.reuters.com/ar…/uk-britain-eu-unions-idUKKCN0V517D
(24) http://www.itv.com/…/almost-nine-in-10-economists-believe-…/
(25) http://www.theguardian.com/…/british-farmers-uk-eu-nfu-brex…
(26) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36353145
(27) https://www.rcm.org.uk/…/royal-college-of-midwives-supports…
(28) http://www.independent.co.uk/…/brexit-eu-referendum-what-wi…[/QUOTE

 

[golden_blunder]

@Zarlak thanks for posting that, good read

 

[CassiusClaymore]

Yeah I read that the other day.

Personally I don't even think it should be a referendum. We pay politicians to make decisions like this and leaving it to the average man on the street who will base his opinion on one or two issues without considering the bigger picture seems incredibly foolhardy to me. In that respect the people that run the country have let us down massively here.

Had to bite my tongue several times at work today from people spouting stuff about controlling our own borders and immigration but there lies a case in point. Curiously enough all the people I know that seem to be going that way are people who I genuinely find quite unpleasant so it kind of makes me feel I might be doing the right thing as I struggle to find any genuine research into the effects of staying in or leaving.

 

[Zarlak]

Yeah I read that the other day.

Personally I don't even think it should be a referendum. We pay politicians to make decisions like this and leaving it to the average man on the street who will base his opinion on one or two issues without considering the bigger picture seems incredibly foolhardy to me. In that respect the people that run the country have let us down massively here.

Had to bite my tongue several times at work today from people spouting stuff about controlling our own borders and immigration but there lies a case in point. Curiously enough all the people I know that seem to be going that way are people who I genuinely find quite unpleasant so it kind of makes me feel I might be doing the right thing as I struggle to find any genuine facts and research into the effects of staying in or leaving.

Exactly, it was offered to secure votes for cnuty McCuntface, like Dawkins said we are plebs when it comes to this. We simply don't fully understand it, we should never have been given the option to vote on something that we don't understand.

 

[Nick 0208 Ldn]

Schauble has put a bit of a dent in the whole Brexit plan.. No benefits from the single market without membership..

"That wont work, it would require the country to abide by the rules of a club from which it currently wants to withdraw." ... "In is in. Out is out."

The EU will want to try to deter further leavers.

It's not really so much 'try to deter further leavers' as 'common sense in the first place'. The remain campaign have said this all along and the leave campaign have touted us as arrogantly as some irresistible piece of meat that everybody will bend at the knee to to offer us what we want, everything else is scaremongering and that we can have our cake and eat it too. It was always wishful thinking.

1) It's not Schauble's decision to make.
2) He hasn't actually ruled out anything, and is merely speculating.
3) The pretence that the German finance minister cares a damn about British sovereignty (or any other EU nation save for his own) is almost insulting.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Farage cares about British sovereignty and he's German

 

[Nick 0208 Ldn]

Farage cares about British sovereignty and he's German

That's nice, here, have a house point.

 

[Zarlak]

1) It's not Schauble's decision to make.
2) He hasn't actually ruled out anything, and is merely speculating.
3) The pretence that the German finance minister cares a damn about British sovereignty (or any other EU nation save for his own) is almost insulting.

He isn't giving his personal opinion, he's telling it the way it has historically worked. I'm not really sure why leavers keep ignoring this.. probably because it doesn't fit the narrative. What Schauble has said is at least based on something. The narrative of the leave campaign is based on nothing but optimism.

 

[ThierryHenry]

Yeah I read that the other day.

Personally I don't even think it should be a referendum. We pay politicians to make decisions like this and leaving it to the average man on the street who will base his opinion on one or two issues without considering the bigger picture seems incredibly foolhardy to me. In that respect the people that run the country have let us down massively here.

Had to bite my tongue several times at work today from people spouting stuff about controlling our own borders and immigration but there lies a case in point. Curiously enough all the people I know that seem to be going that way are people who I genuinely find quite unpleasant so it kind of makes me feel I might be doing the right thing as I struggle to find any genuine research into the effects of staying in or leaving.

I do think that as good a reason as any for deciding which way to vote in this ref is 'which side has the bigger/ higher proportion of wankers'? Leave seems to have remain beat there, no matter what Nick tells us. Only wish I wasn't on the same side as bloody Osborne.

 

[Dan]

Sky News just now.

 

[Mozza]

Mozza (and others) claimed that a new Conservative government would not re-invest savings in public services, that was where this all started. If Tories were all as he supposed them to be, then the NHS would never have seen the money it has.

They had a tight election to win. If they think they can get away with slashing spending and still win say goodbye to the NHS

 

[Mozza]

On immigration, this gives a pretty solid argument as to why the "migration in the 10s of thousands" rhetoric is nonsense.

https://flipchartfairytales.wordpress.com/2016/06/10/migration-time-to-tear-up-leaves-last-card/

It was always a stupid promise, plucked out the air as it made a nice soundbite but has come to inform policy in a really negative way for those with families from outside the EU (like me). Leaving won't make it better as we'd still be above the target so they'd shit on us even harder

 

[Pink Moon]

Trump - Ban all Muslims from the country, build a wall.

Boris - Writes articles about the Alhambra, has suggested an amnesty for illegal immigrants.

Or, both are discriminatory, inflammatory feckwits? His previous comments on gay marriage, Obama's apparent ancestral dislike of the UK, overall racism and Hillsborough prove as much. He'll then come out at a later date and say he was only joking or he was taken out of context. Much like the racist whose best friend just so happens to be black/asian.

But hey, he's a prominent tory and the figurehead of the leave campaign so I'm guessing your mind will already be made up on this one.

 

[Cheesy]

Will be interesting to see the figures for how Labour voters go. A lot of rumblings about some of them being quite disgruntled. It'll obviously have an overall Remain for the party, but may be surprising how many back Brexit.

 

[GloryHunter07]

1) It's not Schauble's decision to make.
2) He hasn't actually ruled out anything, and is merely speculating.
3) The pretence that the German finance minister cares a damn about British sovereignty (or any other EU nation save for his own) is almost insulting.

No doubt his views would hold much more sway if his comments were more favourable to your position.

 

[Rams]

It's a diagrace all these foreigners coming to our country, getting drunk and violent, misbehaving themselves, showing total disregard to the local people & culture, abusing the locals and causing enormous damage to property. I say out of the EU! Sacre blue!!!

 

[Don't Kill Bill]

Interesting read, fecking 1,000 character limit.

https://www.facebook.com/nicholasjohncarter/posts/10153467946496736 Say what you like about the person writing it, but solid use of sources to back up his argument which is a damn sight more than you can say for most of the shite you get told by both the official leave campaign and the remain campaign. Even if you ignore the romanticism at the end which is of course his own opinion.

Salient points from your source,

"Our net contribution to the EU was £8.5bn last year (6) which works out at 36 pence per person per day. That is a drop in the ocean"

"The best estimate suggests that the government would have between £20bn and £40bn less to spend on public services than if we remained in the EU "

If I understand the point this source is making correctly 8.5 billion is 36p per person per day and that is said to be insignificant. Leaving the EU would probably cost between 2.5 and 5 times as much. So if the assumptions cited are correct it wouldn't be a disaster either way. Is that where you stand?

 

[Zarlak]

"Our net contribution to the EU was £8.5bn last year (6) which works out at 36 pence per person per day. That is a drop in the ocean"



If I understand the point this source is making correctly 8.5 billion is 36p per person per day and that is said to be insignificant. Leaving the EU would probably cost between 2.5 and 5 times as much. So if the assumptions cited are correct it wouldn't be a disaster either way. Is that where you stand?

No, the point is not around the cost being insignificant as the main factor in staying, the point is around all the benefits that we get from being in the EU versus the very little difference that leaving the EU will actually make on principles such as immigration and cost of being in the EU means that there is very little reason to leave and actually we will be worse off overall. Which is where I stand. Some of the potential negatives from leaving the EU are far scarier than the very little impact that immigration actually has on us and the cost of being in the EU.

EDIT: Sorry you edited your post after I began replying so perhaps my reply wasn't exactly what you were asking. The point around the article is not really how cheap it is to stay or go it's to point out how most of the rhetoric used by the leave side 'OMG IT'S SO feckING EXPENSIVE WE'RE GOING TO BE SO MUCH BETTER OFF FINANCIALLY OUT' is infact false and we will be worse off. Amongst other things, the cost of being in the EU is a small part of a much larger picture painted by the article.

 

[Don't Kill Bill]

I just wanted to point out that the figures cited do not point to the post Brexit disaster and collapse the remain side has being trying to peddle and I accept that the Brexit sides desire to cure all ills in the UK with 8.5 billion they probably won't really save look very optimistic too.

 

[NinjaFletch]

I just wanted to point out that the figures cited do not point to the post Brexit disaster and collapse the remain side has being trying to peddle and I accept that the Brexit sides desire to cure all ills in the UK with 8.5 billion they probably won't really save look very optimistic too.

Or rather with £8.5bn (and then some) thats already been taken out of the economy with the uncertainty surrounding this debate.

 

[Don't Kill Bill]

Anyone know which poll came out yesterday showing leave 10 points ahead? It was mentioned on the BBC but I can't believe its true.