If we vote for Brexit what happens

CLAPTON

gfplux wrote: »

Why doesn't Clapton show his location.
there are too many people posting about this subject who are hiding where they live. IMO where you live in the UK will have an influence on your views on this subject.

presumably your middle class little europhile enclave entirely pre-determines your pro-euro views or is it only the people who disagree with you who are incapable of thinking objectively?

Generali

michaels wrote: »

So China and Chile are better off than they would have been had they developed as democracies so perhaps we should follow a similar pattern because nothing is more important than gdp per head.

I would argue quite the reverse.

The reason China is so poor is because of the centuries of repression it faced under the warlords, emperors and Commies.

Chinese GDP per head at the end of 2014 according to the World Bank was under $7,600. That's a third less than the UK's was in 1955.

Don't believe the hype about China: growth rates are high but absolute levels of GDP per capita are shockingly low by UK standards, about £100 a week.

kabayiri

Generali wrote: »

...

Don't believe the hype about China: growth rates are high but absolute levels of GDP per capita are shockingly low by UK standards, about £100 a week.

This is probably a different thread, but doesn't the developed world need China to be successful now?

CLAPTON

gfplux wrote: »

Sorry? Don't you realise that almost every western Country has an aging population. You may not agree with Merkel but suggesting Germany is the only Country with an aging population is just plain WRONG.

Note to self, Dugh! I have just fallen into the trap of pointing out something that is wrong in a committed "outers" argument. This will not change anything to Thrugelmir

indeed it is so that the medical advances have enabled people all over the world to live longer:
note to self : don't under any circumstance coolly consider the consequences but import a 100 million people immediately, abandon democracy, build fences along all EU borders, continue to hammer the southern european people , ignore all economics and continue to insult everyone that disagrees with you.
after all you're all right.

gfplux

kabayiri wrote: »

Since this is an UK-wide referendum, why does it matter?

There are certain parts of the UK that receive huge subsidies from the EU. After Brexit that "money" will be in the gift of the U.K. Politiciens. That what can influence people a lot.

kabayiri

gfplux wrote: »

There are certain parts of the UK that receive huge subsidies from the EU. After Brexit that "money" will be in the gift of the U.K. Politiciens. That what can influence people a lot.

You seem to be saying it's as much a local issue as a national one then?

It is clear that some of the EU effects like open migration have had greater impact in some places than others.

However, if I told you I live within the Greater Manchester connurbation (at a stretch), can you accurately determine if I am adversely effected or not at all?

I think we would be in danger of making assumptions, when the reality is much more complex.

CLAPTON

gfplux wrote: »

There are certain parts of the UK that receive huge subsidies from the EU. After Brexit that "money" will be in the gift of the U.K. Politiciens. That what can influence people a lot.

like Luxemburg : so everyone there is europhile out of naked greed
-maybe we have found something to agree about

vivatifosi

kabayiri wrote: »

It is clear that some of the EU effects like open migration have had greater impact in some places than others.

This is one issue that imo has failed to be addressed by the "in crowd" (sings Dobie Gray in head).

Taking London out of the equation, which functions differently to the rest of the country, immigration has been hugely uneven. I believe that there is an immigration tipping point. The point at which the benefits from people moving here (adding to GDP, bringing younger people into the economy, filling hard to fill jobs and so on) is outweighed by overwhelmed doctor surgeries, schools and hospitals, shortage of housing etc.

Sky did a map of the most eurosceptic areas of the country this week. Some (though far from all) of these areas do have real issues... Folkestone, the Fens etc... Politicians do themselves no favours by failing to acknowledge this. Sometimes a one size fits all approach doesn't fit and there are areas of the country that need real help.

Equally though, is it right to put all of the blame for this on Europe? Yes, we have high immigration here, but the UK government under Blair chose not to take up the opt out. So I blame that on a previous government rather than the EU for the start of that. However I accept that this is hugely complex.

kabayiri

vivatifosi wrote: »

...
Taking London out of the equation, which functions differently to the rest of the country, immigration has been hugely uneven. I believe that there is an immigration tipping point. The point at which the benefits from people moving here (adding to GDP, bringing younger people into the economy, filling hard to fill jobs and so on) is outweighed by overwhelmed doctor surgeries, schools and hospitals, shortage of housing etc.
...

It's okay. People in the likes of Lincoln are being told that their current practical problems are for the greater good of the country, which basically means the London powerhouse. Little wonder they feel ignored.

If they could see a roadmap to a brighter future, it would probably help.

Yet, the current government (and previous) are clearly not pumping enough money into the infrastructure in these places. They could and should spend billions more on these places.

Mr Osborne is instead going to tell these people they face further cuts later today.

It's not a very joined up message.

CLAPTON

vivatifosi wrote: »

This is one issue that imo has failed to be addressed by the "in crowd" (sings Dobie Gray in head).

Taking London out of the equation, which functions differently to the rest of the country, immigration has been hugely uneven. I believe that there is an immigration tipping point. The point at which the benefits from people moving here (adding to GDP, bringing younger people into the economy, filling hard to fill jobs and so on) is outweighed by overwhelmed doctor surgeries, schools and hospitals, shortage of housing etc.

Sky did a map of the most eurosceptic areas of the country this week. Some (though far from all) of these areas do have real issues... Folkestone, the Fens etc... Politicians do themselves no favours by failing to acknowledge this. Sometimes a one size fits all approach doesn't fit and there are areas of the country that need real help.

Equally though, is it right to put all of the blame for this on Europe? Yes, we have high immigration here, but the UK government under Blair chose not to take up the opt out. So I blame that on a previous government rather than the EU for the start of that. However I accept that this is hugely complex.

'Blame' isn't the issue : the issue is whether you want to actually DO sometime about immigration or not.
If you do want to reduce immigration, then one has to leave the EU, as all their citizens have unrestrictive access to the UK.