If we vote for Brexit what happens

vivatifosi

I am getting fed up with the b*ll*cks quotient from both sides now.

The remain campaign and Cameron with a ludicrous speech on how Europe is essential for security (when we all know that is NATO), vs the total idiocy of the Team Brexit saying that the EU encourages poverty (while neglecting to mention that the UK supports 1/3 of the world's tax havens).

globalds

A short musical interlude from Australia ..Who are proof we will still be allowed in the all important Euro vision song contest regardless of the vote.

Dami Im will represent Australia at the 2016 Eurovision Song Contest in Stockholm with the song Sound Of Silence

michaels

vivatifosi wrote: »

I am getting fed up with the b*ll*cks quotient from both sides now.

The remain campaign and Cameron with a ludicrous speech on how Europe is essential for security (when we all know that is NATO), vs the total idiocy of the Team Brexit saying that the EU encourages poverty (while neglecting to mention that the UK supports 1/3 of the world's tax havens).

First lesson in economics, the interaction between supply and demand sets price, more supply with the same demand = lower price. Freedom of movement increases the supply of low/unskilled labour. What impact do you think it has on the pay of the lowest skilled in the UK? (and does this have anything to do with tax havens?

Separately, consider the supplier of a basic agricultural product like sugar from a poor country outside the EU. The EU applies high tariffs against such producers, this will result in sales of this poor producers output to be less than otherwise and they will receive less revenue thus being even poorer. Doesn't sound very progressive to me unless you are one of the few protected industrial farmers in the EU.

BobQ

michaels wrote: »

First lesson in economics, the interaction between supply and demand sets price, more supply with the same demand = lower price. Freedom of movement increases the supply of low/unskilled labour. What impact do you think it has on the pay of the lowest skilled in the UK? (and does this have anything to do with tax havens?

Separately, consider the supplier of a basic agricultural product like sugar from a poor country outside the EU. The EU applies high tariffs against such producers, this will result in sales of this poor producers output to be less than otherwise and they will receive less revenue thus being even poorer. Doesn't sound very progressive to me unless you are one of the few protected industrial farmers in the EU.

Or you could take the view that economics is more art than science and you can use it to prove whichever case you want, Remain or Leave.

vivatifosi

BobQ wrote: »

Or you could take the view that economics is more art than science and you can use it to prove whichever case you want, Remain or Leave.

Which is sort of the point I was trying to make, albeit clumsily (I shouldn't post in a hurry because I've got a Eurovision semi-final to watch:o).

Much of what people are voting on is about shades of grey rather than black and white. It is nuanced. However the in and out sides are both presenting it as very black and white.

I've said before I'm voting in. But every time Cameron, or Obama, or whoever goes to speak in favour of staying in, I want to chuck a brick at my television.

BobQ

vivatifosi wrote: »

I am getting fed up with the b*ll*cks quotient from both sides now

The other issue is that when you try and have a serious debate the arguments are dismissed by dogmatic positions.

The remain campaign and Cameron with a ludicrous speech on how Europe is essential for security (when we all know that is NATO), vs the total idiocy of the Team Brexit saying that the EU encourages poverty (while neglecting to mention that the UK supports 1/3 of the world's tax havens).

I think you are misrepresenting Cameron. What he actually said was that our security depends on several different things including both membership of NATO and EU cooperation on security issues

The problem with Leave is that they are a collection of individuals. Gisela Stuart argues that EU causes poverty, Whittingdale opposes increasing the minimum wage as it encourages immigrants to come. Its quite confused, even if individuals on the Leave side are being consistent.

CLAPTON

BobQ wrote: »

The other issue is that when you try and have a serious debate the arguments are dismissed by dogmatic positions.



I think you are misrepresenting Cameron. What he actually said was that our security depends on several different things including both membership of NATO and EU cooperation on security issues

The problem with Leave is that they are a collection of individuals. Gisela Stuart argues that EU causes poverty, Whittingdale opposes increasing the minimum wage as it encourages immigrants to come. Its quite confused, even if individuals on the Leave side are being consistent.

another balanced view

it's normal in a democracy, for people to have different views

robin58

Just to throw a pebble into the water.

Where would we be in context with the Commonwealth nations?

Could we, if we leave, have freed import restrictions from theses suppliers.

Trade in the resources was most of the reasons that we went and colonized theses places.

chewmylegoff

It appears that both sides are competing to see who can make the most hysterical claims to support their prospective positions. I wonder where these attempts to trump each other's ridiculousness will end up. It can't be long before some obscure Scot intervenes in the debate with a point about the EU preventing aliens from attacking the earth.

BobQ

Part of the problem is of course all these competing views come from politicians, and we have so learnt to mistrust politicians.