If we vote for Brexit what happens

CLAPTON

mayonnaise wrote: »

Brexit fears are putting off investors

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/05/19/brexit-fears-are-putting-off-investors-says-hargreaves-lansdown/



I'm sure it will take just a few minutes for the usual suspect to chime in, telling us this is good news. Less investment into the UK economy, less jobs, quieter streets, less pollution.

there probably is some truth in the proposition that fear of WW3 has discouraged some people from buying into international companies.

However, EU bigots and people with a few brain cells and lacking a sense of fair play may wish to learn something by noting :

- people buying shares in large companies has no effect of 'investment' in the UK
- many of the FT100 comprise international companies that happen to be listed in London but whose share price is affected by international factors (e.g. the dreadful economic state of the EU)
- the ft100 is higher today than 5 years ago : presumably due to the expectation that brexit will happen (well I don't actually believe that but is as plausable as the rubbish posted by mayo)
- stock brokers (like estate agents) make their money on turnover
- the ft 100 fluctuates all the time even when brexit isn't on the agenda.

kabayiri

mayonnaise wrote: »

Brexit fears are putting off investors

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/05/19/brexit-fears-are-putting-off-investors-says-hargreaves-lansdown/



I'm sure it will take just a few minutes for the usual suspect to chime in, telling us this is good news. Less investment into the UK economy, less jobs, quieter streets, less pollution.

It's a stupid idea of the government to offer a referendum if they aren't prepared for the consequences.

It's not like they weren't aware of similar issues in the Scottish indy ref.

If you don't want people to choose, then DONT offer a choice!

Simples

BobQ

As an indication of what might happen this is quite interesting from Business for Britain - a Leave organisation.

http://forbritain.org/cogchapter29.pdf

Consider the 2006 EU Screening Report for Turkey, from 4 September 2009. Chapter 19 (of a total of 29) examines Turkey’s suitability in regard to social policy and employment. As the document acknowledges, this was a country which (at that time) wanted to join the EU and was doing everything it could: “Turkey indicated that it can accept the acquis regarding social policy and employment. Turkey indicated that it does not expect any difficulties to implement the acquis by accession.” The country had a “satisfactory level of alignment in the field of social policy and employment”. Nevertheless, Turkey could not, in the opinion of the inspectors, yet be admitted to the EU for the following reasons:

It then lists pages of things Turkey needs to address:

• Labour law as it applied to agricultural businesses with fewer than 50 employees was not stringent enough; • The inspectors did not believe some of the country’s labour laws were constitutional; • Further harmonisation was required on working time rules; • Further harmonisation was required on the rules governing the posting of workers; • Further harmonisation was required to establish works councils and enforce worker consultation;

This list continues for several pages (see the link above p757)

• The Government should involve its quangos with ‘stakeholder groups’ to formulate a “national integrated strategy on promoting social inclusion”;• The Government should create ‘community-based services’ to help the disabled;• The administrative capacity of the new social security system should be upgraded (apparently this means, again, hiring more civil servants); • The Government should establish an independent Equality Agency to oversee the new anti-discrimination laws (once more, it would seem, implemented by Turkey to satisfy the acquis); • The new anti-discrimination legislation fails to mention all the categories of discrimination mentioned in EU regulations;

concluding with

• The Turkish Government does not produce enough “gender segregated statistical indicators”;• The Government should establish an independent Equality Agency to oversee the new sex discrimination laws; • Although women’s participation in certain professions is relatively strong (approximately 30 per cent of lawyers, academics and doctors are women) there were not enough elected female politicians.

But then it says.....

This, remember, is a country which the inspectors considered ‘satisfactory’. The obvious implication is that, under its current membership terms, a country like Britain, which is already complying in full with the acquis, cannot undo what has already been implemented and is having to deal with even more regulation. Leaving the EU would give the UK a powerful opportunity to reconsider the existing laws in this area. While there would be no political appetite for the repeal of laws which undermine workers’ rights such as paid holidays, it is likely that some amendments to the existing laws would be widely welcomed.

So which of these many areas do those favouring Leave want to sweep aside or change? How close to the standards of Turkey do they wish to take us? Hopefully not too close.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Probability of Remain victory now 80%.

Sapphire

BobQ wrote: »

As an indication of what might happen this is quite interesting from Business for Britain - a Leave organisation.

http://forbritain.org/cogchapter29.pdf

It then lists pages of things Turkey needs to address:

But then it says.....

So which of these many areas do those favouring Leave want to sweep aside or change? How close to the standards of Turkey do they wish to take us? Hopefully not too close.

Just an observation, but I think you may be breaching copyright law by posting these extensive quote from outside sources here without permission of the copyright holder.

Shakethedisease

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Probability of Remain victory now 80%.

But there's been so much recently that wasn't expected or reflected in either polling or the betting markets weeks out from the result.. Conservative majority, Corbyn as Labour leader, Trump doing so well, SNP landslide at the last General Election, Tories coming second in the Scottish elections 2 weeks ago. The bookies were so sure Labour would come second they stopped taking bets ( they came third ).

There's going to be no exit poll taken either on the night as far as I understand. Which seemed a bit weird to me in the Scottish referendum.. but even weirder with a vote of this magnitude on a UK wide basis.

Anyway, just saying. Lately there's been a few very big upsets to apple carts regarding politics. Unthinkable a few weeks before, but happened anyway. So I wouldn't get too complacent. All this 'in the bag' stuff will only serve to galvanise those that wish to Leave, and have Remainers stay at home thinking it's fine. Should be careful of too much of it.

Generali

Rinoa wrote: »

After the 2015 GE where the tories won a majority, there was considerable speculation people wouldn't admit in polls they supported the 'nasty' party. But they certainly voted tory in the polling booth.

With the constant bombardment from the governments 'project fear' campaign, where brexit is supposed to cost every family £4.600, factories will close, jobs will be lost and even war in europe is possible, voters will understandably shy away from admitting they favour brexit in a phone poll, whereas online with no human interaction, maybe they are happy to reveal their true intentions.

You're thinking of 1992. The problem with the polls in 2015 were that Ds and Es didn't vote much and As and Bs did. Also, the pollsters systematically asked too many previous Labour voters and too few previous Tory voters how they would vote, they got the sampling wrong.

baza52

I also think that the more we are told the vote to remain will win will just encourage remain votes not to bother voting thinking its a done deal.
The voters that want us out of the EU will however make an effort to vote.

Personally I want out but I'm looking forward to the results and the turnout of the public that voted.

From what I can tell the politicians spend 99% of their time putting the other parties down and 1% talking about the things we want to know about.

Id love to see a politician version of the yes no game with regards to the EU. The public ask a question and they can only answer yes or no.
Would make life a lot easier.

michaels

Generali wrote: »

You're thinking of 1992. The problem with the polls in 2015 were that Ds and Es didn't vote much and As and Bs did. Also, the pollsters systematically asked too many previous Labour voters and too few previous Tory voters how they would vote, they got the sampling wrong.

But employing the same logic to the eu vote is dangerous. Perhaps the tory voters turned out because they were enthused by tory policy (or more likely scared of labour) whereas the labour voters were underwhelmed by Ed and so stayed away. The same effect could see ambivalent stay supporters stay at home even though they are in ABC1 and motivated leavers turn out even though they are DE.

Generali

michaels wrote: »

But employing the same logic to the eu vote is dangerous. Perhaps the tory voters turned out because they were enthused by tory policy (or more likely scared of labour) whereas the labour voters were underwhelmed by Ed and so stayed away. The same effect could see ambivalent stay supporters stay at home even though they are in ABC1 and motivated leavers turn out even though they are DE.

I'm not trying to.

The biggest hurdle Leave has to get over is the status quo. People in the UK live quite a nice life: war isn't being fought in the UK; people can afford to feed, clothe and house themselves; there is plentiful access to healthcare and education; your rights to freedom of speech and so on are largely respected. As a result, people may well feel that they have a lot to lose, potentially, from change and little to gain; how much richer or freer can they realistically get?

Relying on polling to predict a one-off vote is probably a bit of a mugs game quite honestly as there isn't much to compare it against. The pollsters had the Scottish referendum about right but that may well be a fluke or even simply the result of the very high turnout so working out who would actually come out to vote wasn't difficult as they all did pretty much!