If we vote for Brexit what happens

tommysaver

Hi guys, I'm new to the forum but have browsed it regularly (Pretty on top of my finances for a 23 year old!)

I'm trying to educate myself a bit further on this referendum and have a couple of points I'd like to raise, if anyone would kindly elaborate/expand on!

1. Savings. I've done pretty well over the years, worked full time since 18; and I have quite a nice amount stashed for the future e.g. Deposit. People at work are suggesting the value of the £ could go up or down depending on Brexit. Is this something to worry about? I assume it's all relative and not much can be done really. One bloke at work says a financial crash is so imminent he's actually buying up gold and saying we should be doing the same! Is that rather extreme?

2. It's in my interest for property prices to come down, but also I don't want my hard-earned savings to become worth-less if that makes sense.

I've probably done a really bad job of explaining myself!

TL;DR I am still on the fence of which way to vote, I've watched brexit the movie and I am swaying towards leave, but need some more clarification on what's in my interests as a 23 year old with savings and wanting to get on the property ladder in say 5 years time.

Cheers, Tom.

TrickyTree83

michaels wrote: »

Umm - agree with what you say but gobsmacked by this statistic - if it costs less for a patient to be seen at A&E than the GP then why on earth are we spending so much time trying to get GPs to do things rather than hospitals?

Average cost of A&E visit here.

Just found I quoted the wrong figure for the GP appointment, it's not £136.00 it's closer to £45.00. Adding in prescription subsidies would bring it to around £86.35 apparently, although the validity of the source perhaps isn't great (here)

I wouldn't have thought the difference (approx. £50) would make much difference to what I was getting at.

michaels

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Average cost of A&E visit here.

Just found I quoted the wrong figure for the GP appointment, it's not £136.00 it's closer to £45.00. Adding in prescription subsidies would bring it to around £86.35 apparently, although the validity of the source perhaps isn't great (here)

I wouldn't have thought the difference (approx. £50) would make much difference to what I was getting at.

Thanks for coming back to correct and apologies for diverting the conversation from what I agree was a valid comment.

Rinoa

BobQ wrote: »

Rather speculative?


http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/brexit05.pdf

This seems to contradict your assumptions.

MigrantWatch comments on the above:

1. The claim that recent EEA migrants contributed 34% more in revenues than they received in state expenditures is simply wrong. It relies on assumptions that employees earn the same as the UK-born population when their own figures show they do not, that self-employed migrants contribute far more than those employed when they have no evidence of this whatsoever and – wholly unrealistically - that all of them own the same investments, property and other assets as the UK-born and long-term residents from the day they arrive in the UK.
2. In fact, on less unreasonable assumptions, there was no positive fiscal impact at all from the recent EEA migrant group singled out by Dustmann and Frattini for their “very positive contribution”. Indeed, migration to the UK continues to have a significant fiscal cost, and recent migrants made no difference to the upward trend.

The claim that recent EEA migrants are only half as likely to claim ’benefits or tax credits’ is highly misleading. Indeed it is meaningless in the context of establishing the fiscal cost since what matters is the amount people receive rather than the number of claims made – especially since different benefits pay widely different amounts to different people. Recent EEA migrants are much more likely to receive tax credits than the UK-born population, and more likely to receive housing benefit. Furthermore, these are likely to be paid at higher rates in view of their lower incomes. Typically they will be higher than the out-of-work benefits they are less likely to claim, and the native born more likely, to claim. For example in 2011, typical out-of-work benefits for a couple with two children were around £200 a week , but the same couple in low-paid work with two children could be receiving twice that much as they become entitled to working and child care components of tax credits. Job-seekers Allowance was £67.50 a week but the average housing benefit claim was between £73 and £145 per week.

http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/329

mayonnaise

tommysaver wrote: »

Hi guys, I'm new to the forum but have browsed it regularly (Pretty on top of my finances for a 23 year old!)

I'm trying to educate myself a bit further on this referendum and have a couple of points I'd like to raise, if anyone would kindly elaborate/expand on!

1. Savings. I've done pretty well over the years, worked full time since 18; and I have quite a nice amount stashed for the future e.g. Deposit. People at work are suggesting the value of the £ could go up or down depending on Brexit. Is this something to worry about? I assume it's all relative and not much can be done really. One bloke at work says a financial crash is so imminent he's actually buying up gold and saying we should be doing the same! Is that rather extreme?

2. It's in my interest for property prices to come down, but also I don't want my hard-earned savings to become worth-less if that makes sense.

I've probably done a really bad job of explaining myself!

TL;DR I am still on the fence of which way to vote, I've watched brexit the movie and I am swaying towards leave, but need some more clarification on what's in my interests as a 23 year old with savings and wanting to get on the property ladder in say 5 years time.

Cheers, Tom.

Welcome again, Tom.
After Brexit:
Food will be cheaper, VAT on tampons and solar panels will be slashed to zero, VAT on fuel will be abolished, our fishermen will be allowed to fish where ever they want, returning ashore with ever more abundant catches of cod, mullet and plaice. House prices will fall and wages will rise, the NHS will finally be properly funded and we can do away with pesky red tape like protections for temping staff or holiday pay. Flights and car insurance will be cheaper and we'll be free to import millions of curry chefs thus saving the Great British Curry. Once again, we'll be a proud seafaring nation importing spices, silk and other paraphernalia from the British Raj - tariff free. What's not to like?

Rinoa

BobQ wrote: »

Thanks for the source. But they appear to agree with me that GDP per capita is not ideal either.



If they were all unemployed or were all surgeons it might be significant but if they are in a broad range of jobs it tells you nothing.

Perhaps your point was more more subtle than this?

I thought my point was pretty obvious. The HoL Economic Committee found migrants produced no significant benefit to the existing UK population. When you then consider all the problems of accommodation and services required to support them, their contribution is almost certainly negative.

Rinoa

Lord Sugar:



5 May 2013: Lord Sugar attacks the EU, says Brussels is an obstacle to his companies’ success:

“When I started my business years ago, to take on the first person, the second, the third, was bad enough – but now we have a further obstacle to worry about: the political correctness of things, the claims culture, and the health and safety. It’s no wonder some small businesses say it is too onerous and they won’t hire anyone. I blame the fact that we are part of Europe. I blame the fact that the Government doesn’t have the guts to say to Brussels: I don’t like it, we should start taking control of our own safety and health regulations and our own claims culture. I’ve been told we can’t because we are in Europe. I say, enough is enough! We are Britain; we were once a great industrial nation and now you’ve turned us into a nation of ambulance chasers and moaners and wastrels.”

25 May 2016: Lord Sugar appointed government’s new business tsar.

31 May 2016: Lord Sugar lovebombs the EU, says Brussels is responsible for his companies’ success:

“I’ve been in business for 50 years. I’ve seen some pretty daft ideas in my time. And I’ll tell you one of them: Britain leaving the EU… When we entered the EU, it was a breath of fresh air for me. It opened up a massive market. I was free to sell to and buy from who I wanted and where I wanted. Honestly, that’s how my companies prospered… So, for the sake of Britain, I hope you trust me and my instincts, and, on June 23rd, vote to remain.”

What changed his mind? :rotfl:

mrginge

mayonnaise wrote: »

Welcome again, Tom.
After Brexit:
Food will be cheaper, VAT on tampons and solar panels will be slashed to zero, VAT on fuel will be abolished, our fishermen will be allowed to fish where ever they want, returning ashore with ever more abundant catches of cod, mullet and plaice. House prices will fall and wages will rise, the NHS will finally be properly funded and we can do away with pesky red tape like protections for temping staff or holiday pay. Flights and car insurance will be cheaper and we'll be free to import millions of curry chefs thus saving the Great British Curry. Once again, we'll be a proud seafaring nation importing spices, silk and other paraphernalia from the British Raj - tariff free. What's not to like?

Sounds great. Unfortunatly you forgot to add that we will be in the midst of WW3 though.

TrickyTree83

Rinoa wrote: »

Lord Sugar:



5 May 2013: Lord Sugar attacks the EU, says Brussels is an obstacle to his companies’ success:

“When I started my business years ago, to take on the first person, the second, the third, was bad enough – but now we have a further obstacle to worry about: the political correctness of things, the claims culture, and the health and safety. It’s no wonder some small businesses say it is too onerous and they won’t hire anyone. I blame the fact that we are part of Europe. I blame the fact that the Government doesn’t have the guts to say to Brussels: I don’t like it, we should start taking control of our own safety and health regulations and our own claims culture. I’ve been told we can’t because we are in Europe. I say, enough is enough! We are Britain; we were once a great industrial nation and now you’ve turned us into a nation of ambulance chasers and moaners and wastrels.”

25 May 2016: Lord Sugar appointed government’s new business tsar.

31 May 2016: Lord Sugar lovebombs the EU, says Brussels is responsible for his companies’ success:

“I’ve been in business for 50 years. I’ve seen some pretty daft ideas in my time. And I’ll tell you one of them: Britain leaving the EU… When we entered the EU, it was a breath of fresh air for me. It opened up a massive market. I was free to sell to and buy from who I wanted and where I wanted. Honestly, that’s how my companies prospered… So, for the sake of Britain, I hope you trust me and my instincts, and, on June 23rd, vote to remain.”

What changed his mind? :rotfl:

wow

So far that's Dave, Jeremy and now Alan who have been caught out as two faced. Previously saying either we'd be better off out of the EU or in Dave's case saying of course we could prosper outside of the EU and now advocating for Remain.

Have the Leave campaigns had any turncoats?

mayonnaise

Rinoa wrote: »

What changed his mind? :rotfl:

With age comes wisdom.