If we vote for Brexit what happens

LHW99

I like the ability of an economic union which uplifts poorer countries through the various mechanisms and ultimately benefits all by doing so.

I would like to see this too. Unfortunately recent experience for Greece, particularly but others also hasn't convinced me its happening.
Maybe your tech company is doing well from Europe mwtp, but our (small) company used to earn 25% of its income from the EU before 2008. Ever since then that has dropped to below 10%, and shows no sign of improving.

When we joined the EEC from EFTA we were expecting the benefits of trading with a large entity. The way things are now, we should have a global outlook, and in my view the EU gets in the way of that.

tommysaver

mwpt wrote: »

Like I said, I'm not interested in principles, I'm not looking for vague handwaving and untrue statements (we absolutely do already have input into our country), I'm looking for you to convince me why my life will be better with the newfound democracy we'd supposedly have outside the EU. As a neutral, I would have thought you'd be interested in this too.

Haha, what input do we have? Really? Aside from many issues, immigration has to be the easiest example. Oh yes, about those near on half a million migrants we must 'improve on'... Nothing gets done whilst the country screams about it.

I actually quite like David Cameron and voted conservative. It's the system overall at fault. Have you ever seen the debates had inside the house of commons? I'm not a political person, I can hardly write a half decent sentence together (as you can see) but the "Oh please the honourable gentlemen take back that comment!" remarks are genuinely laughable. Sorry, off on a tangent now. TL;DR there's a mini victory in leaving which I think many people are voting for based on this reason alone. Not that I agree with that.

mwpt wrote: »

My partner is able to get an appointment easily when she uses our GP. I didn't have any issues when I registered but have not had to use them since.

I know of many people with a different opinion on this, including myself. Fair enough if it works for you though.

mwpt wrote: »

I don't think you're looking at both sides at all. Your language the ease with which you breezed in claiming to be neutral but very quickly became a brexiteer suggests otherwise.

Meh. I'm just basing it on what I've watched, read and spoken to people about. At the end of the day it's my opinion and what I think is right. I'm swaying out because I can't see what benefit staying in has, unless you can recommended me something to read or watch?

mwpt wrote: »

My reasons for voting in would be as follows:
- The UK has flourished inside the EU. I see no reason to not want to continue flourishing. I also don't see a reason to bail out on our long term partners while they are going through some difficulty. It's a pretty crappy thing to do.

Fair enough. We are one of the strongest though, I can't help but think if things did go well, we would flourish a whole lot more. I can't see it getting worse to the point we have a recession and live off baked beans for 20 years.

mwpt wrote: »

- I like the ability of an economic union which uplifts poorer countries through the various mechanisms and ultimately benefits all by doing so.

Again, meh. Not too bothered about uplifting poorer countries, okay so it's worked quite well for THEM, but ultimately what are we really gaining? We are just having more weight on our shoulders..?

mwpt wrote: »

- I like the idea of being able to live and work anywhere in this economic union as conditions or lifestyle or desires change. But then, I like that the world is wide with different opportunities, others are less concerned.

Yeah, doesn't bother me too much. I'm sure it won't be that difficult to work in other places.

mwpt wrote: »

- My specific industry, tech, in London is thriving and mostly the thoughts on the ground are that this is because of the EU. Startups, finance, e-commerce, etc. Tech pays pretty well and generates employment opportunities, productivity, products people want, and not least a large amount of tax for our country which pays for your health care, the unfunded pension for the old lady down the street and so forth.

Fair enough. I'm in engineering in London.

mwpt wrote: »

- The EU immigrants here contribute more financially to our economy than they take out.

Really? I genuinely am not sure the official figures can be trusted, much like the 333k they said come over... (I'm not one of the type to scream and shout, 'dose migrantzz comin over ere takin our jobzzz) Just think we are getting ourself into deep water with it all. Needs a reform!

mwpt wrote: »

There are downsides to being in the EU, some that might even be practical rather than theoretical but the upsides, to me specifically, far outweigh any potential downsides.

But I'm glad that in theory you'll have a better life in the future with the newfound democracy which is better than the current democracy but weirdly won't change anything for you.

Hmmm. I'm not sure I enjoy your condescending post approach..

How are you to know it won't change anything for me? It hasn't happened yet. There is huge potential for it to change things for me, getting on the property ladder for one..

Anyway, I'll leave it at that as I need my bed. I learnt from reading bits on here tonight so it's a positive all round for me.

Sapphire

tommysaver wrote: »

Haha, what input do we have? Really? Aside from many issues, immigration has to be the easiest example. Oh yes, about those near on half a million migrants we must 'improve on'... Nothing gets done whilst the country screams about it.

I know of many people with a different opinion on this, including myself. Fair enough if it works for you though.

Meh. I'm just basing it on what I've watched, read and spoken to people about. At the end of the day it's my opinion and what I think is right. I'm swaying out because I can't see what benefit staying in has, unless you can recommended me something to read or watch?

Fair enough. We are one of the strongest though, I can't help but think if things did go well, we would flourish a whole lot more. I can't see it getting worse to the point we have a recession and live off baked beans for 20 years.

Again, meh. Not too bothered about uplifting poorer countries, okay so it's worked quite well for THEM, but ultimately what are we really gaining? We are just having more weight on our shoulders..?

Really? I genuinely am not sure the official figures can be trusted, much like the 333k they said come over...

Hmmm. I'm not sure I enjoy your condescending post approach..

How are you to know it won't change anything for me? It hasn't happened yet. There is huge potential for it to change things for me, getting on the property ladder for one..

Anyway, I'll leave it at that as I need my bed. I learnt from reading bits on here tonight so it's a positive all round for me.

Thanks very much for your interesting and well thought out contributions to this thread. My opinions align with yours – though you are better at putting them than I am.

And I'm definitely voting Leave. :T

Moby

CLAPTON wrote: »

the only way the EU can make the people of the UK suffer is to inflict suffering on the people of the EU27

why you support such people is beyond belief but I guess you have along histroy of supporting mad lefty bigotry that damages ordinary people : think about the poor people of Venzsuela

Usual nonsensical piffle from you. I'm not responsible for what's happening in Venezuela. Not even my influence extends that far;)

Seriously though it is abundantly clear that Brexit is a leap in the dark without a parachute. Germany, France etc will make it their business to ensure the UK does not get a favourable trade deal. They will have no choice.....they will have to make an example of us! This will result in years of economic uncertainty make no mistake! Cameron's dubious exaggeration's accepted.

CLAPTON

Moby wrote: »

Usual nonsensical piffle from you. I'm not responsible for what's happening in Venezuela. Not even my influence extends that far;)

Seriously though it is abundantly clear that Brexit is a leap in the dark without a parachute. Germany, France etc will make it their business to ensure the UK does not get a favourable trade deal. They will have no choice.....they will have to make an example of us! This will result in years of economic uncertainty make no mistake! Cameron's dubious exaggeration's accepted.

It's quite clear that life will continue very much as now : trade will continue almost the same except that democracy in the UK will be strengthen.
And you do accept the only way the EU27 can inflict harm on the UK is to also inflict harm on their own people of the EU27.
They have every choice : they can stamp on their own people or trade and make them richer.

and you still want to be a member of a group that deliberately inflicts harm on their own working people to make a political point.

TrickyTree83

Generali wrote: »

No, the UK has actual obligations to the EIB as a result of agreeing to backstop the EIB.

I've not read that we have a bi-lateral agreement with the EIB that continues after leaving the EU, where can I read about this?

All I've seen so far is that we have obligations based on our membership.

CLAPTON

buglawton wrote: »

Current UK thinking is that property is a wealth creatiing industry. Therein lies the fallacy. Building homes now that's another matter.

who thinks property is a wealth creating industry and how does this show itself in the UK , any differently than in any other country?

TrickyTree83

BobQ wrote: »

Tricky, if you are coming around to joining EFTA and we vote for Brexit, how would you see this happening? You might find that the negotiations just move in the direction of WTA rules and the (new?) Government just focusses on exit? Granted they might also adopt your preference. But what difference do you think it will make which solution is followed?

First of all within article 50 there is provision to negotiate amicably - essentially the same trade agreements that we have now written into the treaty. I saw this casually mentioned during a foreign affairs select committee meeting on BBC parliament (I'm a sad case I know).

On that basis I wouldn't think we would end up with WTO rules with the remainder of the EU nor with those countries with whom we already have free trade deals as a member of the EU. According to Mark Howe QC those trade deals are in a legal sense bi-lateral between each member state and the non-EU state. They simple continue as they are now.

The EFTA seems to be a sensible middle ground. It gives us:

- the ability to de-regulate over 90% of our economy that doesn't export to the EU single market.

- the ability to strike bi-lateral trade deals ourselves

- tariff free access to the single market at a lower contribution

- free movement of people, the young vote appears to covet this above all else

- we would retain a veto on EU legislation

- we would retain our place outside of the Eurozone

Now if we were unable to strike an EFTA deal then reverting to WTO rules would not be as bad as some make out.

- if the £ devalues it would mean that our exports become cheaper, lessening the effect on our exports of the tariff wall that would pop up between the EU and the UK. It would in fact hurt the EU more in that scenario.

- we would not be paying in to the EU at all

- immigration would be controllable

- we can deregulate our industries which do not export into the EU, it would be up to the exporters to conform to the regulations in order to export to the single market.

- we would still retain our place outside of the Eurozone

With all of that in mind if we chose an EFTA arrangement then some fears of people that want to Remain are addressed as well as some of those of people that want to leave. The elephant in the room for those wanting to leave is the continued uncontrolled immigration I would think. And for the Remain side it would probably be not having a say in the rules? I would say that with between 10% and 12% of the vote when the rules are concocted is in essence as much not having a say as having 0%, it's negligible.

TrickyTree83

BobQ wrote: »

These words "upheaval" and "dynamism" are euphemisms for unemployment? Structural changes in the economy will mean these "protected" areas will lose jobs. Great for semi-retired academics and city traders, but for the poor bloody infantry who get "upheavaled" it has rather more consequences. Minford reminds me of the WW1 Generals playing games with infantry divisions they sacrifice in a cavalier way.

Minford has been correct on most things throughout the last 35 years, if propping up inefficient industry (EU) hurts our economy then yes there would be upheaval but the jobs coming out of the boom in other sectors will likely be better paid and resourced because they wouldn't be running on such tight margins like inefficient industry does. Are you prepared to tell the 11,000 employees of BHS that a cheaper economy for consumers and cheaper imports that may have saved their jobs is a bad thing?

Filo25

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Minford has been correct on most things throughout the last 35 years, if propping up inefficient industry (EU) hurts our economy then yes there would be upheaval but the jobs coming out of the boom in other sectors will likely be better paid and resourced because they wouldn't be running on such tight margins like inefficient industry does. Are you prepared to tell the 11,000 employees of BHS that a cheaper economy for consumers and cheaper imports that may have saved their jobs is a bad thing?

He's been wrong on a hell of a lot as well.