If we vote for Brexit what happens

Filo25

kabayiri wrote: »

I see that as a matter for the Scots.

It's a complicated enough matter as it is, without having to worry about what other parts of the UK will do.

Staying in Europe offers no guarantees that Scotland will remain part of the UK. Ultimately, it will come down to them.

It certainly is up to them, but its a likely consequence of a "Leave" vote, otherwise the issue is parked for a while.

It will also cause significant issues for Northern Ireland, as I assume in the event of exit we would need a properly manned hard border there, otherwise it is just an easy backdoor exit into the UK from the EU.

Whether the relative peace there could survive that is certainly a legitimate question that has implications for mainland UK as well as NI.

Be interesting to see the geographical split of the vote when it does happen, I would imagine Scotland, Wales, Ireland and much of metropolitan England would lean towards the stay camp with much of the rest of England leaning towards the "Leave" camp.

Likely to be close in any case, looks like most of the right of centre press is likely to be in the Leave camp and that is where most of the readers are, on the other hand, a lot of companies aren't likely to be quiet about their plans to exit or reduce their business in the UK if Brexit does happen.

kabayiri

.string. wrote: »

...
On your other two paras; obviously I don't agree with the last but the second is partially true in that there were divisions, not that we in the UK of all places should be surprised at other countries worrying about immigration. Other parts of Europe are not so much different from us as some make out.

Well I'm a fan of an insurance backed health service paid for on a consumption basis. That might be too right wing for most, best left for another thread.

We do tend to assume that it is only UK that have these views different from the Rest of Europe block.

I'm not sure this is true. My experience of Poles for example, is that they are a strong minded bunch too. They will act in self interest too, if needs be.

CLAPTON

Filo25 wrote: »

In terms of job creation I think it is important, and often in terms of supporting what little manufacturing industry we have left.

I do agree with you with regards to the balance of payments issue, but I haven't seen any sign that the UK ever plans to seriously address that in my lifetime, I also don't share the optimism some have that leaving the EU will particularly help that situation, it certainly isn't likely to help any of our financial services income from overseas.

Yes we have a net deficit with the EU, but I don't think the UK is suddenly going to start becoming competitive in a lot of those industries just because we leave the EU.

I suppose devaluation might help in the short term (albeit with other costs attached), but I doubt it would be a long term answer for a country that has always struggled to have competitive industries in the tradeable sectors over the last few decades.

I was not considering the EU issues but only the balance of payments and inward investment
Without inward investment it's very likely that the pound would devalue on a long term basis making imports dearer (a good thing) and export cheaper (a good thing) until a better balance is achieved.
I don't think the 'UK' needs to address the balance of payment issue : we need an environment such that the market corrects the situation of by normal means. (dear imports, cheap exports)

Filo25

CLAPTON wrote: »

I was not considering the EU issues but only the balance of payments and inward investment
Without inward investment it's very likely that the pound would devalue on a long term basis making imports dearer (a good thing) and export cheaper (a good thing) until a better balance is achieved.
I don't think the 'UK' needs to address the balance of payment issue : we need an environment such that the market corrects the situation of by normal means. (dear imports, cheap exports)

Let me clarify here in terms of inward investment I was referring to say the likes of Honda setting up here for access to the EU market.

I would imagine that is probably dwarfed these days by more "investment" along the lines of british companies being hoovered up by overseas rivals (or indeed British residential property being hoovered up be overseas investors), which I would agree is obviously much more problematic for the economy and helps to disguise the balance of trade issues until you have no capital assets left to sell.

The problem is that the EU exit will certainly impact the more beneficial forms of inward investment, its not nearly as clear that it would stop or slowdown the sale of the countries capital assets, especially with an economically laissez-faire government in place.

CLAPTON

Filo25 wrote: »

Let me clarify here in terms of inward investment I was referring to say the likes of Honda setting up here for access to the EU market.

I would imagine that is probably dwarfed these days by more "investment" along the lines of british companies being hoovered up by overseas rivals (or indeed British residential property being hoovered up be overseas investors), which I would agree is obviously much more problematic for the economy and helps to disguise the balance of trade issues until you have no capital assets left to sell.

The problem is that the EU exit will certainly impact the more beneficial forms of inward investment, its not nearly as clear that it would stop or slowdown the sale of the countries capital assets, especially with an economically laissez-faire government in place.

I am not a fan of micromanagement, and have no idea how one encourages desirable inward investment and discourages undesirable inward investment. In facts I'm not sure what desirable and undesirable inward investment really means.
In any event, laissez-faire government is likely to be much less harmful that government picking 'winners'.

Filo25

CLAPTON wrote: »

I am not a fan of micromanagement, and have no idea how one encourages desirable inward investment and discourages undesirable inward investment. In facts I'm not sure what desirable and undesirable inward investment really means.
In any event, laissez-faire government is likely to be much less harmful that government picking 'winners'.

Well in that case I'm not sure why you are so concerned about inward investment and its impact on the balance of payments, just let the market decide, it is doing so at present and those are the outcomes.

CLAPTON

Filo25 wrote: »

Well in that case I'm not sure why you are so concerned about inward investment and its impact on the balance of payments, just let the market decide, it is doing so at present and those are the outcomes.

Yes to some extent that is indeed true: sadly however much of our 'investment' is heavily subsidised by the government particularly for windpower, proposed nuclear power, solar panels etc, but a lot is simply how the cookie crumbles.
My original point was to question whether the loss of inward investment would be such a bad thing in the medium term.

Filo25

A fair enough point and apologies for my poor working in my original post!

pertgave

kabayiri wrote: »

The refugee crisis has simply exposed divisions between states.

Correct, there are currently about 60 million refugees in the world, and it is not the EU's fault. Many member states are lacking solidarity in the refugee crisis, but dealing with the problems without the EU institutions it would be worse.

CLAPTON

pertgave wrote: »

Correct, there are currently about 60 million refugees in the world, and it is not the EU's fault. Many member states are lacking solidarity in the refugee crisis, but dealing with the problems without the EU institutions it would be worse.

why would it be worse?
would there be fewer drownings?
why is solidarity important if it gives the wrong solution?