If we vote for Brexit what happens

CLAPTON

setmefree2 wrote: »

Let's put numbers to that statement. In 2014 (latest data), the stock of inward FDI at £1trn was 57 per cent of GDP, with Europe accounting for the lion’s share of this stock.

extraordinary : whatever does it mean?

interesting to note the the UK has 500% more inward investment than German

Filo25

kabayiri wrote: »

A question.

Do you think that a vote to remain will bolster the confidence of the pro-Europeans both here and in Europe; and in so doing encourage them to push for Turkey joining the EU?

There could be many tactical reasons for those who want Turkey inside the EU, to push for it earlier than later.

I don't think there is much of a chance of Turkey joining the EU anytime soon, especially with their current government.

The EU has a lot on its plate at present, and will I imagine be more focussed on resolving internal issues for a while than on expansion, especially expansion which is as politically divisive as Turkey would be.

Filo25

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Our local hospital dealt with 113 languages last year. As there are dialects within a language to contend with as well.

Most of those will obviously be non-EU languages though, if only because there aren't that many native languages in the EU

Most of the studies do point to the conclusion that EU immigration does generally have a positive impact on the economy, whereas non-EU immigration on average does not.

You can't deny though that different people in the UK will experience the impact of immigration very differently.

CLAPTON

Filo25 wrote: »

Most of those will obviously be non-EU languages though, if only because there aren't that many native languages in the EU

Most of the studies do point to the conclusion that EU immigration does generally have a positive impact on the economy, whereas non-EU immigration on average does not.

You can't deny though that different people in the UK will experience the impact of immigration very differently.

the issue is whether increase in the population makes us 'better off' in the general sense of the word: is more people in London a good thing (growing by about 100,000 a year) : is the resultant house price inflation a 'good thing', is the general increase in overcrowding a good thing.

Filo25

CLAPTON wrote: »

the issue is whether increase in the population makes us 'better off' in the general sense of the word: is more people in London a good thing (growing by about 100,000 a year) : is the resultant house price inflation a 'good thing', is the general increase in overcrowding a good thing.

I agree its not an easy debate to have as there are so many variables involved, the odd thing I would say though is that while London is probably the area most impacted its also probably one of the more immigrant/EU friendly areas as well, pretty much everyone I know here is likely to vote to remain in the EU (and before anyone asks no they aren't immigrants )

The growing burden on housing and infrastructure is certainly one of the more obvious negative impacts, on the other hand with EU immigration you are generally getting a lot of young economically active immigrants, who come here wanting to work, which certainly helps out with the issues we face with supporting our aging population.

It's all very well me or anyone else saying EU immigration is positive anyway, that's just my experience, someone working in a sector where large scale immigration is hurting their job prospects or driving down wages will obviously have a very different view.

CLAPTON

Filo25 wrote: »

I agree its not an easy debate to have as there are so many variables involved, the odd thing I would say though is that while London is probably the area most impacted its also probably one of the more immigrant/EU friendly areas as well, pretty much everyone I know here is likely to vote to remain in the EU (and before anyone asks no they aren't immigrants )

The growing burden on housing and infrastructure is certainly one of the more obvious negative impacts, on the other hand with EU immigration you are generally getting a lot of young economically active immigrants, who come here wanting to work, which certainly helps out with the issues we face with supporting our aging population.

It's all very well me or anyone else saying EU immigration is positive anyway, that's just my experience, someone working in a sector where large scale immigration is hurting their job prospects or driving down wages will obviously have a very different view.

London is made up of 40% immigrants : although I have no figures to hand one might guess that more the 40% of younger Londoners are now foreigners.
The oft claimed statement that immigrants help the economy are, in my view, unreliable and anyway show a very small GDP change.
I see no current problems with supporting our 'aging' population; there might be such a problem in 10 - 20 years time, in which case it can be addressed then.
It seems to me that the huge losers are the young native born in London /SE due to house price inflation (and accommodation standards) and the winners are older people living in their million pound houses.
Interestingly I would expect the young to in favour of staying in and the older people more in favour of leaving.

leveller2911

Filo25 wrote: »

I don't think there is much of a chance of Turkey joining the EU anytime soon, especially with their current government.

Their citizens will have visa free travel across the EU (Shengen zone) this October and they are well advanced with the negotiations to join and when they do the UK voting rights within the EU will be even less than they are now.

Add that to the fact that Turkey will be in the front row with the begging bowl for EU money , 78 million people will have free movement to live and work across the EU and some people still think its a fabulous idea this EU thingy. Turkey, I believe will willingly give up its claims to Cyprus and will be an EU member within a decade.

The EU are currently bribing Turkey with 3 billion Euro's to tighten up the borders with Greece and there will be a very high price to pay, easing EU entry being just one of them.

Filo25

CLAPTON wrote: »

London is made up of 40% immigrants : although I have no figures to hand one might guess that more the 40% of younger Londoners are now foreigners.
The oft claimed statement that immigrants help the economy are, in my view, unreliable and anyway show a very small GDP change.
I see no current problems with supporting our 'aging' population; there might be such a problem in 10 - 20 years time, in which case it can be addressed then.
It seems to me that the huge losers are the young native born in London /SE due to house price inflation (and accommodation standards) and the winners are older people living in their million pound houses.
Interestingly I would expect the young to in favour of staying in and the older people more in favour of leaving.

I would respectfully disagree with you with regards to the burden of supporting an aging population.

The public finances remain a mess and pensions are a huge part of that, the government spend on pensions is massive every year, much larger than many of the other benefits which are being targeted for cuts, the only reason nobody is going after pensions in a meaningful way is because its political suicide (old people are much more likely to vote than young ones).

I would agree that young people are more likely to vote remain than older voters but I don't think Economics has much to do with that.

CLAPTON

Filo25 wrote: »

I would respectfully disagree with you with regards to the burden of supporting an aging population.

The public finances remain a mess and pensions are a huge part of that, the government spend on pensions is massive every year, much larger than many of the other benefits which are being targeted for cuts, the only reason nobody is going after pensions in a meaningful way is because its political suicide (old people are much more likely to vote than young ones).

I would agree that young people are more likely to vote remain than older voters but I don't think Economics has much to do with that.

I'm not really sure I would describe either children, the old or workers as a burden as such but rather what life is all about.

The state money paid to pensioners does not seem excessive although I don't think xmas bonus, bus passes or the triple lock are sound ideas.
Do you think the state pension should be reduced?

Filo25

CLAPTON wrote: »

I'm not really sure I would describe either children, the old or workers as a burden as such but rather what life is all about.

The state money paid to pensioners does not seem excessive although I don't think xmas bonus, bus passes or the triple lock are sound ideas.
Do you think the state pension should be reduced?

No I don't but there is an affordability issue there with an aging population, likewise for the increased demand for NHS services that older people tend to have for obvious reasons.

That said I'm not evangelical on slashing all other non-pension benefits either, many are though, and they often tend to be a lot quieter when it comes to discussing the much larger spend on pensions

Ultimately either those costs will need to be reduced (either through less generous provision, more means testing, later retirement or a combination of all of the above) as the population gets older or people will need to pay more taxes.

So yes from a public finance point of view young, educated, economically active people coming here from Europe tend to have a more favourable impact on public finances I would imagine.