If we vote for Brexit what happens

CLAPTON

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Don't let it give you wind.

Edit: And btw, the reason young people dont have housing is because the government, which you voted for, has a policy of strangling property building to benefit home owning boomers, ie. you. If you care about this you would be better off complaining to your MP than voting us out of the EU.

maybe so, maybe not,
but that doesn't provide any explanation why the people of the UK will be better off if we have many, many millions more of them.
One might have thought that would make the boomers richer and the young even poorer.

CLAPTON

yet more bad news for brexit

it seems (times report) that exports in April hit a 6 year high which is attributed to the fall in the pound due to brexit 'fears'

it never rans but it pours.

gfplux

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

No they probably won't be.

There is some solace in that the existing trade arrangements we have with other countries via the EU can be maintained as they currently are, there's also legal precedent for that when Czechoslovakia separated. Mr Martin Howe QC says as much on fullfacts.org. Apparently he's an expert on EU law and George Osborne misused that report to claim we would have to renegotiate those deals.

Then there's also the 2 year period we'll have to thrash out some of our own. As some on the Leave campaign has said, Australia, New Zealand, Canada should be relatively straight forward 1 on 1 negotiations, you might be able to add India to that list too. It's possible that deals with those countries get sorted before one with the EU such is the fractured nature of EU negotiations.

Will we want free movement of people between Australia, New Zealand, Canada and India. Would it be in our interests to press for that to be in the trade agreement?

gfplux

As a voter (voted) to remain I understand the principle of the Brexit argument.
Take back control, Britain is strong, Britain is great.
My problem is who will be clever and selfless enough to do this.
I frankly have little faith in the leading Politiciens on the side of Brexit being those with the character to do the job. Perhaps Micheal Gove who might be clever enough but will be part of a Coalition of selfish politicians who will cancel each other out.
A number of the problems mentioned lie at the doors of successive British Governments who could have but did not attempt to solve those problems in the past.
If the result is Brexit I of course will be dissapointed and sad. However Britain will then enter that period of opportunity so often mentioned on this thread and by the leaders of the Brexit campaign.
To paraphrase that famous Chinese phrase "You will be living in interesting times"
Good Luck

carrot_cake

Filo25 wrote: »

It really is all immigration for you isn't it Clapton.

Can I just say on some of these points, I actually live in London, and if I need to see a GP for an urgent appointment I can't remember the last time I couldn't see them on the same day,

mayonnaise wrote: »

Last time I went to the GP, there were about a dozen people in the waiting room. 10 of them native old codgers.

I work in a Dr's surgery and I can tell by both of the above quotes that neither of the OPs are registered where I work!

cells

CLAPTON wrote: »

you have no evidence that increase in population
-provide hiogher per capita gdp
-that provide a better environment
-a higher standard of living in terms of peoples actual lifes

where are the economic text books that say higher polulation is better : is it a universal truth ; does it apply in spain, italy, greece, indian, chine etc do they all lack people to make them prosperous

no, you have fallen for the one-dimensional totally unproven much repeated thinking (either emprirically or theoretically ) that a larger population provides better housing, better transport, better health care better schools for each of us (yes it produces MORE but are each of us better off ).

do you think our infrastructure (in its widest sense ) is fit for purpose or do we need to raise income tax to pay for it (as you say you are right wing, I assume you don't think the money grows on trees)


where is the theory ?
where is the evidence ?

The UK infrastructure is very good for each additional 1% in population we dont actually need 1% more infrastructure we need a lot less than 1% what that means is clearly that the argument that 'infrastructure is full and building more is crippling so no immigrants please' falls down.

BobQ

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

No they probably won't be.

There is some solace in that the existing trade arrangements we have with other countries via the EU can be maintained as they currently are, there's also legal precedent for that when Czechoslovakia separated. Mr Martin Howe QC says as much on fullfacts.org. Apparently he's an expert on EU law and George Osborne misused that report to claim we would have to renegotiate those deals.

I find it odd that the Leave campaign castigates "experts" because (they suggest) the experts have EU sponsorship, yet Mr Howes expresses this opinion for a Leave-supporting campaign (Lawyers for Britain) that his expert opinion is we can carry on using EU trade deals and they say listen to Mr Howes - he is an expert.

A classic case of my experts are right and your experts are wrong!

What Mr Howes actually said was:

The EU has existing free trade agreements which currently apply to the UK as an EU member. Most of these EU agreements are with micro-States or developing countries and only a small number represent significant export markets for the UK. Both the EU and the member states (including the UK) are parties to these agreements. The UK could simply continue to apply the substantive terms of these agreements on a reciprocal basis after exit unless the counterparty State were actively to object. We can see no rational reason why the counterparty States would object to this course since that would subject their existing export trade into the UK market, which is currently tariff free, to new tariffs. There will be no need for complicated renegotiation of these existing agreements as misleadingly claimed by pro-Remain propaganda

These agreements are between a State and the EU and its members. As such post Brexit we would not be a member so not party to the agreement. The words in bold above are a big assumption. Any of the 27 members could object.

If Mr Howes is right fine, but it does seem another leap of faith. But he is an expert.

Then there's also the 2 year period we'll have to thrash out some of our own. As some on the Leave campaign has said, Australia, New Zealand, Canada should be relatively straight forward 1 on 1 negotiations, you might be able to add India to that list too. It's possible that deals with those countries get sorted before one with the EU such is the fractured nature of EU negotiations.

Yes it might work. We should be optimistic. But these Commonwealth nations now trade mainly with other nations.

cells

Population growth is terrible, its probably a big fat net negative my mate clapton says so

We can look at London v rUK. London population has grown about twice as fast as the West Midlands.


GDP: London GDP over the last 20 years has grown faster than rUK

GDP/Capita: Same London GDP/Capita has grown faster than rUK

Housing: London prices have grown faster than rUK. This is not a net negative high price areas show high demand which is a positive for many reasons. Also of 'the natives' I know I London virtually all of them and their families have benefited GREATLY from London HPI. It gives them the option to sell up and move elsewhere and buy 2-3-4 homes in their place for themselves and their kids

Transport: Public transport has gotten better. Also more tube and buses and train lines (eg the train line in/near bakers arms in layton was closed for 3? decades due to low demand 'thanks' to the falling population of London back then. If you lived nearby and used it then it was !!!! that it closed back then. Well it just reopened this year thanks to the higher population making it viable to run services from that station once more). Cars I dont know too much about I rarely drive in peak time london)

Crime: Down! (this surprised me if you asked me twenty years ago if London crime rate would drop substantially I would have laughed)

BobQ

michaels wrote: »

Look at this completely made up article:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36500747
It suggests that European countries were already exploring the possibility of the UK staying within the single market but without free movement as they can not afford the economic consequences of full brexit - just what every remain supporter has told us is impossible.....

Interesting.

But its entirely credible that such a deal might be contemplated by some.

Of course if it had traction with some other members it may have been possible to do such a deal within the EU!

Mistermeaner

CLAPTON wrote: »

you didn't ask a question you made several statements but I will happily answer any questions you wish to pose

See my post you quoted. The words leading up to the ?