EU Brexit impact - Treasury Analysis

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Fella wrote: »

There was zero possibility of a report saying that leaving the EU would benefit the economy.

Well as there's zero possibility of leaving the EU being a benefit to the UK economy that's entirely understandable.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Tromking wrote: »

democracy deficit which our membership of the EU perpetuates. There is no remain argument that can argue that fact.

Of course there is no democracy deficit.

The UK Parliament can leave the EU at any time should we disagree vehemently enough with any EU policy.

No referendum is required.

Just a simple majority vote in parliament.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Well Osborne called this one well....

I can already predict the reaction of some in the Leave campaign to this Treasury analysis today.

Every time there is a serious intervention — whether it's from international bodies such as the IMF and Nato or from foreign leaders or successful businesses or respected academic institutes such as the London School of Economics — the Leave campaigners can't answer the substance so they claim that it's all part of an international conspiracy called "Project Fear".

To them I say this: as this analysis demonstrates, there are very good reasons for the British people to be fearful about Britain leaving the EU.

So engage in the issues rather than complaining endlessly about process.

This is too important a question for Britain for you to pass on the answers.

Every time you cry wolf about Project Fear, you only expose how weak and friendless your case is.

wymondham

The remain camp seems to focus too much on the financial side of things - relying on big institutions to follow rank and speak out. The finance side, although important to Ministers, isn't as important to the public who see the real problems around them.... this will be an interesting lead up indeed as the remain camp will become increasingly disconnected if they don't change tactic.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

wymondham wrote: »

The finance side, although important to Ministers, isn't as important to the public who see the real problems around them.....

And how do you expect any of those 'real problems' to get better if 'ministers' have even less money to pay for things and we have even bigger cuts?

Besides - I wouldn't be so sure about 'the public' if I were you...

The "In" camp holds a one-point lead ahead of Britain's June 23 referendum on whether the country should remain in the European Union, according to an online opinion poll by YouGov released on Friday.

The poll found support for "In" stood at 40 percent, while 39 percent intended to vote "Out", 16 percent were undecided and 5 percent did not intend to vote.

YouGov also asked those interviewed how they would vote if leaving the EU meant Britain's standard of living would fall and people would be worse off by an average of 100 pounds a year.

In response, 45 percent said they would vote to remain, 36 percent to leave and 14 percent said they were undecided.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-poll-idUKKCN0XC1VP

mwpt

michaels wrote: »

Except that:
1) the economy is way more than 6% smaller than we would have predicted in 2007 and we have coped

But why should "coping" be our aim?

mwpt

wymondham wrote: »

The remain camp seems to focus too much on the financial side of things - relying on big institutions to follow rank and speak out. The finance side, although important to Ministers, isn't as important to the public who see the real problems around them....

What are the real problems around them, that are actually caused by Europe? Stop and think about this a little carefully. Remember to factor in that EU immigrants are net contributors to our tax purse, not net takers. Remember that their are EU laws which don't make headlines that silently protect your workers rights, your way of life, allow cheaper food, cheaper travel, etc.

Miss_Samantha

Tromking wrote: »

I hope the Leave campaign major on the clear and present democracy deficit which our membership of the EU perpetuates.

The laws of the EU are drafted and adopted by the EU Parliament. MEPs are elected by the citizens of the EU.

Other decisions are taken by agreement amongst the member states, whose governments are elected by their citizens.

michaels

Generali wrote: »

I don't think that the period where the 6% of GDP was lost was very pleasant for many: incomes fell and many jobs were lost.

The GFC seems to have resulted in GDP per capita 16% below trend as of 2015. And yes it has been very unpleasant. But it is 16% and it has been bearable. A 6% worse case scenario (for total GDP, not sure what the per head will be but presumably less) is thus a high price but not one that should be rejected out of hand before considering whether there might be other advantages - such as increased sovereignty, cheaper food, reduced inequality to name just three.

westernpromise

1/ the people saying this stuff and supporting Remain are, by and large, the same people who said we needed to join the Euro and before that the ERM.

2/ By definition, the businesses that would prosper if we were outside the EU do not yet exist, because we're not.So we only hear from those that think we'd lose by leaving.

3/ It's not possible to vote for the status quo by voting Remain. The EU is changing all the time; Britain may, for instance, soon have a border with Syria, patrolled for us by the Turks. Nobody has any idea what voting Remain entails so in that respect there is not much difference between the two.