If we vote to Remain what happens?

michaels

mayonnaise wrote: »

Brexiteer rule 1. A pro-brexit economist can surely not be described as also-ran and needs to be taken seriously. An anti-brexit economist can however be dismissed within 30 seconds as out of touch and in the pocket of the elites.

Brexiteer rule 2. Immigrants from outside the EU are scientists and programmers, immigrants from within the EU are cleaners and builders.

Remainiac rule 1: If in doubt play the man not the ball
Remaniac rule 2:If you question immigration you are a racist, if you question democratic accountability you are a little englander, if you question 'leave = economic Armageddon' then invoke project fear

mayonnaise

Rinoa wrote: »

From today's times.

Thanks Mr Obama.

Good stuff.
That should get the remain vote out. :T

Filo25

Rinoa wrote: »

From today's times.

Thanks Mr Obama.

Well if nothing else its a good example of how you make a 1% lead look really impressive on a graph by messing about with the scale

antrobus

Filo25 wrote: »

Well if nothing else its a good example of how you make a 1% lead look really impressive on a graph by messing about with the scale

What's odd is that graph is clearly labelled 'Source: ICM' and yet it's YouGov who carried out the polling for The Times. So we can absolve the Times itself from that little piece of jiggery pokery.

I'd guess that some twonk compiled that graph to 'illustrate' the last ICM poll a few days ago that was 44% v 46%, edited the numbers, but forgot to edit the label.:)

As to the poll itself, the result seems par for the course. Online polls seem to show a small Leave lead; telephone polls show a larger Remain lead. So the Survation telephone poll, carried out over the same period as the YouGov online poll, has the result as 45% v 38%.

We shall find out soon enough which one is right.

michaels

antrobus wrote: »

What's odd is that graph is clearly labelled 'Source: ICM' and yet it's YouGov who carried out the polling for The Times. So we can absolve the Times itself from that little piece of jiggery pokery.

I'd guess that some twonk compiled that graph to 'illustrate' the last ICM poll a few days ago that was 44% v 46%, edited the numbers, but forgot to edit the label.:)

As to the poll itself, the result seems par for the course. Online polls seem to show a small Leave lead; telephone polls show a larger Remain lead. So the Survation telephone poll, carried out over the same period as the YouGov online poll, has the result as 45% v 38%.

We shall find out soon enough which one is right.

Thanks - I just assumed it was a typical ICM small leave lead poll, interesting that it is yougov who normally have a small remain lead.*

*All within standard confidence interval of course.

Crashy_Time

Whatever happens with Brexit, the EZ is doomed anyway, elites know this, they are just playing for time now. Average Brit is going to vote based on whether they and theirs are more likely to find employment if Mr. Warsaw man has to go through visa entry channels to work here, the vote is going to be Leave IMO.

BobQ

michaels wrote: »

Remainiac rule 1: If in doubt play the man not the ball
Remaniac rule 2:If you question immigration you are a racist, if you question democratic accountability you are a little englander, if you question 'leave = economic Armageddon' then invoke project fear

The thread has rather degenerated from the laudable aim you established at the start. I do think your rule 1 is true of both sides of the argument.

Rule 2 has more substance to it. I do not believe that all those who favour leaving can be characterised is such a simple way.

My impression is that the majority who support Brexit either do not care about immigration or dislike it for a plausible reason. But I also think there are a minority who dislike foreigners and a small minority with racist views.

I cannot see a connection between democratic accountability and little Englander. The EU is democratic, we have a fair say in its Parliament. Most of the population of the UK do not get the Government they voted for, that is the nature of democracy. Brexiteers span a variety of views. Some do have a very narrow view of Britain, believing we should focus internally rather that internationally not get involved etc, but equally some see us engaging with a wide range of nations and international bodies.

The real issue for me is the economic argument. I do not believe that leaving is Armageddon but I see no justification for leaving without evidence that the economy will be better. All the evidence I have see says there will be a period of instability during which there will be a less favourable trading climate, and a lot of experts who say that in the long term we will be less affluent.

I do not see this as project fear. I see it as the Brexiteers asking me to believe that most of the experts are wrong, most industrialists are wrong and most cabinet misters with access to the information are wrong. Now I grant you they could all be wrong but I do not see it as likely and I cannot see that saying that they are probably correct is promoting fear.

Generali

There are two polls out. Survation has the polls at 45:38 Remain:Leave.

The difference is in the polling methodology. The Times poll used a telephone survey I believe which prompts those polled for an answer if they say don't know. Survation is an Internet poll which accepts answers at face value.

BobQ

michaels wrote: »

A lot has been made of the Brexit campaign's inability to paint a picture of what will happen if we vote for Brexit.

Turning the question on its head, can those supporting remain claim 'It ill be just like it is now' or actually will we see a very different EU continue to emerge, perhaps even faster, as a result of a UK Remain vote?

1) The EU is by default expansionist
There are no incentives for those who run the EU to reduce the scope of its activities, only to increase them so from that we can have a pretty good idea of the direction of travel.

2) The single market requires tax harmonization
It is also fairly clear form the Tampon tax fiasco that the EU sees differential tax rates between member states as being incompatible with the single market so expect the ability to set corporation, income and other taxes to be centralised with no veto possible as it is part of the 'core single market'.

3) Monetary Union Is a stepping stone towards Fiscal union
And of course monetary union was enacted not with the belief that a common monetary policy could be maintained without a common fiscal authority but because as is self evident that is not the case and thus the common currency was seen by those who signed up for it as simply a stepping stone towards full fiscal integration (even if of course they did not dare tell their populations this). Those outside the Euro who think this will not impact them are in for a rude surprise, EU rules will make their economic life more and more difficult (why not mandate that EUR companies debt can not be traded outside or EUR countries to damage London for example), and when any country outside the EUR runs into a crisis (foreign indebtedness for the UK for example given our rising population induced balance of trade deficit) no doubt the price to be paid for a bailout will be to adopt the Euro.

4) A UK Remain vote will shift the dynamic towards integration
After all don't forget having rejected Brexit our negotiating position will be hugely weaker as we will no longer be able to threaten withdrawal if we get steam-rollered in negotiations.

It will be just like now whoever wins. The difference will be in the way it evolves after that.

(1) This is a big assumption. I think that the EU has been through a period of expansion which personally I think we should have opposed (a mch longer period of associate membership for all of those who joined was necessary). But the EU has only expanded because UK and other Governments have voted to let it. I think that it now has enough issues to deal with, so there will not be any more expansion. It has not been helped by the UK adopting such an adversarial approach to the EU and becoming isolated rather than engaged. We are not the only nation that now sees the need to change.

(2) While it might be beneficial to harmonise some taxes there is no evidence that anyone wants it is there? The Tampon issue was a technical term in that when nations joined they had to define any items that were to be zero rated or subject to different rates than the standard. This was defined in a Treaty related document and was difficult to change. As with any single market there are rules to stop nations tweaking things for competitive advantage so it gets scrutinised if a nation wants to change their list.

(3) We are not in the Euro and are not obliged to join. Your speculation is an interesting conspiracy theory but I cannot see why they should do this now after years of the EUro currency being in force.

(4) Where is the evidence that this is the case. If as seems likely we have a narrow margin then it will create issues. A narrow Brexit vote will probably see intensive negotiations and perhaps another referendum. A narrow Remain would send the message that the UK population really is very sceptical. Were any of your "fears" to be realised who says that at the next election both parties allow themselves to be locked into a further referendum?

Why is it that you can post a lot of unevidenced speculation about what might happen after a Remain win and at the same time say that Remain is the only one peddling Project Fear?:)

cells

I recall seeing a stat that said over 100,000 households in London are now households with 1 local and 1 recent EU migrant. It seemed to suggest that this was couples but I think its likely more if you include younger households that rent together eg with some locals and some EU migrants in them.

I would imagine that surely the couples and house shares with part migrants (cant vote) and locals (can vote) in them wont be voting out.

This might be a bigger impact that many imagine and it will grow as the years pass. Many migrants are fairly young and have a grasp of English when they arrive so are forming households with locals a lot quicker than say refugees or poorer economic migrants from further afield in the world.