Brexit the economy and house prices part 6

Enterprise_1701C

The advantages of being out of the eu have been given repeatedly on this thread.

The fact you do not agree they are advantages does not mean that they are not.

Equally, the "advantages" listed by Remainers are often seen as the opposite by Leavers.

I voted Remain, but have come to realise that if we stayed in the eu would evolve into a single country within a few years, their stated aim is "ever closer union" after all. That is something I most certainly would not want, neither would I want to be forced to join the euro which is something they seem to be planning, after all they have not ruined all the economies in the eu (thereby forcing them to stay within the eu) yet, that seems to be the aim of the euro.

People give what they perceive as advantages on either side, they are seen as disadvantages by the other side, so it cannot be done because it would not be accepted as advantageous by the other side.

Masomnia

ukcarper wrote: »

People calling for another referendum are not being told the truth. It is no way clear that we can universally withdraw article 50 and go back to things as they were before referendum. The damage has been done and now I feel the majority just want to get on with it.

I've never seen anyone from the EU state that we can remain on the same terms we have now. It's very disingenuous of the campaigners to claim that we can when it is far from certain. Of course it is no skin off their nose if they believe in Remain at any cost and would be only too happy to end up ceding even greater power to the EU. That's fine if you believe it, but they should be honest.

If there would have to be further negotiations around us withdrawing article 50 then the whole reasoning behind the second referendum is null and void.

While both main parties are pro-Brexit it's not going to change. If people want to reverse the result they will have to wait until a Party fights a general election on the premise of applying to rejoin.

Thrugelmir

melanzana wrote: »

Still no one prepared to set out the advantages of Brexit.

I'm still waiting....

Probably none. Though the UK has never fully embraced the concept of the EU in it's fullest form. We don't need to be members of a political or currency union to trade with other countries. At the outset that's what we joined. Nor become homogenised Europeans. Subject to courts, laws and politicians over which we have no input or ability to overturn or kick out of office.

What do you view as the long term benefits of remaining in. Given the very clear future direction, i.e. a two speed Western Europe. Driven by the French\German axis.

wunferall

If we all want to be completely honest, all that we are seeing about Brexit is pretty much as was expected even before the referendum - well, by any sensible person certainly.

Months of recriminations, hostility, lies and inaction followed by a flurry towards the end of "negotiations" to try and reach an amicable solution with the media-led minority remain faction squealing louder and louder right up until Brexit Day (and very probably after it too).



A thought:
The pro-remain faction still insist that the UK would be better off staying in the EU than leaving, and certainly better off than a no-deal Brexit.
Is that or is that not correct?

Then why can remainers not accept that we could not remain in the EU on the same terms as before now that we voted to leave and implemented Article 50?
Various EU officials have said this.
Which means, does it not, that in such an event the UK would pay the EU even more money that it did before.
Okay so far?


So for the pro-remain faction here, how would the UK be better off paying huge but undisclosed sums to the EU rather than imagined but still unknown sums that they think a no deal Brexit would cost?

Before you say "status quo" I should point out that there has been no such thing since the UK voted to leave.

Thrugelmir

ukcarper wrote: »

The damage has been done and now I feel the majority just want to get on with it.

The UK economy has continued to recover post the GFC. Austerity is working. Employment levels are high. Debt levels are slowly being brought under control. Meanwhile storm clouds are slowly drifting across the European horizon. As trade globally slows down.

Italy poses a sizable threat to the stability of the Eurozone. The EU hasn't brought prosperity and equality to many. 20 years of growth averaging 0.4% has left many disenchanted. Given that inflation in the same period is around 41%. Not suggesting Italy will leave though . In many ways reflective to the UK. In Italy there's the wealthy North (London and parts of the South). While the South of Italy absorbs the brunt.

Cakeguts

Norway had a lucky escape. I expect it was because their population got told the truth about what joining would be. Unlike the UK which didn't get the whole truth in 1973 or 1975.



I keep being told by remainers that the leave group were hoodwinked. They seem to have conveniently forgotten or perhaps never knew that the voters in the 1975 referendum were hoodwinked into voting to remain members of the EEC.



With hindsight they should have accepted the decision by the EEC made in 1963 to refuse membership. It would have saved an awful lot of trouble.



There should have been a referendum in 1992. Why wasn't there one? Norway and Switzerland had referendums about joining the EU and membership was rejected by them. We do not know how many people would have rejected membership in 1992 because they were never asked. The British public had no say in whether to join the EU or not until 2016 when it became clear that a majority of people did not want to be members of the EU.

Moby

Reasons to stay in the EU :-
1. Trade. About 45 per cent of British trade is now tied up with the EU. It’s our biggest export market and I also like the imports: from German cars and French wine, to Belgian chocolates, Danish bacon and much more, all tariff free. And it is not just trade in goods at stake. The UK is increasingly a service economy and the EU concept of “mutual recognition” gives us a passport to sell services throughout the EU.

2. Domestic investment. The plain fact is that much UK company investment is heavily linked to having a guaranteed EU market of 27 other countries that we can openly export to. Why would I want to risk job losses and lower investment in the UK?

3. Foreign direct investment. The UK has traditionally been one of the biggest attractors of foreign direct investment in the EU. The reason is that we have a fairly competitive economy and guaranteed tariff-free access to the 27 other EU member states. If we vote to leave, much of the FDI, associated investment and jobs will disappear and go to competitors who do have EU access.

4. Immigration. The UK is a beneficiary of EU migration. A lot of EU citizens come to Britain and contribute skills and pay taxes. Yes, some abuse the system to unfairly claim social security benefits but the vast majority do not. Much of this migration means we are able to fill skills shortages in our hospitals, care services, and building and service industries.

5. Freedom of movement of capital and labour. I like the fact that, if I want to, I can take my pound notes, turn them into euros, and the UK government cannot stop me since capital controls are outlawed by the EU. I like the fact that, if I want to, I can find a job in another EU member state, and these countries have no right to stop me from doing so. I think it is great that UK businesses have the right to set up subsidiaries in other EU countries if they want to. Our kids have the right to work and study in these countries as well.

6. Jobs. Britain is a large trading nation and many British jobs would be put at risk if we were to leave the EU. A Brexit would mean lower domestic investment, lower FDI, and lower exports. All this translates into fewer jobs. Estimates of job losses vary from 500,000 to 3m. My best guesstimate is around 1m job losses over two years were a Brexit to occur.

7. The cost of living. Even for the vast majority who will keep their job, there is a real danger that prices will rise quite rapidly if we leave. First, the pound is likely to fall significantly, pushing up the price of imports. Second, the UK might be forced to apply tariffs to imported EU goods if we cannot negotiate a free trade arrangement that is acceptable to the World Trade Organisation. Third, EU competition keeps British firms competitive. Without EU competition, over time we would turn the clock back to the late 1960s and early 70s when the UK economy was very uncompetitive.

8. Peace and stability. There is an old adage that “trade knits nations together” making it much less likely that they will want to spend their time and resources fighting each other. Let’s remember that one of the reasons the EU (EEC as it was originally called) was formed in 1957 was to help reintegrate Germany into the European economy and make war between France and Germany unthinkable. In this respect, the EU has been an outstanding success. It was even awarded the Nobel Peace prize in 2012 in recognition of this.

9. Britain has more influence as an EU member. The Americans, Japanese and Chinese pay a lot more attention to the UK and our views because we are a member of the EU and can influence how it is run. The UK is simply not a big or strong enough economy to negotiate with the US, Japan or China as equals.

10. Safety and security. Sure, the Nato alliance is the primary guarantor of European security, but as members of the EU we are able to use law enforcement intelligence from the 27 other EU countries and have access to fingerprint and DNA information. Since 2004, using the European Arrest Warrant, over 1,000 suspects have faced justice in UK courts and over 7,000 have been extradited from the UK to face trial or serve a sentence.

11. Globalisation. I am in favour of globalisation and the benefits it brings, and being part of the EU is being part of the process of globalisation. I am fed up of hearing arguments from Little Englanders pretending that all would be fine and well if we left the EU. Things will be worse and potentially much worse.

12. Keeping the UK together. A Brexit would be a disaster for the unity of the UK since it is highly likely that Scotland and Wales would want to remain part of the EU. This could lead to them both having referendums to leave the UK followed by applications to rejoin the EU. That will mean years of further uncertainty, and we just have other priorities to worry about.

Cakeguts

Herzlos wrote: »

Leaving is materially different in almost every way from what was proposed in the referendum. So we don't know if it's what people wanted. It's like ordering a new car only to discover the spec has changed and it comes with square wheels and no doors. We need the opportunity to stop and check we still want to go ahead with it.

We've gone from the easiest deal in human history, staying in the single market and just funnelingimaginary money into the NHs to stockpiling supplies and going down fighting with no upside for 2 generations. Can anyone honestly say that's what they voted for in 2016?



If that's the best you can come up with I suggest you've lost the argument. It's replace the previous vote as it'd be the current will of the people. Since it'll be based on what we know going into a deal it'll be more valid than the last one and the result will need to be interpreted accordingly.



No-one is going to be happy anyway, so we may as well try. You never know; you might win again and shut us traitors up for good. That's Farage suggested it whilst he thought he'd win again.



Only if we left and rejoin. Which is what'll happen if we don't have another vote.



Stop looking at cost and look at value instead.



Then we should lead the effort in fixing it rather than walking away. If it somehow does collapse then we can lead the formation of whatever takes it's place. From the outside we'll just need to watch and take what we're offered.

If we're unhappy with future EU ideas we can always legislate a trigger on them to leave automatically should they happen. Not that k actually think they are a concern, most of the proposals make sense and we were always capable of resisting them.

This feels a big like storming out of a golf club because someone was talking about painting the walls a colour you don't like.

You seem to have conveniently forgotten that joining the EEC has turned out to be completely different to what people though they were joining in 1971. You could say that they were hoodwinked in the referendum in 1973 and then again in 1992.



The whole UK membership of the EU is non democratic. There was no referendum in 1992.

The whole Remain campaign seem to have conveniently forgotten that the UK public were not consulted about joining in 1992 and yet they claim that the Leave campaign believed lies without any evidence to back this up.

Moby

Good article in the New Statesman:-
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2018/10/england-s-political-narcissism-could-break-union?amp&__twitter_impression=true

Whither the English Unionist? Properly put to the test by Brexit, those who have for so long professed their damp-eyed commitment to the integrity of the UK have been found wanting. Asked “if Brexit means the collapse of the Irish peace process, what is your choice?”, they reply “Brexit”. Asked “if Brexit leads to a United Ireland, what is your choice?”, they reply “Brexit”. And asked “if Brexit means Scotland leaving the Union, what is your choice?”, they reply “still Brexit”. This really does bring new meaning to the idea of going it alone

.

There is a concerning willingness to be so bloody minded about Brexit and asserting the will of the majority that the above scenario is a real prospect.

Cakeguts

prowla wrote: »

So, about today's march...


Of the 16,141,241 people who voted remain in the referendum, only 5% felt strongly enough to attend.


63,400,000 people (99%) did not participate in today's march in London.


Is something representing 1% of the population really a "people's vote"?

Not only that but it seems fairly large majority of the people on the march didn't actually know why they were there. When I thought about it today I couldn't actually ever remember a protest where most of the protesters were protesting about something completely different to what was supposed to have been organised.



The march was supposed to have been about a vote on the Brexit deal. However most of the protesters thought it was about a vote on a second referendum.



The conclusion that someone can draw from this is that there several thousand people who voted remain without finding out what they were voting for. Getting the purpose of a march wrong is quite a good indicator of people who don't do any research into what they are being asked to do. I would like to suggest that anyone on that march who thought it was about getting a vote on a second referendum didn't know what they were voting for when they voted Remain.