EU Referendum Vote - Poll

Mkjackary

Clarky said:

hugbot said:

International diplomacy isn't about loving your neighbours, its about finding reasons to tolerate each other for mutual gain because its better than sticking it to each other with mutual loss. 

Its not really like a marriage because if a marriage isnt great (and you have no kids) you just send them packing and never have to deal with them again. Its more like trying to get on with your local neighbourhood. You COULD say "fuck you all you're all dickheads" and you might even be right. But you're still gonna wake up the next morning with those dickheads next to you.

and likewise, if a marriage is not going well, you could choose to try and put some effort into fixing it because there was once something worthwhile that brought you together in the first place..

But if she has changed, and the thing you fell in love with her for is gone, and you know the way she is acting, she will never go back to her old ways.

Need to call it a day as it is unhealthy for the both of us. We both want something different now.

End it now, stay on good terms, still do everything we used to, but only after leaving she doesn't get to fuck us anymore.

Fortheloveofguitar

Mail on Sunday reporting remain now have a 3 point lead. Yet they were apparently 7 points behind less than a week ago so that's some surge

Others saying neck and neck again yet these were saying a 7 point lead as well last week.

Support hasn't dropped that much in less than a week. More bollocks

ToneControl

I have been told that Brexit would mean the UK would spend years catching up with all the trade deals the EU has already negotiated for us, the CBI says:
"The EU gives UK business preferential market access to over 50 countries outside of the EU. The EU is effective at opening up global markets , with trade deals in force that cover over 50 
countries – from South Africa, to Colombia, to South Korea."

After listening to Tim Harford today, I looked these 50 countries up:
https://en.wikipedia.org/…/European_Union_free_trade_agreem…
they include no large-economy countries at all

They include lots of small places: Iceland, Isle of Man, Jersey, Guernsey, the Faroes, Andorra, the RAF Akrotiri base, etc. It includes only a handful of medium sized economies: Mexico, South Africa, Norway, Switzerland

If we instead joined EFTA, they have a similar but slightly better list: http://www.efta.int/free-trade/free-trade-agreements

Clearly there has been more than a little exaggeration - the EU does not offer many trade deals, and none for any important countries

ToneControl

ICBM said:

Fretwired said:

Interesting letter in the Telegraph:

SIR – My own published analysis of the Treasury’s two Brexit models (Measurement without Theory: On the extraordinary abuse of economic models in the EU Referendum debate) confirms the view of the four former Tory chancellors and party leaders, Nigel Lawson, Norman Lamont, Iain Duncan Smith and Michael Howard.

I concluded that the “Treasury reports are two of the most dishonest and deceptive public documents I have ever read. The whole exercise should therefore be seen for what it is – an elaborate charade. What is happening is no different from Tony Blair’s 'dodgy dossier’ on Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction.”

Professor David Blake
Cass Business School
London EC1

By the Leave logic that the vast majority of economists who say leaving will be bad for the UK are wrong because they're economists, this one must therefore be wrong too.

You can't have it both ways. Either economists do know roughly what they're talking about, in which case the vast majority think leaving is a bad idea, or they don't in which case you can't pick and choose the ones you want to support your case.

And quoting Lawson, Lamont, IDS and Howard as economics experts? Is that the same Norman Lamont who presided over our involuntary exit from the ERM and caused the worst recession since… the one the Tories caused in the early 80s. And the same Nigel Lawson who set that up by going into it at completely the wrong rate. (As widely recognised at the time.)

None of that means the Treasury's models are right either, of course.

But at least they *have* worked out what they think would happen. The Leave campaign don't even seem to have done that, other than blithely assuming that everything will be alright and we'll be able to make free-trade deals with anyone we want to - something that doesn't happen internationally as a rule, or at least not outside formal trading blocs such as NAFTA or… the EU.

The "leave" campaign does not need to provide proof about economic projections to validate its objectives. Its objective is political independence. The leave campaign has addressed economic forecasts as a response to (with all my heart) completely distorted and bogus economic projections that were immediately obviously bogus to me, being lucky enough to have a degree in maths

This piece from David Blake simply points out the finer detail on why that the main "remain" objection to leaving the EU is based on a set of completely inadequate, amateurish economic models. I have been telling you this for weeks, but in the spirit of the "Emperors new clothes", you've clung to the belief that the economics emperors must be correct, because they are important, qualified fellows. How about reading through the material for yourself, and making up your own mind? 

ToneControl

Clarky said:

hugbot said:

International diplomacy isn't about loving your neighbours, its about finding reasons to tolerate each other for mutual gain because its better than sticking it to each other with mutual loss. 

Its not really like a marriage because if a marriage isnt great (and you have no kids) you just send them packing and never have to deal with them again. Its more like trying to get on with your local neighbourhood. You COULD say "fuck you all you're all dickheads" and you might even be right. But you're still gonna wake up the next morning with those dickheads next to you.

and likewise, if a marriage is not going well, you could choose to try and put some effort into fixing it because there was once something worthwhile that brought you together in the first place..

what about if she's now shagging 20 or so southern and Eastern European countries that have nothing in common with the original EEC in 1973?

ICBM

ToneControl said:

The "leave" campaign does not need to provide proof about economic projections to validate its objectives.

lol

Yes it absolutely does, if it's going to call out the Remain campaign for doing so.

This is so completely typical of Leave - criticise any claim of Remain, make wildly optimistic assertions of their own, and refuse to provide evidence for either. You want it both ways - no evidence for Remain is good enough for you, but you won't give any of your own.

ToneControl said:

I have been telling you this for weeks, but in the spirit of the "Emperors new clothes", you've clung to the belief that the economics emperors must be correct, because they are important, qualified fellows. How about reading through the material for yourself, and making up your own mind? 

The Emperor's New Clothes is the Leave campaign. Everything will be so much better, even though you can't tell us how.

Would you take medical advice from a doctor? Doctors are qualified professionals who aren't always right. But generally I do listen to them, because they know more about their subject than I do... even when the subject is my health.

And for what it's worth, I *have* read quite a lot and made up my own mind. The more I read - especially from the Leave campaign - the more certain I've become that voting Remain is the right decision.

Clarky

Mkjackary said:

Clarky said:

hugbot said:

International diplomacy isn't about loving your neighbours, its about finding reasons to tolerate each other for mutual gain because its better than sticking it to each other with mutual loss. 

Its not really like a marriage because if a marriage isnt great (and you have no kids) you just send them packing and never have to deal with them again. Its more like trying to get on with your local neighbourhood. You COULD say "fuck you all you're all dickheads" and you might even be right. But you're still gonna wake up the next morning with those dickheads next to you.

and likewise, if a marriage is not going well, you could choose to try and put some effort into fixing it because there was once something worthwhile that brought you together in the first place..

But if she has changed, and the thing you fell in love with her for is gone, and you know the way she is acting, she will never go back to her old ways.

Need to call it a day as it is unhealthy for the both of us. We both want something different now.

End it now, stay on good terms, still do everything we used to, but only after leaving she doesn't get to fuck us anymore.

the solution in this case is to shag her mates.. even the ugly ones

ToneControl

ICBM said:

ToneControl said:

The "leave" campaign does not need to provide proof about economic projections to validate its objectives.

lol

Yes it absolutely does, if it's going to call out the Remain campaign for doing so.

This is so completely typical of Leave - criticise any claim of Remain, make wildly optimistic assertions of their own, and refuse to provide evidence for either. You want it both ways - no evidence for Remain is good enough for you, but you won't give any of your own.

The primary objective of "Leave" is to regain political independence

You either think that's a good thing or a bad thing

It is a proven fact that 

1. the EU is creating more and more of the law we live by, 
   
2. the EU is less democratic than the UK, even with its House of lords
3. The EU plans ever closer political union
4. The Euro project is a disaster for the poorer countries (which I have been telling everyone for 10 years)
5. Bailouts to Euro-countries have been enormous, Trillions of Euros
6. Many EU states have large far-right wing parties
7. The EU parliament is currently dominated by centre-right parties
8. EU laws prevent the UK from controlling immigration - which has affected salaries, housing and schools for many Uk residents 
9. Levels of migration from the EU are unknown. Official estimates are extrapolated from small samples in an informal survey, and the official number for last year was less than half the number of those registering for a NI number
10. EU laws prevent the UK from constraining availability of UK benefits to UK residents 
11. The latest EU countries have much less commonality with the UK, socially and economically, and many require extensive and expensive reconstruction and redevelopment to have any chance of parity with the original EU countries
12. The wealthy EU states have been funding massive infrastructure upgrades in poorer EU countries
    
13. The EU has the lowest growth rate in the developed world
14. The EU has no trade deals with any major countries

Do you disagree with any of these?

The assertions I make based on these are that:

1. Laws and Decisions made by the EU parliament are likely to become progressively focussed on the needs of the Euro countries
2. As the Eurozone integrates further, it's unlikely we can stay at arm's length, I think we'll be dragged into the Eurozone
3. As more poor countries join the EU, their votes and Commissioners will begin to dominate the EU government
4. It is perfectly possible that the average EU vote may diverge from the Uk vote - the EU may become more right wing, or more left wing, who knows? the UK voters will have no say, and would validly complain about lack of representation as the Scots do today 
5. It looks very likely that Greece will crash again, requiring more massive bailouts. The debt crisis could cripple the EU for 30 years, I have looked at the proposals in this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_debt_crisis#Proposed_long-term_solutions, and I do not believe the UK should stick around to be part of any of them
6. The EU grants for massive infrastructure upgrades in poorer EU countries are what I would expect in a unified country, but not in a "single market". These upgrades, and EU grants have facilitated many jobs being moved to Poland, etc. I believe that the UK population does not support this
7. Unconstrained EU migration has negatively affected quality of life for many people in the UK. My best mate's day rate for plumbing is now 35% lower than 10 years ago. Demand for housing and medicine in large cities is frequently a hot topic.
8. I believe that staying the EU could be a disaster financially, socially and politically for the UK

ToneControl

The response from "Remain" has been:

1. Things are better in the EU than outside it. No forms to fill in when you fly, cheaper mobile calls on holiday (although the holidays are now twice as expensive), worker protection (didn't we have more of that before the EU?). Plus lots of things a UK parliament could have done themselves. Really? I think New York was bought with beads wasn't it?
   
2. UK science in the EU is great, it would be damaged outside the EU. No proof offered, speculative claims that "EU funding" will not be replaced with "UK funding". The UK was world-leading before, it does not need EU membership, or to have its taxpayers' money handed out remotely by the EU as research grants in order to continue to succeed
3. If we leave the EU, we will have an economic apocalypse. Projections claiming to prove this have been proven to be deceitful to a reputation-destroying degree, hence the treasury themselves disowning Osborne's claims. Models used to predict economic problems are poor and flaky, and intentionally ignore using many factors and hypotheses which would support Brexit, as demonstrated in challenges from qualified experts. No one knows the long term consequences. It is proven that similar countries do very well outside the EU. 
4. Anyone opposing EU membership and mentioning immigration is a racist. Immigration always benefits the target country, where the indigenous people enjoy the resultant cultural diversity, and the UK values the competition for jobs, homes, schools, hospitals. What can I say? I'd love to help everyone in the world, but being pragmatic, it's not possible. The UK should be run for the benefit of its citizens, not for the benefit of distant and diverse countries and cultures. Immigration into the UK has helped big businesses, but does not improve quality of life for most people. Any rational person would be compelled to agree that, to maximise benefits to the citizens of the UK, immigration based on qualifying criteria must be better than zero controls.
5. The UK is a small, powerless country, which will be unable to negotiate trade deals. Proven false.
6. The UK is more secure, even in an EU with guaranteed free movement of people. Logically impossible
7. The London financial centre would be badly damaged by Brexit. Proven false
8. The UK will be at the back of the queue for a trade deal with the USA. Who cares? The EU doesn't have one, and the one proposed has been rejected by France and Germany (since it would shaft them) - so clearly the EU is poor at agreeing useful trade deals
9. The Uk will be shafted because it will lose the EU's trade deals. Laughable. The EU has ZERO trade deals with any major economic country. 
10. The EU will shaft the UK with trade barriers. Proven to be highly unlikely. Worst case is WTO level tariffs, which are not high, and would harm the EU more than they would harm the UK
11. Scotland will leave the UK. But it will anyway, let's be realistic - and for the a subset of the exact reasons I am giving for the UK leaving the EU (political independence). Mind you, it's a mystery to me why a currently centre-left country would hand over its sovereignty to a centre-right super state. To be honest though, Scotland would find it pretty awkward to be in the EU if RUK wasn't
12. Left wing "remainers" saying that being in the EU protects us from the conservative party. Laughable. The dominant EU party are the centre-right EPP. How will the EU protect us from our own version of the same thing? If we get a left-wing government in the UK, they will be over-ruled by the centre right EU. Far-right EU parties could make this worse 
13. What about all the Brits in the EU? There a smattering of UK workers across the EU. I'm assuming they won't all be fired. Then we have all the rich and poor UK pensioners living mostly in Spain, why would they be allowed to stay? Erm because the UK still pays for them, injecting large amounts of cash into skint Spain.

ICBM

Some of that is true, but a lot is twisted to present the worst outcomes for remaining and the best for leaving, and there are a lot of unsupported assumptions and a few things that are simply wrong.

Leaving to "regain political independence" for emotive reasons is fine, if that's what you want - just don't then try to justify it by arguments that we'll also be better off.

I'm sure the UK will 'survive' outside the EU. The sky isn't going to fall down. But we are very likely to be worse off, and actually with less real control, since the bulk of our relations will still be with the EU.

To be honest I've become weary with this - constantly having to argue against the exaggerations and outright lies about the EU perpetrated by the likes of Boris Johnson. Read what hugbot posted above.

I just hope most people will listen to what the majority of informed and educated people from scientists to doctors to industrialists and trade unions are saying, and vote to stay in.

TheBigDipper

Fretwired said:

Chalky said:

Fortheloveofguitar;1115726" said:

More blackmail from the French

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36567469

I'm sure this will play well, the French threatening us. Come on Remain camp, tell us again why we should stay married to people who threaten us?

Cameron should just tell the twat that we won't come and rescue France a third time ..

If you are disturbed by facts or find them inconvenient, look away now.

On both occasions, I think you'll find that the UK was part of an alliance of many countries that "rescued" France - including the United States of America and Russia. We could not have "rescued" France by ourselves. 

Thus demonstrating the benefit of working together in big groups to achieve a common objective. 

BTW - those who think the USA would never join a group like the EU should remind themselves what "United States of America" means. It's a federation of 50 states and commonwealths sharing one currency and a federal government. Every state has its own laws and taxes but gives up some "sovereignty" to Washington for the common good in the long run. 

The US President is part of the law-making legislature, not a civil servant like Junkers. Whatever Junkers job title is, he's similar to the head of the civil service and can't pass anything into legislation. That's the job of our elected representatives (MEPs) or the minister who is appointed by our elected government to represent us. 

Chalky

ICBM;1116372" said:

Some of that is true, but a lot is twisted to present the worst outcomes for remaining and the best for leaving, and there are a lot of unsupported assumptions and a few things that are simply wrong.

Leaving to "regain political independence" for emotive reasons is fine, if that's what you want - just don't then try to justify it by arguments that we'll also be better off.

I'm sure the UK will 'survive' outside the EU. The sky isn't going to fall down. But we are very likely to be worse off, and actually with less real control, since the bulk of our relations will still be with the EU.

To be honest I've become weary with this - constantly having to argue against the exaggerations and outright lies about the EU perpetrated by the likes of Boris Johnson. Read what hugbot posted above.

I just hope most people will listen to what the majority of informed and educated people from scientists to doctors to industrialists and trade unions are saying, and vote to stay in.

And yet again @ICBM, you've criticised the Leave campaign without offering any concrete positive evidence for the benefits of Remain. Tell us why we should stay in the sinking EU where we have no control? Read your contributions to this thread and note how you come across - you are not pro-Remain, you are simply anti-Leave. Your negativity in this debate is right down there with Cameron and Osbourne.

Fretwired

TheBigDipper said:

Fretwired said:

Chalky said:

Fortheloveofguitar;1115726" said:

More blackmail from the French

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36567469

I'm sure this will play well, the French threatening us. Come on Remain camp, tell us again why we should stay married to people who threaten us?

Cameron should just tell the twat that we won't come and rescue France a third time ..

If you are disturbed by facts or find them inconvenient, look away now.

On both occasions, I think you'll find that the UK was part of an alliance of many countries that "rescued" France - including the United States of America and Russia. We could not have "rescued" France by ourselves. 

Thus demonstrating the benefit of working together in big groups to achieve a common objective. 

BTW - those who think the USA would never join a group like the EU should remind themselves what "United States of America" means. It's a federation of 50 states and commonwealths sharing one currency and a federal government. Every state has its own laws and taxes but gives up some "sovereignty" to Washington for the common good in the long run. 

The US President is part of the law-making legislature, not a civil servant like Junkers. Whatever Junkers job title is, he's similar to the head of the civil service and can't pass anything into legislation. That's the job of our elected representatives (MEPs) or the minister who is appointed by our elected government to represent us. 

Give me strength ... it was just a little Blackadder style humour .. :-)

Evilmags

The majority of economists who are independent and have the ability to write what they believe are in favour of Brexit.

Chalky

Evilmags;1116485" said:

The majority of economists who are independent and have the ability to write what they believe are in favour of Brexit.

And I categorically guarantee that once Brexit is underway, every single one of the "Remain economists" will have revised their forecasts upwards! Miracle!

ICBM

Chalky said:

And yet again @ICBM, you've criticised the Leave campaign without offering any concrete positive evidence for the benefits of Remain. Tell us why we should stay in the sinking EU where we have no control? Read your contributions to this thread and note how you come across - you are not pro-Remain, you are simply anti-Leave. Your negativity in this debate is right down there with Cameron and Osbourne.

And yet again you have ignored what I've said and twisted it.

Benefits of the EU - the last forty years of increasing prosperity, security, stability, human rights, social rights, workers' rights, environmental protection, freedom of movement, and cultural diversity.

Yes, I am anti-Leave - because I don't want to throw all that away for some spurious notion of "regaining control", which in the modern world barely exists independently.

We have far more control *in* the EU, despite the deliberate falsehood being perpetrated that we are always outvoted.

The negativity towards the EU from the Leave side is far more extreme and manipulative - and in many cases outright factually untrue, some of which they have been pulled up on repeatedly but just will not stop using.

Fretwired

Some common sense ..

Fretwired

And some more common sense ...

Fretwired

Typical Remain .. short on facts .. plenty of fear  .. car crash interview ..

Heartfeltdawn

Some of the virtue signalling in this thread is as bad as any SJW Tumblr thread.