[Update] The UK votes to leave the EU

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by pip08456

So you'll be voting on what's in vogue rather than voting with your conscience.

Good call.

Clearly as I'm voting for something not very fashionable, thanks for your input though, it's been invaluable

[Big Brian]

Originally Posted by Damien

Because I think that would hit us either way. We can't isolate ourselves off from Europe and they will continue to be a big trading partner for us. Now that trade will take a hit if we do leave Europe, in my opinion, which would help protect us a bit but only in the sense that we'll have done the damage anyway. Alternatively if the Leave campaign are right that we'll keep the benefits of the single market then we take the economic hit in the EU or not in the EU.

If the EU is a sinking ship then all Leave are offering is the option to jump overboard. Either way we're going to drown. Better to try and steer the ship or hope it avoids any icebergs.

The thing is Europe will still be there with their problems. People will still be able to take advantage of their open borders and end up in Calais. Their economic regulations will still apply in any businesses here that wish to trade with Europe, albeit those that don't won't be bound by them, and any economic crash will take us along with it.

I think this article sums up the cautious conservatism of many Remain voters: http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/03/a...for-voting-in/ (open in private/incognito mode if it's paywalled for you).

Nonsense. What Leave are offering is an alternative to the sinking ship. Remain are beginning to sicken me now with their antics. Leave have proposed an Australian style points system for workers coming in from the EU and Remain say it will wreck the economy. What a load of bull-locks! Has it wrecked Australia's economy? It seems everything Leave propose will wreck or damage the economy. Remain don't have a valid reason to remain in the EU and so everything that's said by anyone who opposes them will wreck the economy.

---------- Post added at 07:49 ---------- Previous post was at 07:46 ----------

I'd like Remain to tell me how we are 'Stronger in Europe' when our voice in that den of thieves is getting weaker and will continue to do so the more integrated the EU becomes?

---------- Post added at 08:01 ---------- Previous post was at 07:49 ----------

And if you are in any doubt as to what remaining in the EU really means regarding Political and Economic integration, this from the Economist in 2015 should help.

Everything you need to know about European political union

IN AN interview on July 26th with the Financial Times, Italy’s finance minister, Pier Carlo Padoan, said his country supports a decisive move towards European "political union". The euro crisis and the recent bitter negotiations over a rescue programme for Greece have prompted many such calls for more European integration, often employing the same phrase, "political union"; in other quarters, the crisis has led to furious resistance to the idea of "political union". All of this raises the question: when Europeans refer to "political union", what do they mean?

Isn’t the European Union already a political union? Isn’t that rather the point of the whole project?

http://www.economist.com/blogs/econo...st-explains-20

So if this is what Remain want then by all means vote to stay. Personally, I think it would be a big mistake as we won't be able to get out of it for at least another 40 - 50 years and by then it just may be too late. Thank God I won't be around to see it.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Big Brian

Nonsense. What Leave are offering is an alternative to the sinking ship.

But they still want to set up an FTA with the sinking the ship and the sinking ship will set the terms of that deal.

The terms will almost certainly require us to pay in a considerable amount to the EU and require free movement of labour which will torpedo the proposal below.

Leave have proposed an Australian style points system for workers coming in from the EU

wont happen if you want a FTA with the EU.

---------- Post added at 08:52 ---------- Previous post was at 08:44 ----------

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

You aren't comparing like for like there for a couple of reasons, not least of which that Norway has a way higher GDP per capita than we do, and contributions are based on that.

If we had the same GDP Norway do we'd be paying nearly 2.5 times as much.

Also worth a look at http://euquestion.blogspot.co.uk/201...orway-pay.html

I can't see it, maybe I missed it. But where does it state that the amount of contributions to the EU FTA and other EU programmes are based on the GDP of the state?

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by Pierre

But they still want to set up an FTA with the sinking the ship and the sinking ship will set the terms of that deal.

The terms will almost certainly require us to pay in a considerable amount to the EU and require free movement of labour which will torpedo the proposal below.

wont happen if you want a FTA with the EU.

---------- Post added at 08:52 ---------- Previous post was at 08:44 ----------



I can't see it, maybe I missed it. But where does it state that the amount of contributions to the EU FTA and other EU programmes are based on the GDP of the state?

You are basing your theory of an FTA post Brexit on a flawed argument.

See this: re-FTA

" Reciprocity is a necessary feature of any agreement. If each required party does not gain by the agreement as a whole, it has no incentive to agree to it. If agreement takes place, it may be assumed that each party to the agreement expects to gain at least as much as it loses. Thus, for example, Country A, in exchange for reducing barriers to Country B’s products, thereby benefiting A’s consumers and B’s producers, will insist that Country B reduce barriers to Country A’s products, benefiting Country A’s producers and perhaps B’s consumers."

source https://scm.ncsu.edu/scm-articles/ar...national-trade

See also

The EU obtains its revenue from four main sources:

Traditional own resources, comprising customs duties on imports from outside the EU and sugar levies;
VAT-based resources, comprising a percentage (around 0.3%) of each member state's standardised value added tax (VAT) rate;
GNI-based resources, comprising a percentage (around 0.7%) of each member state's gross national income (GNI); and
Other resources, including deductions from EU staff salaries, bank interest, fines and contributions from non-EU countries

sourcehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget...European_Union

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by pip08456

You are basing your theory of an FTA post Brexit on a flawed argument.

No I'm not.

Free movement of labour is a fundamental principal of the EU and the EEA.

If you want to be part of the EEA then you will have to agree to the free movement of Labour. That is an irrefutable fact.

[jonbxx]

The EU as a politicial organisation has no incentive to give the UK favourable terms post Brexit as it will only encourage other states to look at leaving themselves. If it took two years for Greenland to set up treaties with the EU post independence with 55,000 residents and pretty much only one industry then how long would it take for the UK to negotiate a trade agreement?

Personally, I think the EU would let the UK dangle after the two year exit period is up so we would be working to WTO tariff rates under MFN rules. As an example, this would include 48% tariff on milk, 22% on meat, 12% on goods vehicles, etc. Ouch.

If the EU does put tariffs on trade then we do the same but being out of the EU would allow us to setup better trade deals in the wider world with far more dynamic economies then those in the EU and get a better deal for the UK. Add in that being out of the EU would allow the UK to tailor things better for inward investment and a short term hit if it comes from the EU can be overcome by better global trading with far more nations. From the business people I've talked too many of them dealing with the EU they don't have the doom and gloom we see daily and they say quite a few businesses are far more positive then the public would believe, there is also a lot of discontent with the CBI who apparently are not truly representing the attitudes and opinions of an increasing amount of businesses.

We are being bombarded with worst case scenarios to scare people and make them fearful of leaving from an establishment too limited to see anything other then their own agendas.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by jonbxx

The EU as a politicial organisation has no incentive to give the UK favourable terms post Brexit as it will only encourage other states to look at leaving themselves. If it took two years for Greenland to set up treaties with the EU post independence with 55,000 residents and pretty much only one industry then how long would it take for the UK to negotiate a trade agreement?

Personally, I think the EU would let the UK dangle after the two year exit period is up so we would be working to WTO tariff rates under MFN rules. As an example, this would include 48% tariff on milk, 22% on meat, 12% on goods vehicles, etc. Ouch.

The least you can do is post a link to your source as I have done when needed.

---------- Post added at 09:54 ---------- Previous post was at 09:52 ----------

Originally Posted by Pierre

No I'm not.

Free movement of labour is a fundamental principal of the EU and the EEA.

If you want to be part of the EEA then you will have to agree to the free movement of Labour. That is an irrefutable fact.

I am not talking about being part of the EEA, I'm talking FTA, there is a fundamental difference.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by pip08456

I am not talking about being part of the EEA, I'm talking FTA, there is a fundamental difference.

No there really isn't. We would either have an EFTA-EEA agreement with the likes of Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein.

http://www.efta.int/eea/eea-agreement

Or we could enter into our Bi-lateral agreement like Switzerland has.

https://www.eda.admin.ch/dea/en/home...eberblick.html

In both of these cases not only have the countries had to agree to free movement of Labour, they are in the Schengen zone - so no border or passport controls

At least at the moment the UK is not in Schengen.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by Pierre

No there really isn't. We would either have an EFTA-EEA agreement with the likes of Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein.

http://www.efta.int/eea/eea-agreement

Or we could enter into our Bi-lateral agreement like Switzerland has.

https://www.eda.admin.ch/dea/en/home...eberblick.html

In both of these cases not only have the countries had to agree to free movement of Labour, they have had to agree to the Schengen zone - so no border or passport controls

At least at the moment the UK is not in Schengen.

You obviously don't realise what an FTA is. An FTA is a two way street, nothing more, nothing less. It is purely trade orientated.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by pip08456

You obviously don't realise what an FTA is. An FTA is a two way street, nothing more, nothing less. It is purely trade orientated.

You can be as naïve as you like.

If you want access to the EU single market you have to open your borders. It is really as simple as that.

http://ec.europa.eu/growth/single-market/index_en.htm

[Osem]

Originally Posted by RizzyKing

Forget immigration it's a false argument and proof that leave are as inept as remain who use their version of scaremongering. As for trade it's a two way street between us and the rest of the EU we both benefit from continuing free trade and it makes zero sense for either side to complicate it or indulge in trade tariffs of stupid levels. I think what I'm most sick of hearing is how voting to leave is somehow turning our back on Europe and how we will become inward looking and for a lot of us leavers it's a load of rubbish. Voting to leave is the best thing we can do for the whole of Europe and our leaving will allow the UK to get back on the global stage being able to make positive choices for everyone, not tied to those agreements given the green light from Brussels.

Also seeing more and more with this "we can come out later if we are not happy" no you can't look how long it took to get this referendum and the circumstances it took for it to happen the chances of this happening anytime soon after June 23rd is laughable. By hook or by crook and given the EU's past crook more likely, leaving will be made more difficult to do in future I give it a year tops if the UK votes to remain before there is another big EU summit meeting and a brand new treaty. As for voting ukip to get out in future I'd rather chew my own arm off then ever vote for ukip same as the vast majority at the minute and voting them in to get out of the EU with the catastrophic consequences of them in power even for a short while not a chance.

Another fallacy thrown around a lot is this "you've got to be in it to change it" really and this is based on what proof exactly, we are the fifth biggest economy in the world having a vote to leave and to keep us in they agreed to what meaningful reforms??? NONE. The EU hierarchy have no interest in reform because they don't believe it needs reforming the plan and march to the U.S.E is right on course and so far everyone has moaned about it but ultimately not done a thing to halt the progress. There isn't going to be a single meaningful reform until they get the political equivalent of a punch to the jaw the UK leaving would be that it would open debate on the EU in a way that has never been done and allow all member states to stand up and actually be able to demand reform.

I'm not anti European far from it I want a Europe working together in all terms for the better of all Europe and the world and if the EU was working that way I'd be voting remain and flying the EU flag but the EU isn't doing that. It is being run by a group with a single vision and neither the imagination or the creativity to make the EU into a positive force or to adapt to changing global circumstances it's control by committee in the worst way.

I believe Europe is stronger and safer by all nations remaining independent sovereign states that best use their collective power to further a positive agenda and make a positive impact on the whole world. Not by trying to force over thirty different nations (that will be the number by the time they try complete federalism) to be one federal state governed by unelected officials whose interests and agendas have nothing to do with the people of Europe and I have faith that those nations have progressed sufficiently that we are not going to be at each other's throats without the great eu to keep us peaceful, what a crock.

I'm going to do the best thing I can for Europe on June 23rd I'm voting to leave an undemocratic, stagnant and failing project and giving a hope to all those in Europe who feel the same and are waiting for something to spur them into action. Right now we have lazy and incompetent politicians on both sides negatively campaigning to scare us into their agenda but we have a chance to show them there are so many more possibilities available to us by doing the unthinkable and leaving and that we as individuals can both rise above and see beyond the blinkered vision they have.

Have confidence in ourselves as a people and that our nation has the strengths and values this world needs and put aside personal materialistic or selfish reasons and do something truly worthwhile on June 23rd make a start to maybe a better world.

Yes it makes me laugh when people give the impression that we'll be able to just demand another referendum and get it. How exactly? Right now both the main parties want us to stay in and that isn't going to change. It took decades to get this referendum FGS!

There's only one conceivable way in which we'll get offered a second referendum and that's if we vote to leave. Now why does that sound familiar when it comes to the EU eh??

[jonbxx]

Originally Posted by pip08456

The least you can do is post a link to your source as I have done when needed.

Of course my friend - pages 7 and 8 here

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Osem

There's only one conceivable way in which we'll get offered a second referendum and that's if we vote to leave. Now why does that sound familiar when it comes to the EU eh??

We can leave the EU anytime we like. Article 50 of the Treaty of Lisbon provides for this.

You don't need a referendum the government of the day can just do it. Although a referendum makes sense if you want to have a clear mandate.

Or you vote for a party that has a clear manifesto pledge to leave the EU, such as UKIP did in 2015.

http://www.ukip.org/ukip_manifesto_summary

It's very simple.

[Kursk]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

They could've changed my mind relatively easily, I used to be very anti eu, long before it was fashionable but sadly it was beyond them to put a case forward so I think I'll be sticking with remain

Disregard the politicians altogether. Your heart is motivating you to leave because your own experience has led you to be anti-EU in the past.

Trust your own judgement; remain is actually the riskier option. In Europe no-one can hear you scream .