Poll: The EU Referendum: How Will You Vote? (June Poll)

[C64]

But i read the sun, so it's all the same really isnt it? /s

In other news Gove's father calls him a liar about the EU destroying his company.

Not that it will stop Leave using the argument...

He just debunked that

 

[davewhite04]

That is pretty idiotic. The UK reducing its purchases of German cars won't wreck their economy. They will sell them elsewhere I suspect. It's not them pricing themselves out of the market they don't control it. If we don't have a trade agreement with the EU then trade falls back on WTO rules. If the EU imposes a tariff on cars it will most likely be reciprocal. Its not a choice for the German car manufacturers. If the £ falls then the cost of trading into the UK would rise. Its not about German choice or pricing themselves out its just a fact of the way international trade works between countries with different sovereign currencies.

Its not scaremongering to make an assessment of how a decision like this will impact the economy and then point that out. What is scaremongering is spreading racist lies about migrants, or lies about the kind of trade deals likely to be available after Brexit, or lies about the £350m a week nonsense. The reason Leave keep pathetically parroting the pitiful whining squeal about project fear is the utter and complete inability in any way to actually answer the reality of what Brexit might mean in economic terms.

What does faith in the British people have to do with anything? Do I have faith? Don't know, the British people have voted in disgusting Tory scum governments time after time, the BNP EDL UKIP are racist hate filled bigots so not much faith in them either. Like all things its a mixed bag, some aspects of the UK are good, some make me puke so I don't see how faith comes into it at all.

Britain is Britain, if you don't like it, leave.

 

[scorza]

lol at fisherman who want fish themselves out of business..

The quota is there for a reason..morons.

Don't like the fishing industry get another job!

In 1970 the UK caught 410,000 tons of fish from the North Sea. In 2002 it was just 295,000 tons. Denmark caught 528,000 tons of fish from the North Sea in 1970, in 2002 it catches 1,249,000 tons of fish from the same area. Something tells me it's not British fishermen who are fishing themselves out of business.

 

[scorza]

I studied economics as a postgraduate at Harvard University, so maybe.

Hmm. Nice unverifiable claim there.

 

[Six6siX]

Britain is Britain, if you don't like it, leave.

Right back at you. Don't bother voting to change it.

 

[C64]

"we are your friend" yea right as long as you get tax credits housing benefit child support for doing a menial job.

Eu citizens have a much better deal here than we can get in their countries.

Name one country in the eu where a brit can turn up and get an unskilled job let alone all the in work benefits and housing.

Other countries are patriotic and anti outsiders yet all for the eu it makes no sense.

In france they will employ a frenchman over an outsider same in spain portugal germany greece italy.

This is a class war all the eu money goes to nobby middle class stuff like the arts.

I am convinced now the eu is a project to protect the established middle classes lot.

 

[pitkin]

If we a part of a union, surely no country in that union should be more beneficial to live in than any other. Investment could be shared equally to make sure each member state has the chance to prosper. Healthcare, benefits, pensions, living wage could all be brought up to a single standard. This would curtail a lot of economic migrancy. I've spoken to enough people from other countries to know a lot of them would rather be earning a living in their own country, but the opportunities just aren't there for some of them.

I'm voting out because the EU isn't interested in making a better life for it's citizens. All we hear about is immigration and trade in any debates. Nobody mentions what a massive missed opportunity this EU project has been. We could have created something good, something to bring parity across all of Europe and make sure all of it's citizens could enjoy a good life. Instead it's been about power and money.

 

[Nate--IRL--]

Name one country in the eu where a brit can turn up and get an unskilled job let alone all the in work benefits and housing.

Ireland. What do I win?

Nate

 

[BaronVonDuncs]

Britain is Britain, if you don't like it, leave.

I was born here so why leave? The fact that I would like to see it change does not mean I want to or should have to leave.

Besides it the United Kingdom that's the subject of this decision not just Britain.

 

[{T5K}TT]

I studied economics as a postgraduate at Harvard University, so maybe.

I studied economics at University College London (undergraduate) and Brasenose College, University of Oxford (postgraduate). We can all trade degrees and so on, but so what? So I have some idea about economics, but to see the EU referendum as a matter of economics is to completely avoid the point. Fundamentally, the EU's direction is that of political union. Do we want to be part of this empire they are attempting to construct? That, seems to me, to be one of the central questions, and it is a question of power and politics.

 

[Arazi]

A very good read, thanks for the link.

Sure was a good read. More should read it.

I heard earlier Osborne has threatened that he will have to raise taxes, how will he do that when he wont be chancellor if we vote to leave?

Some desperate stuff coming from the vote in side, it is embarrassing.

 

[Nate--IRL--]

If we a part of a union, surely no country in that union should be more beneficial to live in than any other. Investment could be shared equally to make sure each member state has the chance to prosper. Healthcare, benefits, pensions, living wage could all be brought up to a single standard. This would curtail a lot of economic migrancy. I've spoken to enough people from other countries to know a lot of them would rather be earning a living in their own country, but the opportunities just aren't there for some of them.

I'm voting out because the EU isn't interested in making a better life for it's citizens. All we hear about is immigration and trade in any debates. Nobody mentions what a massive missed opportunity this EU project has been. We could have created something good, something to bring parity across all of Europe and make sure all of it's citizens could enjoy a good life. Instead it's been about power and money.

To Be fair to the EU, they have attempted just this in a limited fashion. Structural funding to the poorer parts of the EU for example. Now I won't say it has been a runaway success, but you find places like Northern Ireland has benefited from EU funding quite a bit, specifically with funding from the PEACE programs.

Nate

 

[Ocean Breeze]

I can't think of a single way that the EU has disadvantaged me. It's only been beneficial to me; better employment rights, ease of travel, cheaper prices (Using mobiles costs the same no matter what EU country you are in for example) etc etc.

I have certainly not been affected by immigrants. I barely see any! and I work in Birmingham. The only ones I encounter are the ones that wash my car and they do a good job. I have nothing against them.

The main threat I face at the moment is my job going to India!

 

[smargh]

Gove said that the recent cable release was concerning getting Turkey into the EU. This is incorrect. The cable was about Visa-free travel, and the same list is already rather extensive: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_policy_of_the_United_Kingdom#Non-visa_nationals

There were a few other points where he went on a bit of a rant, sidestepping the question, but I didn't write them down. Maybe I'll re-watch it on iPlayer later.

Overall, at best I felt that he was often inappropriately using media reports to suit his own unrelated or incorrect narrative from a nationalist perspective. At worst he was being a tw*ttish politician telling what could be interpreted as almost-porkies.

 

[BaronVonDuncs]

Hmm. Nice unverifiable claim there.

Thanks for calling me a liar this do you?

[/URL][/IMG]

 

[v0n]

In 1970 the UK caught 410,000 tons of fish from the North Sea. In 2002 it was just 295,000 tons. Denmark caught 528,000 tons of fish from the North Sea in 1970, in 2002 it catches 1,249,000 tons of fish from the same area. Something tells me it's not British fishermen who are fishing themselves out of business.

It wasn't 410,000 tons in 2002, but that's not important - if you already started let's finish that thought - ten years later, in 2012, UK annual stats reached 628,000 tonnes of fish while Denmark stats dropped to 508,000 tonnes. That year only Spain caught more fish than UK in the entire EU, and for the past 10 years UK somehow managed to be either second largest or third largest fishing industry within EU year after year....

 

[Arazi]

The UK terms of trade (the ratio of an index of a country's export prices to an index of its import prices) with the EU are likely to alter if the UK decides to leave the EU. By how much and how fast is not an easy question to answer. But, as you might know, for the first 2 years after a Brexit, no legislation needs to changes (because of a treaty clause). It seems to me that if you think with 100% certainty that the terms of trade will worsen during those 2 years, then that is quite some crystal ball you got there. Plausible arguments can be made either way, and the behaviour of the UK government in the light of a Brexit will be quite different to what it is now: It will be concerned with reducing uncertainty (one of the main costs of Brexit).
Once the dust has settled, and a trade deal with the EU is developed, what is likely is that UK firms exporting to the EU will face higher costs making their exports relatively more costly versus remaining to in the single market. But that makes an important assumption: All else in respect to EU taxes and legislation that impacts on product and service costs remains constant; it might not, so increasing costs for our UK exporters (which has been the usual trend).

What seems to me is that reducing the case to remain in the EU to an argument about trade and the economics of trade supposes that is all there is to the EU. The direction of the EU is that of economic and, above all, political union.

How about democratic accountability and the fact that we can not hold the EU Commission to account at the balot box, despite the fact they develop laws that impact on the UK? There are fundamental questions of democratic accountability and legitimacy. It seems to me that voting to Leave is the only way of restoring some democratic accountability to the UK system.

Great post, and to echo part of your post, correct, nothing will change for two years, because of a treaty clause, so if the UK leaves we then have two years to negotiate everything.

I dont think i have heard any of the high ranking remain politicians state that fact.

So why do all the remain in the EU supporters keep spouting all the scare nonsense, again it is embarrassing, as you have said, they would need a crystal ball.

 

[Mulder]

I studied economics as a postgraduate at Harvard University, so maybe.

You studied at Harvard but don't know the difference between "your" and "you're"? I don't want to call you a liar, but looking at the evidence.....

Also, you never responded to our little debate, here and here.

 

[Insanties_birth]

For me I honestly just don't know where the conclusion came that we couldn't have an EU like structure (benefits, trade, working together) wiithout all the encroaching anti-democratic sovereignity stealing. Sometimes obviously you give a little to get a little back (trade) but even when it's clear we've stepped too far like not being able to manage tax on a local level, managing migration, controlling our own laws etc. There just isn't a real answer from anyone as to why that is okay or how it would improve. It's sad that we've given up control in these areas to such an extent that we're duty bound to follow them or be penalized when they never should have been given up in the first place.

I understand there's always the fall back for pro EU voters, cry about the economy, the economy and then shift the subject back to the economy again but there's no real answer for why the EU has developed this way and how we can fix the problems of having no control or safety measures in these regards. Local law, migration and tax matters are sensible for quickly reacting and making sure we make the most out of economic and political matters when they need to be changed. Quite often politics is just a balancing game and you change the rules day to day (like taxes) to make the most sense as and when it's needed but the EU is stifling that sort of control or even ability to make quick responses. Forget the economic argument for just a second and can anyone reasonably answer how that is going to improve? Why it got to that state in the first place and how we can trust it to not become more invasive? Outsourcing democracy is fine when it's mutually beneficial or when you can change it when need be but the EU has no brakes, no controls, no quality level of transparency or measures to stem the tide of what is going on. How can we control or improve that without blind optimism? Everything in the past has shown it's headed the opposite way, outsource democracy to foreign interests in the hope of the better good coming out and when you acknowledge it's not then just keep repeating it's for the better good. Bad policies just swept under the rug to keep plugging the good few

 

[StriderX]

One doesnt need to be great at english to be good at Maths.