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

Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?

  • Remain a member of the European Union

    Votes: 794 45.1%
  • Leave the European Union

    Votes: 965 54.9%

  • Total voters
    1,759
Status
Not open for further replies.
Don
Joined
7 Aug 2003
Posts
44,308
Location
Aberdeenshire
Tariff free?
What does it matter. The statement that we "lose access to the single market" is false regardless of what terms we negotiate post exit, or even if we negotiate anything at all.

As long as our companies comply with the required EU regulations (and they obviously currently do) they will be able to trade into the EU.

The term "lose access" does nothing than persuade voters who know no different that our companies will be explicitly blocked from trading with the EU.
 
Don
Joined
7 Aug 2003
Posts
44,308
Location
Aberdeenshire
When talking about the single market we say single market access as being in the EU or EEA. Outside of it we'd 'just' be trading with individual countries, like anyone without a trade deal does. What Cameron said was completely reasonable, unless you have an idiotically skewed view of the terms ordinarily used by all sides of the debate. This part normally isn't in any way contentious :-\.
If you lose access to a supermarket - can you shop there?
 
Soldato
Joined
20 Jul 2004
Posts
3,614
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Do you think the EU will agree to a trade deal that benefits the one non member over the other 27 members?

Not quite what I mean, if the UK is willing to go for the EEA option, trade is much the same as it is now.

Of course there are parts of the EEA option that some find distasteful, it depends on how much those distasteful things would cost in political terms, that would determine how possible the EEA options is.

Nate
 
Soldato
Joined
8 Mar 2007
Posts
10,938
Ok well I just watched Gove suggest that immigration could be brought down to the tens of thousands. In 2015 43,000 people came to the UK on the basis of family visa, ie children, wives etc of UK residents. The immigration from Non EU countries was nearly 200,000. How exactly is Brexit going to reduce immigration to the tens of thousands?

Your implied claim was that it wouldn't reduce net migration at all, the 10's of thousands figure is clearly unachievable and won't defend it but that wasn't what we were discussing so you're shifting the goal posts.

Immigration would drop by over a third if EU citizens had to face the same conditions as non-EU migrants.

I am not suggesting anyone has claimed immigration will be 0 but the clear implicit message of the Leave campaign is that immigration will be substantially reduced. In my view that is a fallacy.

I agree but my point was SOME remainers (not you) are putting forward that straw man to knock down in the same way it was alleged that some leavers (but not me) are using the "we'll still have trade" misrepresentation. That was the only point I was making....both are equally flawed arguments.

Umm no. No country in Europe has had a deal with the EU that didn't involve free movement.

There are non-EU countries that have agreed (or are close to agreeing) free or near-free trade agreement with the EU, some of whom have smaller economies and/or smaller trade surpluses than us, without the condition of the free movement of labour though.

Why you think geographical location would trump economic power in an economic-based agreement is baffling.

Switzerland tried to change it and had a referendum to change it in response the EU has sanctioned them in various ways eg expelling all Swiss students from the Erasmus program so they couldn't go to study in other EU countries under the scheme.

Yet this is a club you want to be part of?

All the evidence from other countries suggests that the UK will not be able to get a special deal on free movement.

No it doesn't because there is no apples with apples historical precedent.

No my assertion is that if one market undergoes a drop in demand then the seller will change behaviour. That might be seeking a different market or it might be reducing supply. Its not that German car producers will suddenly choose to move their supply but if the market conditions change and demand is reduced then obviously total cars sold will drop.

I've forgotten why we should give such a massive **** about a German Car Manufacturer's profits again?????

That is two member states out of 28. The decision will be subject to vote by all member states.

You genuinely believe that Germany have no more power in the EU than Slovenia? Good luck with that.

Without the UK, France and Germany the EU would be dead in the water and you know it.

If you think the large states always get their way then why is the UK leaving if as a large state we can mostly get what we want?

I didn't say they "always" get what they want, but they get things that would badly effect their economy otherwise. Besides, why would the other members care about an agreement that included free trade on cars when they don't make them anyway.

Why would a Romanian farmer who sells nothing to the UK want to impose tariffs on his French counterpart's ability to do so?

The ownership of the company is neither here nor there the issue is where the production occurs. That is why Japanese cars are made in Sunderland because then they are manufactured in the EU and not subject to any restrictions in the single market. The trading rules applied to those manufacturers are the EU ones not Japanese or American.

So all a UK company has to do to circumvent the trade barriers the EU put up against a post-Brexit Britain is set up a factory in the EU. Everyone's a winner then.

I don't and have not suggested that BMW will stop selling cars in the UK. The issue is how many at what cost. My assertion is that a UK outside the EU will probably have a Tariff regime that will increase the cost of BMW cars in the UK. Micro economic theory says that if the price goes up the demand goes down and the market will adjust to find a new equilibrium and clear itself. That means fewer BMW cars sold in the UK. The wider consequence of that change is varied but that is as far as my claim goes.

Do you have shares in BMW or something? :p
 
Last edited:
Don
Joined
7 Aug 2003
Posts
44,308
Location
Aberdeenshire
If you have a rewards card, then lose it... you can still shop there, you just don't get the same rewards/discounts/etc.
But that's not the same as losing access though is it?

A significant proportion of ordinary people on the street will be of the belief that we will no longer be able trade with the EU. You even get comments such as "well we will just replace it with trade with the Commonwealth like we did before we traded with Europe".
 
Soldato
Joined
20 Jul 2004
Posts
3,614
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Apologies quoting is broken for me somehow

Do you think there's any chance of some kind of à la carte EU/EEA membership, though? If that happens, and we get access without free movement of people, what's next? The Front National spacking out and demanding France does the same. Then the Germans wanting a special deal. Etc. Etc.

Á la carte EEA membership, no I don't think that's a possibility. Whether it is the option sought by the UK depends on if the Government of the day can sell it's requirements to the public. This is after they have rejected much the same thing in a referendum.

Nate
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
26,098
"Losing access to the single market" is not the same phrase as "losing access to trade with EU countries". Who's been presenting them as the same thing?
 
Don
Joined
7 Aug 2003
Posts
44,308
Location
Aberdeenshire
"Losing access to the single market" is not the same phrase as "losing access to trade with EU countries". Who's been presenting them as the same thing?
David Cameron. If someone says you lose access to something, it doesn't mean you still have access, but on lesser terms. It means you have no access.

It doesn't matter how you try to dress it up, but in plain English that is what it means and for those who don't know any different and won't question it, will possibly base their vote on it. Even if it's only a few percent it could swing the result.
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
26,098
David Cameron. If someone says you lose access to something, it doesn't mean you still have access, but on lesser terms. It means you have no access.

It doesn't matter how you try to dress it up, but in plain English that is what it means and for those who don't know any different and won't question it, will possibly base their vote on it. Even if it's only a few percent it could swing the result.

Has DC actually said that we lose access to trade with EU countries? He seems to be quite picky with his words as an ex-PR man and a student of the Tory machine.

I agree with Moses on this though - if someone says "we lose access to the single market" and people interpret this to mean that we can't buy Mercs any more then that's on them. This is a referendum on a far too complicated issue to dumb everything down so people who don't want to read anything can feel informed. That's partly what people are already annoyed about from both sides as it is.
 
Last edited:
Don
Joined
7 Aug 2003
Posts
44,308
Location
Aberdeenshire
Has DC actually said that we lose access to trade with EU countries? He seems to be quite picky with his words as an ex-PR man and a student of the Tory machine.

I agree with Moses on this though - if someone says "we lose access to the single market" and people interpret this to mean that we can't buy Mercs any more then that's on them.
Well of course it's on them, but they are also voters, and DC should have been challenged to clarify that lose access really means we would no longer be trading from within the single market but outside it.

As you say it's typical political guff that is absolutely used to mis-sell the remain position.
 
Soldato
Joined
29 Mar 2011
Posts
4,908
Jokester's just saying people are too thick to understand that point.

What is it with the remain camp that makes them so condescending.

What is it that you think you have to elevate you to such a high standard of thinking, IQ 150+ is it ? :rolleyes:

I know very intelligent people who are voting out as they see the EU for what it is, a flimflam construct over which we have no true democratic choice.

The EU are totally ******** themselves as if we go they know the whole thing will collapse.

It needs too as its unaccountable, unelectable and down right ignorant of the peoples wishes of each of its members.
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
26,098
Well of course it's on them, but they are also voters, and DC should have been challenged to clarify that lose access really means we would no longer be trading from within the single market but outside it.

As you say it's typical political guff that is absolutely used to mis-sell the remain position.
Maybe he would have been challenged if our press were worth saving from a burning building as opposed to bitter PR machines for their chosen position.
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
26,098
I'm not the one saying people can't understand the simple distinction. I've said normal people I've spoken to can. It's Jokester saying they're too thick.
Yeah I mean if someone would struggle with understanding some of the fairly basic concepts then the best you can hope for is that their votes are all cast in a random enough fashion that they cancel out the votes of people of similar comprehension rather than swaying the result one way or the other.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom