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

[ReltonBFD]

why would we lose talent ? Would we not attract talent if we left the EU then ?

 

[Outcast]

I'm a Remainer because cheap duty-paid ciggies

In case it's slipped your notice..

The extra taxation on... Luxuries & fuel is to raise monies to pay our staggering fee into the EU each year.

 

[Avenged7Fold]

why would we lose talent ? Would we not attract talent if we left the EU then ?

Most of the talent from the eu cannot afford to pay to go here and it is the eu relationship that allows them to come study and stay as researchers. We certainly won't pick up the bill after increasing uni caps so much

 

[Mr Jack]

Yes but once you take away the funding for research which is essentially just to push agendas, the slice of the pie looks much bigger.

What do you mean by "funding for research which is essentially just to push agendas"?

 

[estebanrey]

Buying some duty free fags, booze and perfume when I go on holiday is hardly comparable to having the whole EU trading block at my fingertips on the Internet where I can purchase any item I want duty free

I think you are confusing "duty free" and "tariff free". People pay duties, businesses pay tariffs.

I'm a Remainer because cheap duty-paid ciggies

Then you should be an outer. When I went abroad in the late 80s early 90s you could buy duty free fags when going to Spain but now you can only buy them when travelling outside the EU.

 

[stewski]

Pouring billions into (creating) a Black Hole ?

There are likely to be quite significant gains to our knowledge with this that should benefit mankind.

We are ALL already benefiting by its creation due to the WWW being invented for it.

Not to detract from the point that the LHC is a major benefit to mankind.
To my knowledge the WWW wasn't invented for the LHC.

 

[D.P.]

Not to detract from the point that the LHC is a major benefit to mankind.
To my knowledge the WWW wasn't invented for the LHC.

It wasn't invented for the lHC specifically but for projects like the LHC at CERN who developed the LHC.

 

[Danthus]

The idea that we would become some little backwater incapable of dealing on the world stage if we leave the EU is ridiculous.

 

[[TW]Fox]

The idea that we would become some little backwater incapable of dealing on the world stage if we leave the EU is ridiculous.

It's also not claimed we would be - it's a selective interpretation by those who disagree that our influence would be reduced.

 

[Zethor]

I generally know nothing about the funding about it ? , I won't Google it but am I missing something what's that got to do with my post ??

Science wise yeh its interesting , don't actively follow it tbh

You know not much about the EU yet you are quite vocal about it, aren't you? My point was the benefits of being in the the EU are palpable, they are on going so it is only logical to point out that consequences of losing those benefits.

The idea that we would become some little backwater incapable of dealing on the world stage if we leave the EU is ridiculous.

I doubt lots of people claim the UK will be hit by the Apocalypse after Brexit but it will probably be hit by a ~2% to ~6% loss in growth which will probably be felt as brutally as the 2008 crash was felt.

 

[Locky]

but it will probably be hit by a ~2% to ~6% loss in growth which will probably be felt as brutally as the 2008 crash was felt.

Did you just make that up?

Yes you did.

 

[Insanties_birth]

I'm not really sure how you think this is a response to the line from my post you're quoted above it. Yeah, we'll carry on having our currency and we'll carry on having some influence; that influence will be less than it would be if we stay within the EU and retain our influence over the other countries inside the EU via EU mechanisms and across the world as magnified by the EU.

I know you're very pro EU but considering we've lost our veto to further integration if we remain in the EU then how is it that we're going to realistically have influence on the way the EU works? Brexit has already had the EU flex there muscles and sideline us regardless of the outcome and you're being facetious or deceiptful to suggest otherwise. We've lost our biggest chance to actually have reform in the EU and gained very little, if we remain we lose our veto on integration and policy matters but if we leave we are sidelined somewhat too. I'll admit that as it's a risk and I'm not going to be as dishonest as you are being in that presentation of how the EU mechanisms will work in our favour.

After all if we leave we do still get to rejoin the EFTA and have a say in the decision shaping process so without veto on the way the EU operates and still some say if we leave it seems there's not much to be gained by staying (at least in the poltiical change argument). If the referendum represented our best chance get reforms from the EU in our favour then how can you believe the next 40 years will look positive given the results This is the problem I have with some pro EU people, they basically harp on endlessly that others are missing the point while being head in the clouds themselves. I'm back to being undecided based on the fact I still question sovereignity issue and us losing our veto has only put us in a worse spot with the EU. It's funny that every positive about the EU is marred by a negative just like that too.

The leadership in brussels is strangely authoritarian in robbing the regular person / country / political systems of there rights but always slow to act on protecting the people. Angela merkel invited way too many migrants and caused a migration crisis and the EU did nothing, Ukraine got sieged by russia and they did nothing, countries started building up walls to prevent migrants and they chastised them until the cogs in there heads span enough to catch up and they realised the walls were right and they shut up and supported it. Now they are FINALLY trying to do something about the terrorists within the migrant camps.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world...ce-migrant-camps-hunt-jihadis-posing-refugees

As much as the EU is a good idea, the leadership is pitifully slow and weak except when it comes to compromising with it's member states in which case they they seem pretty good at making sure we get very little out of our deals. Maybe it's being a bit bitter but it would have been a lot easier would we have not had a poor referendum.

 

[stewski]

It wasn't invented for the lHC specifically but for projects like the LHC at CERN who developed the LHC.

Agreed, but if you want to mention projects that have benefited from the funding given to the LHC, you can't really call the web one of them, as it pre-dates the LHC by such a margin. My understanding was that the WWW was sort of "off the books" project at CERN. Thank goodness Tim BL, His boss and others had the good sense to make it happen and make it free and open.

More relevant would be the LHC's computing Grid
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worldwide_LHC_Computing_Grid
and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Grid_Infrastructure

Or the value in the search for the Higgs Boson and establishing the Standard Model of Particle Physics by experiment.

Obviously the real value of the LHC will/may be felt in decades and even century's to come.

The Beeb make the case for the LHC here
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-32087787

Which they also link (IMHO erroneously) to CERN's previous involvement with Tim BL and the WWW.

Personally I think the LHC is a fantastic project, but as I say the WWW wasn't invented for it.

 

[Zethor]

Did you just make that up?

Yes you did.

Did I?

Even setting aside foreign investment, migration and the dynamic consequences of reduced trade, we estimate the effects of Brexit on trade and the UK’s contribution to the EU budget would be equivalent to a fall in income of between 1.3% and 2.6%. And once we include the long-run effects of Brexit on productivity, the decline in income increases to between 6.3% and 9.5%.

http://voxeu.org/article/economic-consequences-brexit


Static losses due to lower trade with the EU would reduce UK GDP by between 1.1% in an optimistic scenario and 3.1% in a pessimistic one. The losses due to lower FDI, less skilled immigration, and the dynamic consequences of reduced trade could also be substantial.

http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/EA022.pdf

 

[Mulder]

Did I?

Even setting aside foreign investment, migration and the dynamic consequences of reduced trade, we estimate the effects of Brexit on trade and the UK’s contribution to the EU budget would be equivalent to a fall in income of between 1.3% and 2.6%. And once we include the long-run effects of Brexit on productivity, the decline in income increases to between 6.3% and 9.5%.

http://voxeu.org/article/economic-consequences-brexit


Static losses due to lower trade with the EU would reduce UK GDP by between 1.1% in an optimistic scenario and 3.1% in a pessimistic one. The losses due to lower FDI, less skilled immigration, and the dynamic consequences of reduced trade could also be substantial.

http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/EA022.pdf

Your first link is to an organisation that gets funding from the EU commission.

Your second link is one academic report. Yes it's by some fancy economists, but i'd question why they assumed less skilled immigration, the central Brexit case is an Australian based points system where we continue to welcome people with skills the country needs.

Here are some other economists views.

Here are 100 business figures saying the city would thrive if we left. EU trade deals don't cater very well for services, a lot of them make no mention of services at all. We're already predominantly services focused, and will be even more so in the future.

The Institute of Economic Affairs has estimated the benefits to Britain of new trade deals under Brexit here. We can't negotiate our own deals with the parts of the world that are growing the fastest, we leave that to the EU. The EU has been negotiating on our behalf badly, and a lot of deals or are on hold because of disputes about Italian tomatoes or Romanian Visas, as well as being goods focused as above.

Then there are other economic cases for Brexit, here:

A final myth, that the mere existence of our group should debunk, is that there are no economists or economic studies favouring Brexit. Many important studies, from the mayor of London’s economics team, Capital Economics, Open Europe, the Centre for Economics and Business Research and the IEA, have suggested that there would be no long-term material losses from Brexit, and in some cases gains. Well-known figures, such as former Bank of England governor Lord (Mervyn) King, have said that our leaving the EU is not primarily an economic question, with the impact of leaving greatly exaggerated.

As with most things, there are arguments on both sides.

I'd encourage anyone on the fence to try and figure out how the EU actually works. Not what it's supposed to be, or represent, but what it is in reality and how it actually works. Searching Youtube for "eu documentary" is a good start.

 

[Danthus]

Static losses due to lower trade with the EU would reduce UK GDP by between 1.1% in an optimistic scenario and 3.1% in a pessimistic one. The losses due to lower FDI, less skilled immigration, and the dynamic consequences of reduced trade could also be substantial.

http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/EA022.pdf

Why will trade be lower, people who trade now will continue to do so.

 

[Hagar]

I do not know how CERN and LHC got involved with the EU debate as they have nothing to do with the EU except that some of the countries on the CERN committee are also within the EU, some are not. The funding is by country, not by the EU.

Anyway it is a good collaborative example of research between nation states and one that should and would be continued with the UK in or out of the EU.

CERN's main function is to provide the particle accelerators and other infrastructure needed for high-energy physics research – as a result, numerous experiments have been constructed at CERN as a result of international collaborations.

CERN is also the birthplace of the World Wide Web (not the internet which is something else). The main site at Meyrin has a large computer facility containing powerful data processing facilities, primarily for experimental-data analysis; because of the need to make these facilities available to researchers elsewhere, it has historically been a major wide area network hub.

 

[Mr Jack]

I know you're very pro EU but considering we've lost our veto to further integration if we remain in the EU then how is it that we're going to realistically have influence on the way the EU works?

The veto is the absolute least useful tool in our box of influence - and we didn't lose our veto on further integration, we agreed not to stop further integration in the Eurozone which doesn't involve us - not the same thing. And, in practice there was little chance of us doing that anyone, it would take a particularly inept Prime Minister to squander such diplomatic credit on something that wouldn't involve us anyway! I mean how exactly would you expect France, Germany, Italy, Spain, etc. to take it if, after they'd finally hammered out the details of a scheme to patch up the Euro, the British Prime Minister turned round and said "Ha ha! Nope you can't have that!"?

We've lost our biggest chance to actually have reform in the EU and gained very little, if we remain we lose our veto on integration and policy matters but if we leave we are sidelined somewhat too. I'll admit that as it's a risk and I'm not going to be as dishonest as you are being in that presentation of how the EU mechanisms will work in our favour.

This was not our "biggest chance". The biggest chance is, and always has been, to work slowly through diplomacy and alliance building - this is something Cameron is very, very bad at. From his utterly incompetent decision to pull the Tories out of the largest EU parliamentary block to his inept use of the veto; Cameron has repeatedly failed to act in the manner most likely to achieve his aims.

After all if we leave we do still get to rejoin the EFTA and have a say in the decision shaping process so without veto on the way the EU operates and still some say if we leave it seems there's not much to be gained by staying (at least in the poltiical change argument).

Firstly, there's no guarantee we'll get back into the free trade area - whether because our leaders choose not to (as Gove suggests) or because we fail to achieve a compromise with the other nations.

Secondly, no we won't have a say in the decision making process. Countries like Norway get to be consulted; they do not get to decide. This would be our new position.

If the referendum represented our best chance get reforms from the EU in our favour then how can you believe the next 40 years will look positive given the results

Because it wasn't our best chance? Seriously, why would you think it was? How well did you really expect "well if you don't play my way, we'll take our ball and go home" to go down? How much do you expect the other EU members to bend for someone who isn't even sure they'll stay anyway?

 

[stewski]

I do not know how CERN and LHC got involved with the EU debate as they have nothing to do with the EU except that some of the countries on the CERN committee are also within the EU, some are not. The funding is by country, not by the EU.

Anyway it is a good collaborative example of research between nation states and one that should and would be continued with the UK in or out of the EU.

CERN's main function is to provide the particle accelerators and other infrastructure needed for high-energy physics research – as a result, numerous experiments have been constructed at CERN as a result of international collaborations.

CERN is also the birthplace of the World Wide Web (not the internet which is something else). The main site at Meyrin has a large computer facility containing powerful data processing facilities, primarily for experimental-data analysis; because of the need to make these facilities available to researchers elsewhere, it has historically been a major wide area network hub.

I'm sure the UK would continue to collaborate with CERN projects in the case of a Brexit, (just as trade would continue) But the question if it would participate at the same level/as well as it has in the past, is an interesting question. Scientists in the UK are firmly in the remain camp.
And the Lords have warned a Brexit could negatively impact Science funding.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...-millions-in-lost-research-funding-peers-warn

 

[Zethor]

Your first link is to an organisation that gets funding from the EU commission.

Source for this claim?

Your second link is one academic report. Yes it's by some fancy economists, but i'd question why they assumed less skilled immigration, the central Brexit case is an Australian based points system where we continue to welcome people with skills the country needs.

That assumption is logical as skilled EU migrants are currently free to work and live in the UK. After Brexit, they will have some restrictions which will obviously decrease their numbers.

Here are some other economists views.

Again with the first Google hits? The 'Economists for Brexit' rubbish has been debunked repeatedly:

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/9394016c-0d43-11e6-b41f-0beb7e589515.html#axzz48HPX2zf1
https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/jeremy-fox/brexit-bunkum-ii-professors-and-their-pamphlet

The consensus among economists is that Brexit will be harmful.

Here are 100 business figures saying the city would thrive if we left. EU trade deals don't cater very well for services, a lot of them make no mention of services at all. We're already predominantly services focused, and will be even more so in the future.

100 business figures! Impressive, except the leading figures are people such as Ex-HSBC boss, former Channel 4 chairman or former director of Hargreaves Lansdown. I wonder who the rest of the 100 are if the leading figures all former-something.

Meanwhile current-something leading business figures seems to have other views:

http://uk.businessinsider.com/ftse-bosses-business-leaders-pro-eu-letter-times-brexit-2016-2

The Institute of Economic Affairs has estimated the benefits to Britain of new trade deals under Brexit here. We can't negotiate our own deals with the parts of the world that are growing the fastest, we leave that to the EU. The EU has been negotiating on our behalf badly, and a lot of deals or are on hold because of disputes about Italian tomatoes or Romanian Visas, as well as being goods focused as above.

Then there are other economic cases for Brexit, here:

Lol, the IEA, really? That's a free market think tank lead by a nice little mercenary called Mark Littlewood.

http://www.iea.org.uk/biographies/mark-littlewood-director-general

Littlewood has gone from being the chief press spokesman of the Pro Euro Conservative Party (a party with the EURO as a symbol ) to 100% Brexiteer.
He has also been a 'defender' of the tabacco industry. As long as it pays the bills, why not?

http://www.tobaccotactics.org/index.php/Mark_Littlewood

As with most things, there are arguments on both sides.

I'd encourage anyone on the fence to try and figure out how the EU actually works. Not what it's supposed to be, or represent, but what it is in reality and how it actually works. Searching Youtube for "eu documentary" is a good start.

There are always arguments on both sides. Evolution is just a theory after all and climate change, don't even get me started! Let's not forget about that flag on the Moon and its suspicious position... I definitely saw a Youtube video on that subject.

The Brexit arguments can easily dismantled, they represent the views of a small minority of experts. There's no independent, reputable financial institution that put forward a case for Brexit.

Nice try tho.