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

[[TW]Fox]

Yeah I kind of find it hard to believe that all those people would still be coming in if we had the same sort of immigration policy as Australia or the USA

I think the key part of illegal migration is that its, errr, contrary to whatever immigration law the country has in place.

Hence it being illegal.

 

[John40]

Assuming it's a large IN vote which is looking very likley in a way I really hope the EU hits us with everything they've held back on these last few months all at once.

 

[[TW]Fox]

Because it's bad for Remain, so doesn't count.

It has no bearing on Leave or Remain. They are not coming from within the EU...

 

[datalol-jack]

Yeah I kind of find it hard to believe that all those people would still be coming in if we had the same sort of immigration policy as Australia or the USA

I'm still unsure you know what you're talking about regarding asylum.

The US has a refugee ceiling trending towards 100,000; they roughly take double our numbers normally, and have a history of resettling over 200K people in the past. Australia on average accepts and re-settles round the same number as us, they also took in high numbers during particular crises.

Furthermore, since we're exempt from the proposed response measures EU-wide, we take voluntary numbers, and these won't be materially affected by Brexit. Lastly, the push factors (conflict in Syria) and appeal of British asylum (our human rights record, knowledge of English, being taken from the camps directly, having relatives in the UK already) won't change.

People trying to scam the system, and those who end up being caught and deported for being economic migrants, criminals or what have you, who attempt to exploit the situation via illegal channels aren't really concerned with policy or geopolitics of any particular nation or bloc.

 

[robfosters]

Assuming it's a large IN vote which is looking very likley in a way I really hope the EU hits us with everything they've held back on these last few months all at once.

What the hell do you mean by that exactly???

 

[Roar87]

I think the key part of illegal migration is that its, errr, contrary to whatever immigration law the country has in place.

Hence it being illegal.

I don't think the migrant crisis are all illegals though, 50% of our immigration is from the EU

 

[John40]

What the hell do you mean by that exactly???

I want the Remainers to be all wishing they'd not fell for the massive scaremongering, although I imagine most will be only too pleased to see the EU battering us with legislation.

 

[perky]

The EEA is the single market though isn't it, which is part of the EU. Norway, although not part of the EU is governed by the EEA and therefore has to conform to the freedom of movement. I don't think it is suggested by most that we would have access to the single market and have control over immigration. It has been made absolutely clear that the EU would not allow us to cherry pick the parts of the EEA that best suit us?

It is clear to me that the UK would have to negotiate new trade deals with the rest of the world should we leave and that is primarily what the focus of the trade argument is about. No ones saying that we can't trade in the EU either. It is just that we would have to negotiate with all 27 nations and incur a tariff imposed on us for the benefit of trading in the EU, and I don't feel we would we be paying 10%+ tariffs on exporting our goods to the EU, nor do I think the UK economy would collapse if we were paying those tariffs. It is worth remembering that a lot of our import comes from Germany, France and Italy and that amounts to a lot of jobs and commerce on their part, so there would be room to negotiate a better deal from my understanding. Any talk of the EU wanting to penalise us for leaving, and setting an example to the rest of the nations need to tread carefully as some of the biggest nations have a lot of goods exported to the UK market that could cause big loss of jobs and money.

Of course the EU accounts for 50% of our trade (actually think it is less than 50%), with the rest being global trade deals accounting for 56% of our trade. My opinion is that if other countries can successfully negotiate trade deals outside of the EU, then so too can the UK. It is clear however that there would be a financial hit to the economy, but for how long is the question.

Bottom line is, we would have control over immigration, but not on the single market, which is essentially what the EEA is.

I agree with most of that. There are those that claim we could use Article 112 of the EEA Agreement to unilaterally curb migration though, and it's even on UKIP's website, it makes heavy use of this and my post was really to squash those arguments. It is giving the impression there is far more flexibility in negotiating than there actually is, and really begs the question why we haven't tried those already if that flexibility existed:
http://www.ukipdaily.com/eu-referendum-efta-swiss-or-efta-norway/

I don't, however, share your optimism for favourable trade deals. I don't think we could do individual trade deals with each country in the EU if we left and were not in the EEA, because if that were true we could do so now with countries outside of the EU and a lot of this argument would go away. Ultimately the EU would call the shots on those negotiations.

The biggest problem though with the idea of negotiating a favourable trade deal with the EU is down to politics. We could I think IF we weren't in the EU to start with. If we come out and then be allowed to have a favourable deal, that would show other countries that it's possble to exit the EU and access the market without substantial penalty. Other countries may well follow. Those EU countries whose economic and social well being depend entirely on the success of the EU project will be very relucatant to allow a 'third way'. Also there'll be no political will for the EU to give us anything like favourable terms in bilateral agreements like Switzerland for the same reason (notwithstanding that the EU really doesn't like bilateral deals, they are very cumbersome and have to be continually updated).

I worry that the main EU countries that are so deeply dependent on the success of the EU project won't want to see a domino effect of others leaving, the likes of Sweden and Denmark are already teetering, and even the rise of the far right parties in France has to be a concern for them.

We have to remember that for us the EU represents a large export market consisting of 27 EU countries, but for any particular EU country their export market consists of us, and 26 other EU countries all of which depend on the EU system working. Some big players like Germany have to balance their self interests of having a favourable trade deal with us against the potential disaster of a collapse of the project, and I think the latter self interest will take priority and they'll not want other countries to think this is a viable option for them. This may mean it being more expensive for us than it otherwise would have been if we were outside of the EU trying to gain market access than leaving the EU then trying to do it.

Reality is I think we are small fry when it comes to the potential of the whole EU project collapsing, to deny that the EU would not seek to prevent it is, for me, to deny the existence of self preservation.

 

[Caged]

I don't think the migrant crisis are all illegals though, 50% of our immigration is from the EU

Are you redefining 'migrant crisis' to mean something entirely different?

 

[Freakbro]

Must have spoken to a lot of weak minded individuals worried about paying 3p more per minute when abroad on their mobiles or terrified of this imminent three pronged attack by Russia, ISIS and the Klingons

Is laughable the rhetoric the In camp constantly bleats. All fear. Said many pages ago that fear is the best tactic against the weak willed.

I want the Remainers to be all wishing they'd not fell for the massive scaremongering, although I imagine most will be only too pleased to see the EU battering us with legislation.

Lol, pathetic posting there because, god forbid, people actually think differently to you and the people voting to remain do so, because, like, you know, they actually want to stay in the EU

 

[John40]

Lol, pathetic posting there because, god forbid, people actually think differently to you and the people voting to remain do so, because, like, you know, they actually want to stay in the EU

Kettle, pot.

 

[Freakbro]

Kettle, pot.

What, i'm not the one calling people weak willed for making their own decisions? (I do expect their opinions to be based in some sort of reality though - that's the main criticism of people on the Brexit side in here....opinions seem based a lot in fantasy or CT )

Especially since you guys make fantastic extrapolations based on nothing but the tingle in your waters.

Who do you know who has been scared into voting remain? From what you post, nobody, since pretty much nobody you know is voting remain (but you seem to think it's going to be an easy remain win)

I know a good mix of remain and leave, none of them have been scared by anything being said, they have made their minds up on an issue or two that is important to them, so I still don't know how you come to this point of view.

I mean, I don't know how many months we have been debating this now, but Roar87 still doesn't seem to be able to differentiate between economic migrants, refugees, and illegal immigrants....that's not weak willed but feeble minded.

 

[Danthus]

Had a remain letter through the door with such statements as

British families will be 4300 worse off

But the bit that really annoyed me

"these faces... "

That's pretty much lying. It's a prediction not a fact

Someone earning the new living wage is not going to be anywhere near £4300 worse off.

 

[Caged]

Nobody is going to be £4300 worse off because that figure was worked out by taking a lack of forecast rise in GDP (I think) and dividing it, then passing it off as though somehow everyone gets a pay cut. Just another example of Osborne's economic prowess.

 

[413x]

Nobody is going to be £4300 worse off because that figure was worked out by taking a lack of forecast rise in GDP (I think) and dividing it, then passing it off as though somehow everyone gets a pay cut. Just another example of Osborne's economic prowess.

It's how it in no way said it was from the leave campaign
And then ..

Hopefully these facts will help you make up your mind.
Awful awful campaign for both.

Got horrible feeling we are going to vote in as a nation and then be shafted even more by the eu for being naughty.
It's like throwing a paddy and then coming crawling back

 

[Mr Jack]

Someone earning the new living wage is not going to be anywhere near £4300 worse off.

Yup, it's a terribly misleading statement. Saying the country's economy will be smaller than it would otherwise be by £4300 per household would be more or less correct (although we could quibble about the number of household since there will be more households by then, anyway) but talking about every household being that much poorer is just nonsense. You can't take these kind of national figures, divide by the number of households, and hope to come up with a figure that means anything, it just doesn't work like that.

 

[Caged]

But...but...the national credit card!!!. Macroeconomics being the same as a household budget. Don't tell George he's wrong, it would end him.

 

[Judgeneo]

Yup, it's a terribly misleading statement. Saying the country's economy will be smaller than it would otherwise be by £4300 per household would be more or less correct (although we could quibble about the number of household since there will be more households by then, anyway) but talking about every household being that much poorer is just nonsense. You can't take these kind of national figures, divide by the number of households, and hope to come up with a figure that means anything, it just doesn't work like that.

Using the treasuries statistics, the only accurate thing to say is 6.2% smaller compared to staying in by 2030.

Doesn't make such a good headline though.

Thats without going into the flaws in the calculations itself, which are beyond complicated.
LSE data has estimates ranging from 1.5% to 9.5% smaller, and doesn't attempt to estimate the effects of a number of changes which the brexit campaign says will benefit the UK economy.

Most calculations assume that leaving the EU would lead to lower productivity growth, which forms a major part of the drop in GDP.
This is because they estimate that foreign investment would fall by a rather large amount. However there isn't much evidence to suggest that this is guaranteed to be the case. The effects on productivity and wages that come from having far fewer unskilled migration is never mentioned either.

Depending on what variables you plug into these models, you end up with GDP changes ranging from small-medium positive, to large negative. All major institutions assume a similar set of variables, as they come from the same schools of thought.

My take is that we'll see a small short term drop, and after a number of years we'll be growing faster than we would be inside the EU.

 

[campbell]

Finally got around to reading up about the EU. I went into it a little biased toward remain.

Now I'm a firm out. I realised its the most undemocratic system in the world! I didn't realise MSPs were just mere tokens that didn't actually do anything. No one has any accountability! It's the greatest system in the world for politicians, make decisions without fear of repercussions.

Quite scary if we stay tbh, it simply gives the thumbs up to the EU to press on with getting bigger and more involved.

 

[Dave M]

Assuming you mean meps, how much less do they do than Westminster mps?