EU Referendum

[websaway]

I think you've nailed it.

It's a classic trick of these charlatans who engage in populism. They'll always aim their attack at the more intelligent/informed of society in order to pander to the egos of the less intelligent/less informed, even when they know that the arguments of the former are correct. It's one of the oldest political tricks in the book. The tabloids and mid-market papers do this all the time.

"Experts" is just the latest variation on this technique. Other common lines of attack that you hear from the Trumps, Palins and Farages of the world include "the metropolitan elite", "the sneering elite", "the intelligentsia", sarcastically pronouncing the word "intellectuals" by over-ecunciating each syllable, and so on. Basically it's pandering to people's ignorance and lower instincts, saying "These people, with their facts and information and things that you're too stupid to understand - they think they're better than you, but they're not, are they?!".

The perfect encapsulation of this was Farage's "Common Sense Express" tour of Britain a few years back. Never mind the experts - it's the bloke down the pub who knows how to sort this country out, if only they'd put him in charge. It's all quite straightforward really, we can solve all the problems in the country with just good old fashioned common sense.

Lest we forget how Farage cultivates his image at every opportunity - with a pint and a press crew. Populism at its finest.

The polls and ratings tend to lift the lid on this. Boris scores well above average on likeability and PM material but has been rated well below average by fact checking organisations. A fraud cut from the same cloth as Trump, but more clever because he's cultivated this likeable image of bumbling buffonery. Nobody suspects the buffoon of being calculating. A buffoon is dumb. A bit like us.

As I said elsewhere, there are intelligent arguments for leaving the EU (and there are populist arguments being made by the remain camp), but it annoys me no end when I see the leave side relying so heavily on these tactics because they fool good decent people, not just the mean-spirited, small-minded ones. I'm thinking in particular of those who claim to be defenders of the less privileged and less well off and seriously believe that IDS, Whittingdale, Grayling, Fox, etc are going to lead them into a brave new world of better living standards and fairness for the ordinary man and woman on the street. You just need to look at the backstory of these people - in many case, the recent backstory - to see what they're really about.

I have not heard anyone say leaving will be a bed of roses. Most are saying, like Cameron last November, that we are up to the challenge. But the alternative to leaving is not an option for a lot of people.

 

[Edwin]

One more point to note on trade agreements: they don't necessarily apply to everything. Indeed, they can be as narrow as a single product or product category. We've had the good fortune to be "spoilt" by the EU since the single market covers just about everything in one neat package, but in a situation where individual trade negotiations would need to be conducted, and individual trade agreements reached, country by country, it could well be that different industries will end up getting different deals depending on the relative strengths of both parties.

Whereas the current situation (as far as the EU goes) is much simpler, more straightforward, and more beneficial: no tariffs or barriers at all on ANY goods traded within the EU (services are a more complex picture)

 

[paymatters]

The bookies are rarely wrong and you can still quadruple your money on leave winning. Surprised they don't see it as 50:50 unless they know something we don't??

 

[Edwin]

BTW, can I just say that... barring a few sticky moments here and there, I think this thread is overall the most polite in-depth discussion of the Brexit debate/referendum I've seen.

I hope you feel the same, and I hope we can all work to keep it that way, no matter our differing viewpoints.

 

[websaway]

Are people catching on to the red herring that Cameron brought back from Brussels . The problem was hyped up to be immigrants claiming benefits, when really that was not the big problem. The problem was numbers.
Independent poll puts brexit 10 points ahead. I take it with a pinch of salt.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...oris-johnson-nigel-farage-david-a7075131.html

 

[BREWSTERS]

Here are the other countries that the EU has trade agreements with:
- France
- Germany
- UK
- Netherlands
- Belgium
- Spain
- etc. (mentally insert the other EU countries here)

Just because it's all wrapped up neatly (at the moment) into a 28-state mega-deal is not the same as saying there are no trade agreements between EU countries! All those will also need to be renegotiated. As will deals with Norway, Switzerland, etc.

Here's a solution to that...keep the status quo with those countries. After all, it's in their favour to do so. BTW, UK sales to EU counties has been declining for years.

 

[gimpydog]

All those will also need to be renegotiated. As will deals with Norway, Switzerland, etc.

If we leave the EU then we will have trade agreements with 0%, initially at least.

I do wish you guys would stop this 'project fear' nonsense & do some fact finding before you post this stuff.

If we leave, we can fall back on the WTO trade rules enshrined in the Marrakesh Agreement, which we signed up to 22 years ago along with 123 other nations.

https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/marrakesh_decl_e.htm

Trade will continue, with, or without, further treaties.

The various agreements which make up the Marrakesh Agreement combine as an indivisible whole; no entity can be party to any one agreement without being party to them all.

 

[BREWSTERS]

The only figures I can find quickly, by the CBI, show that being part of the EU, and consequently its trade agreements, gives the UK access to 1/3 of the total world markets by value.

When the EU completes the Japan and US agreements this will increase to 2/3. If all are signed then it will give access to 88% of world markets by value.

If we leave the EU then we will have trade agreements with 0%, initially at least.

Don't you get it? We can deal with 100% of the countries in the world (except any that have a temporary trade embargo) right now - not because we are in the EU.

This is what I mean when I say forget Trade Agreements - no one needs one to trade.

I'll spell it out;

Right now we have access to 100% of the worlds total markets (minus trade emabargo'd ones).
After Brexit, that will still be the same.

 

[AssetDomains]

BTW, can I just say that... barring a few sticky moments here and there, I think this thread is overall the most polite in-depth discussion of the Brexit debate/referendum I've seen.

I hope you feel the same, and I hope we can all work to keep it that way, no matter our differing viewpoints.

Yes the debates not so polite everywhere I agree with her sentiment but like him or not its no way to speak to the prime minster

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[gimpydog]

I think you've nailed it.

It's a classic trick of these charlatans who engage in populism. They'll always aim their attack at the more intelligent/informed of society in order to pander to the egos of the less intelligent/less informed, even when they know that the arguments of the former are correct. It's one of the oldest political tricks in the book. The tabloids and mid-market papers do this all the time.

"Experts" is just the latest variation on this technique. Other common lines of attack that you hear from the Trumps, Palins and Farages of the world include "the metropolitan elite", "the sneering elite", "the intelligentsia", sarcastically pronouncing the word "intellectuals" by over-ecunciating each syllable, and so on. Basically it's pandering to people's ignorance and lower instincts, saying "These people, with their facts and information and things that you're too stupid to understand - they think they're better than you, but they're not, are they?!".

The perfect encapsulation of this was Farage's "Common Sense Express" tour of Britain a few years back. Never mind the experts - it's the bloke down the pub who knows how to sort this country out, if only they'd put him in charge. It's all quite straightforward really, we can solve all the problems in the country with just good old fashioned common sense.

Lest we forget how Farage cultivates his image at every opportunity - with a pint and a press crew. Populism at its finest.

The polls and ratings tend to lift the lid on this. Boris scores well above average on likeability and PM material but has been rated well below average by fact checking organisations. A fraud cut from the same cloth as Trump, but more clever because he's cultivated this likeable image of bumbling buffonery. Nobody suspects the buffoon of being calculating. A buffoon is dumb. A bit like us.

As I said elsewhere, there are intelligent arguments for leaving the EU (and there are populist arguments being made by the remain camp), but it annoys me no end when I see the leave side relying so heavily on these tactics because they fool good decent people, not just the mean-spirited, small-minded ones. I'm thinking in particular of those who claim to be defenders of the less privileged and less well off and seriously believe that IDS, Whittingdale, Grayling, Fox, etc are going to lead them into a brave new world of better living standards and fairness for the ordinary man and woman on the street. You just need to look at the backstory of these people - in many case, the recent backstory - to see what they're really about.

So you won't believe former/current ministers of state, but will give weight to the 'expert' opinions of someone like Vicky Pryce - a Greek economist & convicted liar.

How bizarre.

 

[BREWSTERS]

Sovereignty is the most important issue here...being able to control the laws within our borders. Every other argument comes a distant second.

Financially, the EU costs our country a fortune, and I work too hard to keep my head above water and look after my kids to be seeing my taxes spent on building opera houses and art galleries in some far flung east European city, or on bureacrats expenses while they dream up some other stifling law to try and justify their existence. Anyone who thinks they're getting value from their taxes....mustn't be paying any.

 

[Edwin]

I do wish you guys would stop this 'project fear' nonsense & do some fact finding before you post this stuff.

If we leave, we can fall back on the WTO trade rules enshrined in the Marrakesh Agreement, which we signed up to 22 years ago along with 123 other nations.

https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/marrakesh_decl_e.htm

Trade will continue, with, or without, further treaties.

The issue isn't trade itself, it's tariffs. Indeed, anyone can trade with anyone. But to do so tariff-free (or at lower than WTO "Most Favoured Nation" tariff levels) requires specific trade agreements to be in place. There will be none if the UK leaves. Each new trade agreement will have to be negotiated so as to establish the range of goods/services it covers, and the tariff regime that will apply.

Here's a bit more about what that means in practice.

The UK would pay tariffs on goods and services it exported into the EU, but since the UK would pay ‘most favoured nation’ rates, that would prohibit either side imposing punitive duties and sparking a trade war.

These WTO tariffs range from 32 per cent on wine, to 4.1 per cent on liquefied natural gas, with items like cars (9.8 per cent) and wheat products (12.8 per cent) somewhere in between.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/19/what-would-brexit-mean-for-british-trade/

Remember, right now the tariffs on UK exports to the EU are 0% for goods. You can easily see why "WTO rules" trade is guaranteed to make British goods more expensive, since the tariff is charged on top of the normal price of the goods (and goes to the country that imports them).

So for example if Germany bought a British car, the British manufacturer would have to pay 9.8% to the German government (on top of every other cost they face now) for the transaction to be allowed to proceed.

(Most Favoured Nation conditions essentially mean that Germany, no matter how much it might want to, couldn't bump that levy up beyond 9.8% on UK cars unless it changed the tariff for all other WTO rules countries too)

Think of the WTO rules as the trade equivalent of a "backup emergency parachute" that deploys a few hundred feet up if every other parachute has failed. Sure, you stay "alive" but you're not in very good shape when you whack into the ground at some speed!

 

[BeachLife]

ITrade will continue, with, or without, further treaties

Right now we have access to 100% of the worlds total markets (minus trade emabargo'd ones).
After Brexit, that will still be the same.

Both these statements are obvious and really didn't need to be stated. Trade agreements aren't needed to trade, but are you really saying that they have no purpose?

One example that is quite close to me, given that I can think of 4 family members that worked in the industry for a combined 100 years or so together, from blast furnace man to works manager.

Tata Steel tried what most manufacturing industries in the UK are told in order to compete on the world stage, specialise. Their high tech electrical steel was being exported to China, who have been destroying the world steel industry with their cheap exports. China responded by placing a 46% tariff on the imported UK steel. They can do that because there is no trade agreement.

Here's a solution to that...keep the status quo with those countries. After all, it's in their favour to do so.

Once we are out of the EU our exports to them will be subject to their normal tariffs, generally 10%.

For the leavers that say this won't happen, and that it is in the EU's interest to not impose these tariffs, do you really believe they will let us cherry pick the single market and free trade, but opt out of the costs (immigration and regulation)? I don't think so.

 

[Edwin]

FYI Jeremy Corbyn is guesting on The Last Leg now on C4.

 

[Toonz]

So you won't believe former/current ministers of state, but will give weight to the 'expert' opinions of someone like Vicky Pryce - a Greek economist & convicted liar.

How bizarre.

That's a daft response because (1) nobody would claim that every single self-proclaimed expert was credible, let alone honest. (2) It's debatable whether former/current ministers of state could not be called experts themselves. And (3) it's comically selective and could be easily countered by me choosing different examples.

What I'm saying is that expertise is not something to casually dismiss. And "common sense" (aka opinionated ignorance) is no substitute for it.

 

[websaway]

It occurred to me today how ironic it is that the vast majority of politicians who want uncontrolled immigration are first in line when it comes to choosing the schools their children go to and where they live their lives.

Not hugely ground breaking facts but it crystalizes the unease when we have to listen to them.

 

[martin-s]

FYI Jeremy Corbyn is guesting on The Last Leg now on C4.

Watching that moron makes my blood boil.

 

[Edwin]

If anyone missed Andrew Neil's interview with Nigel Farage** last night and wanted to see it, there's both video and a transcript here
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/06/transcript-nigel-farage-grilled-andrew-neil-brexit/

(**I know full well he's not the official "Leave" campaign leader. But he's still going to be hugely influential on that side of the argument because of his UKIP ties - UKIP supporters are 97% in favour of "Leave" and represent the biggest single block of votes in that direction by far.)

 

[Edwin]

For anyone who likes statistics, there's more than you could possibly use at http://www.tradingeconomics.com/countries

 

[websaway]

Watching that moron makes my blood boil.

Yes he didn't mention trade or immigration, except for championing immigrant workers rights and working together with other socialists in Europe. So sold his main principles for small change.