Brexit Referendum Superthread

Bob24

LiamoSail wrote: »

I hope Spain punts the lot of the over 60's English back to England. With that extra €340m, the NHS should have no problem with the added financial burden of them

Are you sure Spain is not already cross-charging the UK when British patients who are not qualified for Spanish social security cover are using the Spanish public healthcare infrastructure?

Zubeneschamali

Bob24 wrote: »

If you assume voters are stupid or misinformed, there is no point in organising votes and the concerns you raise can be extended to most referendums.

Yes, indeed. Nice I, Lisbon I, the first Divorce referendum, the Prolife referendum...

We have lots of clear examples of people voting in stuff they do not understand and rejecting other stuff for mad reasons.

It's a bad way to do politics.

Rightwing

I don't know if it's free movement within the EU that's the problem. If it is, it shouldn't be, not until Turkey are in, then different story.

I suspect it's all these losers/thugs/genuine victims of war/economic migrants that are charging up from Africa and the East that's the problem. And yes, it is a big problem.

oscarBravo

Rightwing wrote: »

I don't know if it's free movement within the EU that's the problem. If it is, it shouldn't be, not until Turkey are in, then different story.

I suspect it's all these losers/thugs/genuine victims of war/economic migrants that are charging up from Africa and the East that's the problem. And yes, it is a big problem.

What has that big problem got to do with EU membership?

smjm

LiamoSail wrote: »

I hope Spain punts the lot of the over 60's English back to England. With that extra €340m, the NHS should have no problem with the added financial burden of them

Then Spain would lose the revenue from their pensions/savings, which is probably supporting quite a lot of jobs. Not good, given Spain's high unemployment rate. Plus they'd have to cater for the return of their own, mostly young people, who are working in the UK, perhaps sending money home. There's quite a few of them. Again, given the high unemployment rate, especially amongst the youth, how would this benefit Spain? Why would you even hope this would happen?

ancapailldorcha

smjm wrote: »

Then Spain would lose the revenue from their pensions/savings, which is probably supporting quite a lot of jobs. Not good, given Spain's high unemployment rate. Plus they'd have to cater for the return of their own, mostly young people, who are working in the UK, perhaps sending money home. There's quite a few of them. Again, given the high unemployment rate, especially amongst the youth, how would this benefit Spain? Why would you even hope this would happen?

Why would Spain make revenue from their savings which are likely held by UK banks. They'll likely be drawing their state pensions from the Spanish government constituting another drain.

Rightwing

oscarBravo wrote: »

What has that big problem got to do with EU membership?

The EU are solving the world's problems single handedly. This is where the problem lies.

Pro Hoc Vice

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Why would Spain make revenue from their savings which are likely held by UK banks. They'll likely be drawing their state pensions from the Spanish government constituting another drain.

Why would the Spanish be paying a UK citizens pension who went to retire in Spain.

ancapailldorcha

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

Why would the Spanish be paying a UK citizens pension who went to retire in Spain.

Thought EU citizens drew their pension from their country of residence there.... Anyway, why would they pay tax on it to the Spanish government unless you're referring to purchasing goods and services.

smjm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Why would Spain make revenue from their savings which are likely held by UK banks. They'll likely be drawing their state pensions from the Spanish government constituting another drain.

The Spanish benefit from UK pensioners spending their money, from pensions or savings or whatever other source. Savings themselves would likely be held in Spanish banks. The Spanish also benefit (or certainly have in the past) from the money that's brought in when properties are purchased. The pensions would be UK pensions - state and/or private - sent to Spain, not Spanish pensions.

ancapailldorcha

smjm wrote: »

The Spanish benefit from UK pensioners spending their money, from pensions or savings or whatever other source. Savings themselves would likely be held in Spanish banks. The Spanish also benefit (or certainly have in the past) from the money that's brought in when properties are purchased. The pensions would be UK pensions - state and/or private - sent to Spain, not Spanish pensions.

What about healthcare? If the UK leaves the EU, I can't see them being too keen on keeping the EHIC.

Todd Toddington III

Rightwing wrote: »

The EU are solving the world's problems single handedly. This is where the problem lies.

Care to expand on that rather vague statement?

Bob24

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

What about healthcare? If the UK leaves the EU, I can't see them being too keen on keeping the EHIC.

Unfortunately I can't find a clear explanation of who is paying for treatment when someone uses a European health insurance card, but I am fairly sure governments are cross-charging each other already (i.e. Spain would already clame the cost to the UK when British EHIC holders are getting treatment there).

smjm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

What about healthcare? If the UK leaves the EU, I can't see them being too keen on keeping the EHIC.

Don't know to be honest. It's all up for grabs in the negotiations. The point I was making to the OP though is that Spain does well enough out of the current arrangements. I can't understand people, like the OP, who hope things are going to turn nasty!

Calahonda52

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Thought EU citizens drew their pension from their country of residence there.... Anyway, why would they pay tax on it to the Spanish government unless you're referring to purchasing goods and services.

For what its worth: several years ago, the Spanish Gov introduced a rule [Spanish 720 asset declaration] for residents that they had to produce a schedule of world wide assets and income, and they were proposing that tax was paid, in Spain, on world wide income.
The theory was that it was for all residents, native and otherwise, but it was enforced with vigour against the non national residents, we sold out and left.

Not everyone was impressed.
http://www.healthplanspain.com/blog/spain-news/369-spain-s-720-asset-declaration-model-considered-illegal-by-european-commission.html#.V4PxN1d3D7o

Rightwing

Todd Toddington III wrote: »

Care to expand on that rather vague statement?

Well correct me if I'm wrong, but have the Gulf states for instance, taken in 1 migrant between them ?

Pro Hoc Vice

Rightwing wrote: »

Well correct me if I'm wrong, but have the Gulf states for instance, taken in 1 migrant between them ?

http://europe.newsweek.com/gulf-states-are-taking-syrian-refugees-401131?rm=eu

No they have taken many more than that, or do you mean the Gulf of Mexico.

Rightwing

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

http://europe.newsweek.com/gulf-states-are-taking-syrian-refugees-401131?rm=eu

No they have taken many more than that, or do you mean the Gulf of Mexico.

No.

Ok, that's good to see anyway.

K-9

Deleted User wrote: »

They really can't trigger Article 50 until they know what kind of relationship they want with the EU.

Would there not be more pressure on May to trigger it than Boris or Gove seeing as she was on the remain side?

K-9

smjm wrote: »

I doubt it. Both sides will, I believe, ensure that those who are already living abroad can remain so. Many, if not most, will probably be covered by the Citizens Rights Directive anyway: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_Rights_Directive

The negotiations will be about future immigration, and the UK government won't allow the current EU situation to continue.

The question then become what does Britain give up for restrictions on freedom of movement of EU nationals. Banking and financial services access to the EU? CAP and fisheries?

One thing is certain, they'll have to give up an important demand in negotiations to restrict movement.

Bob24

K-9 wrote: »

The question then become what does Britain give up for restrictions on freedom of movement of EU nationals. Banking and financial services access to the EU? CAP and fisheries?

One thing is certain, they'll have to give up an important demand in negotiations to restrict movement.

Are they not out of the CAP no matter what? I might be wrong but I thought even the so-called Swiss to Norwegian models are leaving it out - even though this countries are allowing free movement of people.

And yes, I wouldn't completely write-off free movement at this stage, since as you said for the UK to completely stop it would mean making important concessions on something else. They need to decide on what there key demands are, and it will depend on where the priorities are and how they are perceived by the British public.

It is just the opinion of a random guy on the internet, but if I was them I would first say I would target a final deal with an hybrid model whereby free movement is still present but with blockers to restrict it when flows go above certain thresholds (to be defined).

Lemming

Bob24 wrote: »

but if I was them I would first say I would target a final deal with an hybrid model whereby free movement is still present but with blockers to restrict it when flows go above certain thresholds (to be defined).

This was raised as a question - albeit with a slightly different angle to what you've floated - during the aforementioned parliament.tv committee session from the other week by invoking an emergency provision that was enacted for Lichenstein. The legal perspective was that to attempt to enact this particular provision for a country as large as the UK on a non-temporary basis would do absolutely zero favours for the UK's international credibility. The legal expert went so far as to say that if he were to be cruel, that was the wishful thinking of "armchair lawyers".

Todd Toddington III

Rightwing wrote: »

Well correct me if I'm wrong, but have the Gulf states for instance, taken in 1 migrant between them ?

So you were talking about immigration, or more specifically migrants from Iraq and Syria coming to the EU. Taking our jobs, or something

smjm

Lemming wrote: »

This was raised as a question - albeit with a slightly different angle to what you've floated - during the aforementioned parliament.tv committee session from the other week by invoking an emergency provision that was enacted for Lichenstein. The legal perspective was that to attempt to enact this particular provision for a country as large as the UK on a non-temporary basis would do absolutely zero favours for the UK's international credibility. The legal expert went so far as to say that if he were to be cruel, that was the wishful thinking of "armchair lawyers".

The legal expert may have a slightly pro-EU bias of course. Either way, here's the response from the "armchair lawyer":

http://eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=86137

wes

K-9 wrote: »

The question then become what does Britain give up for restrictions on freedom of movement of EU nationals. Banking and financial services access to the EU? CAP and fisheries?

One thing is certain, they'll have to give up an important demand in negotiations to restrict movement.

I don't see what they have to offer to have Europe fundamentally compromise on one of the 4 freedoms. I think they will have to accept that single market access is a non-starter, and settler for a free trade deal of some kind.

smjm

Bob24 wrote: »

Unfortunately I can't find a clear explanation of who is paying for treatment when someone uses a European health insurance card, but I am fairly sure governments are cross-charging each other already (i.e. Spain would already clame the cost to the UK when British EHIC holders are getting treatment there).

You're correct. Brits in the EU receive free healthcare at the point of use, via EHIC, but the NHS pays for it.

Zubeneschamali

wes wrote: »

I don't see what they have to offer to have Europe fundamentally compromise on one of the 4 freedoms. I think they will have to accept that single market access is a non-starter, and settler for a free trade deal of some kind.

I don't think the chaps in the City will be pleased to be out of the Single Market - and their old school chums in Westminster will suddenly realize that they don't care what all the little people think. They'll settle for a Norway deal, the worst of both worlds for the Brexiters.

Thomas_..

molloyjh wrote: »

But what about all of the other impacts that come with that? And what about those people who don't know anyone who is living elsewhere in the EU? There was so much misinformation out there and so little real analysis done by those shouting the loudest that many Leavers would not have understood the full and complete impact of the decision to leave. And the margin of victory was very small as well after all. So to say it is what they, as an entire group of people, wanted isn't exactly bullet-proof. We may find out in time that the package as a whole actually isn't what they wanted at all.

Quite right and what is in that Video is just one example of the Impact this leave decision will have and already has:

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-36683770

Brexit vote: 'Our EU scientists didn't feel welcome in UK'

6 July 2016 Last updated at 16:17 BST

The bio-tech industry, which researches new medicines and antibiotics, has been one of the fastest growing sectors of the British economy of the past 20 years, with firms in the sector saying they need to recruit scientists from around the world to do their research.

Dr David Williams, chief executive of Discuva, a biotech company based in Cambridge trying to find an antibiotic for hospital superbugs, says the Leave vote is threatening his ability to recruit and retain the brightest and best scientists from Europe.

It will affect many sections in ecomomy, finances, science and the whole society.

The anti-Immigration mood that was stirred by Farage in the first place (and that he did for years) was meant to go against social welfare travellers from Eastern European EU countries, but in consequence of the Brexit, it will affect all EU citizens. One has to wait and see what will turn out from the negotiations and the settlement of that residence problem on a mutual basis. Much of the outcome will depend on the skills of Ms May and her way to negotiate with the EU. If she takes the hard line approach, she might give away chances for a positive settlement.

Thomas_..

molloyjh wrote: »

Well I don't assume stupid at all. Misinformed though, definitely. It was a very prominent and common theme to the entire debate. The £350m figure jumps out for starters. What I would say is that there very much is a point to referendums, but they should only be run in areas that the public can add real value rather than areas that they simply don't fully understand. Social decisions for example can be done by referendum, economic and international relations less so. Also there needs to be standards set and adhered to regarding the debate. Anything that is pure lies (of which there was a lot in this campaign) should be banned immediately. It's easy to win people over when you can say whatever the hell you like. When you have to stick to the truth it is a lot harder.

Yes, I´m all with you there.

Thomas_..

LiamoSail wrote: »

I hope Spain punts the lot of the over 60's English back to England. With that extra €340m, the NHS should have no problem with the added financial burden of them

The presumably are the last who really like to go back.