Brexit Referendum Superthread

Galwayguy35

BoatMad wrote: »

The damage to our FDI policy would ne huge if we pulled out of the EU.

Britain has committed the biggest act of national self harm , short of a civil war, Ireland needs not to follow suit

I agree, but the point I was making was there is a reluctance to even discuss it, and also the fact that with the UK gone there is a E10 billion hole to fill and we are going to maybe end up putting more in that we're getting out of it.

It's about time the countries that joined in 2004 started paying their fair share as well.

FrancieBrady

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Tom McGurk was putting forward the idea last night on Claire Byrne Live that Ireland should follow the UK and leave as well.

Richard Bruton was having none of it and when asked if Ireland should have a referendum all we got for an answer was "No", now last time I checked the TDs were supposed to work for the people and the Government shouldn't be afraid to discuss it and have a referendum if they are confident it will pass.

I think maybe they are afraid of what the result might be after Brexit.

The very least you could say about FG in this instance is they learn from others mistakes.
Cameron should have said NO and kept saying it

First Up

Galwayguy35 wrote:

I agree, but the point I was making was there is a reluctance to even discuss it, and also the fact that with the UK gone there is a E10 billion hole to fill and we are going to maybe end up putting more in that we're getting out of it.

Apart from a handful of the usual dunces, there is virtual unanimity across the political spectrum on the merits of Ireland's EU membership. If there are contrarian voices they are welcome to be heard but the fact is, there aren't many. Call it Group Think if you want but you would need an especially warped sense of reality not see what EU membership has gotten us. Brexit is a setback but more an inconvenience than a game changer.

Galwayguy35 wrote:

It's about time the countries that joined in 2004 started paying their fair share as well.

The principle of the Cohesion Fund is as valid today as ever. When Romania, Bulgaria and the Baltics reach average EU prosperity, it will largely reverse the migration that the Brits are upset about - and boost European prosperity and stability.

Its called the bigger picture. Some see it, some don't.

Nody

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

It's about time the countries that joined in 2004 started paying their fair share as well.

It took Ireland what, 30 years to start being a net contributor? Why should new countries get worse treatment than Ireland?

Sam Russell

In 1948, Sterling devalued from $4=£1 to $2.8=£1. Currently, £1 = $1.24. That is 31% of its value pre 1948. There has been a consistent drip drip of devaluation of Sterling over the last 70 years.

The battle in the UK between the left and the right has prevented the build up of wealth that would cause the currency to gain in value over the last 70 years. The only halt to this continuous slide has been the membership of the EU which saw a substantial rise in prosperity.

The immigration that causes so much offence is not from the EU, and will not be stemmed by the leaving of the EU, but will be much worse as the counterweight of growth in wealth and prosperity will stop and be replaced by continuous decline.

Look at how Zimbabwe has gone since independence - once the bread basket of Southern Africa and now a basket case. Maybe May should be careful.

What have they done?

KingBrian2

Sam Russell wrote: »

In 1948, Sterling devalued from $4=£1 to $2.8=£1. Currently, £1 = $1.24. That is 31% of its value pre 1948. There has been a consistent drip drip of devaluation of Sterling over the last 70 years.

The battle in the UK between the left and the right has prevented the build up of wealth that would cause the currency to gain in value over the last 70 years. The only halt to this continuous slide has been the membership of the EU which saw a substantial rise in prosperity.

The immigration that causes so much offence is not from the EU, and will not be stemmed by the leaving of the EU, but will be much worse as the counterweight of growth in wealth and prosperity will stop and be replaced by continuous decline.

Look at how Zimbabwe has gone since independence - once the bread basket of Southern Africa and now a basket case. Maybe May should be careful.

What have they done?

Yes but the perception that Europe was dictating to them was prevalent. It was taxes that got the 13 colonies to break away from the British Empire. From that the USA was born. Britain had lot of interest groups pressing to shove off from the EU and reestablish links to the commonwealth.

KingBrian2

Nody wrote: »

It took Ireland what, 30 years to start being a net contributor? Why should new countries get worse treatment than Ireland?

The EU was new back then. Had no rules to obey or for the most part a consultation with other Member states. Today each Nation knows what's what so getting them to contribute is about improving the EU and this would also help their own struggling economies.

ancapailldorcha

Sam Russell wrote: »

All referendums on subjects like that get hopelessly sidetracked and end up being about kicking the Government. Why would a Government Minister agree with holding such a referendum just to get a kicking.

Of course he said NO.

I'd read that the referendum was solely a ploy to keep UKIP at bay and to keep the Tory party together. There was barely any appetite for it at all. Labour had moved to the left while Clegg's Liberal Democrats have been disgraced by the coalition government meaning that the Tories had an open goal. There was no need for this ridiculous referendum at all.

Bit cynical

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I'd read that the referendum was solely a ploy to keep UKIP at bay and to keep the Tory party together. There was barely any appetite for it at all. Labour had moved to the left while Clegg's Liberal Democrats have been disgraced by the coalition government meaning that the Tories had an open goal. There was no need for this ridiculous referendum at all.

You say there was little appetite for it, but when the referendum was held, there was a very high turnout of 72.2 per cent. The greatest turnout in any referendum in Ireland was the one to join the EU. In that 70.88% turned out - somewhat less than the UK brexit one. The marriage equality referendum turnout, also considered high by Irish referendum standards, was only 60.52%.

Peregrinus

KingBrian2 wrote: »

The EU was new back then. Had no rules to obey or for the most part a consultation with other Member states. Today each Nation knows what's what so getting them to contribute is about improving the EU and this would also help their own struggling economies.

Not that new. It was founded in 1957 as an expansion of the European Coal and Steel Community (founded in 1951); we didn't join until 1973.

Zubeneschamali

solodeogloria wrote: »

It isn't racist because most countries do it. Heck, even the European Union does it on its external borders. Unless we say that anyone should be able to enter the EU to work?

If the UK wants to close its borders and only let in people with a PhD and a million pounds, it is perfectly entitled to to do so once it leaves the EU. I don't think controlling immigration from Eastern Europe can be racist - they are white Europeans the same as folks in the UK.

But they can't do that and stay members of the Single Market. I doubt a UK like that could do better than WTO terms for trade.

Peregrinus

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

If the UK wants to close its borders and only let in people with a PhD and a million pounds, it is perfectly entitled to to do so once it leaves the EU. I don't think controlling immigration from Eastern Europe can be racist - they are white Europeans the same as folks in the UK.

Well, "race" is an arbitrarily defined concept. The Nazis had no difficulty identifying millions of white Europeans as members of a different "race"; they simply invented the concept of the "Aryan race" for the purpose.

If you're discriminating between two groups of people to the disadvantage of one of them, I don't think whether the discrmination is acceptable or not depends on whether you call the two groups different "races", or use some other terminology. To make a judgment about that we have to look at the substance of the discrimination, not the labels used to support or justify it.

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

But they can't do that and stay members of the Single Market. I doubt a UK like that could do better than WTO terms for trade.

Exactly. The whole point about the single market is that you're free to sell your labour anywhere in the market. If the UK wants to apply rules to the hiring of (say) a Greek worker that they don't apply to the hiring of a British worker, then they don't want to be in the single market. Clive Lewis MP, to whom solodeogloria refers, may not have grasped this yet or may be in denial about it, or he may just be doing the politicians thing of trying to please all of the people all of the time. But, in the context of a single market, this particular form of discrimination is not compatible. And we don't have to label it as "racism" to show that.

solodeogloria

Sam Russell wrote: »

In 1948, Sterling devalued from $4=£1 to $2.8=£1. Currently, £1 = $1.24. That is 31% of its value pre 1948. There has been a consistent drip drip of devaluation of Sterling over the last 70 years.

The battle in the UK between the left and the right has prevented the build up of wealth that would cause the currency to gain in value over the last 70 years. The only halt to this continuous slide has been the membership of the EU which saw a substantial rise in prosperity.

The immigration that causes so much offence is not from the EU, and will not be stemmed by the leaving of the EU, but will be much worse as the counterweight of growth in wealth and prosperity will stop and be replaced by continuous decline.

Look at how Zimbabwe has gone since independence - once the bread basket of Southern Africa and now a basket case. Maybe May should be careful.

What have they done?

Good morning!

It's worth pointing out that the value of a currency isn't the only yardstick of how strong an economy is.

If sterling was still worth $4 that would be bad for British exports. A drop in a currency's value can be beneficial. Also 1948 was before decimalisation of sterling.

The doom stories of the UK's economy tanking haven't been seen yet. It's in the interests of all involved to get a good deal so let's see what will happen. More importantly let's see what is brought to the table in Brussels next year. It's still too early to say much.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Edit:
More Brexit news. Canada is arguing that CETA will apply to Britain after leaving the EU and Merkel is considering concessions on free movement.

solodeogloria

solodeogloria wrote: »

....Merkel is considering concessions on free movement.

hmmmm, I know that is what the article says, but the direct quotes seem very very different. Some very poor editing I would have thought.

Speaking in Berlin, Angela Merkel said that making an “exception” for Britain would “endanger” the principles of the EU.

“Were we to make an exception for the free movement of people with Britain, this would mean we would endanger principles of the whole internal market in the European Union, because everyone else will then want these exceptions," she said.

"I personally am of the view that we will have to discuss further with the [European] Commission when this freedom of movement applies from."

“The question of when lifelong guarantees come into effect according to the social standard of the host country must certainly be taken into consideration,”

What do you think this would change for the UK's position solodeogloria? Is the timing issue a deal-breaker for the UK?

Currently here is the situation
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/citizen/move-live/index_en.htm

EU citizens can reside on the territory of another EU country for up to three months without any conditions other than the requirement to hold a valid identity card or passport;

o reside in another EU country for more than three months, EU citizens are required to meet certain conditions depending on their status (i.e. worker, student, etc.) and may also be required to meet certain administrative formalities;

EU citizens can acquire the right to permanent residence in another EU country after legally residing there for a continuous period of five years;

The family members of EU citizens have the right to accompany or join them in another EU country, subject to certain conditions.

Thomas_...

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

solodeogloria wrote: »

It isn't racist because most countries do it. Heck, even the European Union does it on its external borders. Unless we say that anyone should be able to enter the EU to work?

If the UK wants to close its borders and only let in people with a PhD and a million pounds, it is perfectly entitled to to do so once it leaves the EU. I don't think controlling immigration from Eastern Europe can be racist - they are white Europeans the same as folks in the UK.

But they can't do that and stay members of the Single Market. I doubt a UK like that could do better than WTO terms for trade.

Who of hose PhDs with the millions on their account are happy or keen to settle in a country like the UK where the mood has turned against any sort of foreigner since the Brexit referendum, whether already born there or not? If would be in such a position, I would rather look for another country where people of other nationalities are welcome and not go to a country where the bigots have turned out to have more say in every aspect of foreign relations. This nationalistic and in parts really racist attitude is to backfire on the Brits soon enough and in some cases it already has. Some academics who were about to go over to the UK and show up for their contracts in universities or other science institutions / companies have immediately declined after the Brexit result when the abuse on foreign nationals in the UK became public and they became public very rapidly.

The might of the bigots have always caused and brought damage to the country. Now with Trump being elected in the USA, others will also think twice before trying to settle in the USA. The benefit of this rise of the bigots will be the side of the other countries who maintain an open and welcoming society, but not the UK and not the USA where one feels more insecure as a foreign national.

Thomas_...

If one thinks it couldn't get worse, then Mr Johnson Comes up with another of his crap ideas and illusions:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-37995606

Boris Johnson is offering Britain a vision of life outside the EU that is "intellectually impossible", a leading European finance minister has said.
The foreign secretary reportedly told a Czech paper the UK was likely to leave the EU customs union post-Brexit - but still wanted to trade freely after.
However, Jeroen Dijsselbloem, the Dutch finance minister, said such an option "doesn't exist" and was "impossible".
Number 10 said a decision on membership of the customs union had not been made.
Mr Johnson reportedly told the Czech newspaper Hospodarske Noviny he did not believe the UK would remain in the EU customs union after Brexit.
...

How that man ever managed to get elected as Mayor of London really is beyond me. He might get into history as the worst (in regards of most idiotic) Foreign Sectretary the UK ever had.

Thomas_...

Thomas_... wrote: »

Who of hose PhDs with the millions on their account are happy or keen to settle in a country like the UK where the mood has turned against any sort of foreigner since the Brexit referendum, whether already born there or not?

@Thomas_... always worth considering that where the immigrants are more tempted by are also the areas which did not vote to leave. Most of the inward migration into the UK is into employment centres and these areas in the main voted to remain.

Interestingly enough, I myself am relocating (perhaps some element of the vote impacted subconciously?) from a substantial 'Leave' area to a substantial 'Remain' area within the UK in the coming weeks as an immigrant.

The doommongering is self-perpetuating. Most people will weigh up the anti-immigration vote accordingly, and make a decision bearing it in mind, but it will only dominate the decision making of few. The UK has not changed drastically overnight, there are still opportunities in abundance for people. Successful people are successful both because of situations, but importantly also in spite of situations.

Thomas_...

Deleted User wrote: »

Thomas_... wrote: »

Who of hose PhDs with the millions on their account are happy or keen to settle in a country like the UK where the mood has turned against any sort of foreigner since the Brexit referendum, whether already born there or not?

@Thomas_... always worth considering that where the immigrants are more tempted by are also the areas which did not vote to leave. Most of the inward migration into the UK is into employment centres and these areas in the main voted to remain.

Interestingly enough, I myself am relocating (perhaps some element of the vote impacted subconciously?) from a substantial 'Leave' area to a substantial 'Remain' area within the UK in the coming weeks as an immigrant.

The doommongering is self-perpetuating. Most people will weigh up the anti-immigration vote accordingly, and make a decision bearing it in mind, but it will only dominate the decision making of few. The UK has not changed drastically overnight, there are still opportunities in abundance for people. Successful people are successful both because of situations, but importantly also in spite of situations.

Well, good luck to you anyway. The fact that some areas voted in a majority for remain doesn't give you the guarantee to be spared any abuse for being a foreign national. In the end of the day everyone has to make his own decision but the reputation of the UK on an international Basis has already suffered. Apart form the bigots, the main reason for why others declined from going to work in the UK was and still is the uncertainty regarding their future in regards of the residence status foreign nationals will have after the UK exits the EU. That is the main reason, the bigots are just adding up to this feeling of insecurity.

Sam Russell

solodeogloria wrote: »

It's worth pointing out that the value of a currency isn't the only yardstick of how strong an economy is.

If sterling was still worth $4 that would be bad for British exports. A drop in a currency's value can be beneficial. Also 1948 was before decimalisation of sterling.


solodeogloria

Well, if the economy is going very well, as in Germany, the demand for the currency is pushed up, but if going badly, the currency is pushed down, as in the UK. The main driver for this is the balance of payments, which has always gone badly for the UK, but very well for Germany.

Since losing the Empire, Britain has struggled to maintain manufacturing exports, and so has run a deficit on the current account since 1948 (most years). That is why Sterling has depreciated so much, while the Dmark has appreciated. When we joined the Euro (@IR £0.78p), Sterling was at a higher value but is now @GB£;0.86p.

Yes, the exchange rate is not the only yardstick of an economy but it does allow a comparison with other economies.

Thomas_...

Sam Russell wrote: »

solodeogloria wrote: »

It's worth pointing out that the value of a currency isn't the only yardstick of how strong an economy is.

If sterling was still worth $4 that would be bad for British exports. A drop in a currency's value can be beneficial. Also 1948 was before decimalisation of sterling.


solodeogloria

Well, if the economy is going very well, as in Germany, the demand for the currency is pushed up, but if going badly, the currency is pushed down, as in the UK. The main driver for this is the balance of payments, which has always gone badly for the UK, but very well for Germany.

Since losing the Empire, Britain has struggled to maintain manufacturing exports, and so has run a deficit on the current account since 1948 (most years). That is why Sterling has depreciated so much, while the Dmark has appreciated. When we joined the Euro (@IR 0.78p), Sterling was at a higher value but is now @GB 0.86p.

Yes, the exchange rate is not the only yardstick of an economy but it does allow a comparison with other economies.

Talking about yardsticks:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-37992264

K-9

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

It's worth pointing out that the value of a currency isn't the only yardstick of how strong an economy is.

If sterling was still worth $4 that would be bad for British exports. A drop in a currency's value can be beneficial. Also 1948 was before decimalisation of sterling.

The doom stories of the UK's economy tanking haven't been seen yet. It's in the interests of all involved to get a good deal so let's see what will happen. More importantly let's see what is brought to the table in Brussels next year. It's still too early to say much.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Edit:
More Brexit news. Canada is arguing that CETA will apply to Britain after leaving the EU and Merkel is considering concessions on free movement.

And I was reading a piece on the RTE business website this morning saying the UK may have to pay the EU 50 or 60 billion just to leave!

It's too early to be reading much into anything, especially what Canada says!

Thomas_...

K-9 wrote: »

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

It's worth pointing out that the value of a currency isn't the only yardstick of how strong an economy is.

If sterling was still worth $4 that would be bad for British exports. A drop in a currency's value can be beneficial. Also 1948 was before decimalisation of sterling.

The doom stories of the UK's economy tanking haven't been seen yet. It's in the interests of all involved to get a good deal so let's see what will happen. More importantly let's see what is brought to the table in Brussels next year. It's still too early to say much.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Edit:
More Brexit news. Canada is arguing that CETA will apply to Britain after leaving the EU and Merkel is considering concessions on free movement.

And I was reading a piece on the RTE business website this morning saying the UK may have to pay the EU 50 or 60 billion just to leave!

It's too early to be reading much into anything, especially what Canada says!

There is no such talk about concessions to the Brits regarding free movement. On the German media, where this issue was just a topic on the "Zeit-Online" Website, they provided a Video in which Merkel made a speech in which she said that free movement as a EU principle is not be set for making concessions to the Brits, she merely said that the subject can be discussed and that it is about to hear what the Britis want in detail. But far off from what the tabloids are presenting. No concessions making on the table, the tabloids are as usual making things up by distorting speeches. Some of their correspondents should improve their German language skills if they won't be branded as liars.

But as one can easly see by the other poster who brought that up, Brexiteers are easily blinded and mislead by their wishful thinking that they can have it all their way. It will be even lesser than they think what they will get at the end of it.

solodeogloria

Sam Russell wrote: »

Well, if the economy is going very well, as in Germany, the demand for the currency is pushed up, but if going badly, the currency is pushed down, as in the UK. The main driver for this is the balance of payments, which has always gone badly for the UK, but very well for Germany.

Since losing the Empire, Britain has struggled to maintain manufacturing exports, and so has run a deficit on the current account since 1948 (most years). That is why Sterling has depreciated so much, while the Dmark has appreciated. When we joined the Euro (@IR £0.78p), Sterling was at a higher value but is now @GB£;0.86p.

Yes, the exchange rate is not the only yardstick of an economy but it does allow a comparison with other economies.

Good afternoon,

This is a rather simplex understanding of how currencies are valued. The Euro is worth just less than Sterling - it doesn't follow that Britain's economy is stronger than the Europe's. Likewise, the dollar is worth less than the Euro. It doesn't follow that the US economy is weaker than Europe's. A pound is worth more than a Swiss Franc - that doesn't mean that Britain's economy is stronger than the Swiss one.

Even before Brexit the pound was overvalued.

Interesting that even in 2015 some projected the pound would fall even without Brexit.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Prof Curtice

Oh Boris, look what you've done. People are after the promises you offered, but quite seriously cannot deliver...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37989728?intlink_from_url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-37966135&link_location=live-reporting-story

People "almost universally support" the UK staying in the EU single market after Brexit - while also wanting new migration controls, research suggests.

90% of respondents support Britain remaining part of the European Union single market

And

70% supported Britain imposing a limit on EU migration

Prof Curtice wrote:

While it may be the case that the EU believes that freedom of movement and free trade go together much like love and marriage were once thought to do, this is evidently not the way in which the average voter in the UK sees the situation

recedite

UK unemployment hits a record low.
The good news just keeps on flowing since the Brexit vote.
Exports boost, narrowing budget deficit, steady low inflation, low unemployment.... its like some sort of economic dream team.

How much more of this good news can the naysayers take?

alastair

recedite wrote: »

UK unemployment hits a record low.
The good news just keeps on flowing since the Brexit vote.
Exports boost, narrowing budget deficit, steady low inflation, low unemployment.... its like some sort of economic dream team.

How much more of this good news can the naysayers take?

Great news!

Analysts also noted that the pace of jobs growth was slowing and attributed this to the effects of the UK's vote to leave the EU.

"The Leave vote is starting to sap the jobs recovery of its previous strength," said Ruth Gregory, UK economist at Capital Economics.

"Employment growth slowed sharply - with the 49,000 rise in the three months to September down from August's 106,000 and well below the consensus forecast of 91,000."

The British Chambers of Commerce said Brexit was "dampening firms' recruitment intentions" and that this would put "increased pressure on UK employment levels".

recedite

recedite wrote: »

UK unemployment hits a record low.
The good news just keeps on flowing since the Brexit vote.
Exports boost, narrowing budget deficit, steady low inflation, low unemployment.... its like some sort of economic dream team.

How much more of this good news can the naysayers take?

Deleted User wrote: »

This is akin to someone suggesting that a baby that is born to a woman who was told not to smoke during pregnancy - as it could harm their child's growth - being 'tall' at 3 weeks is proof that the doctor's were wrong, and vindicating her smoking habit.

.

K-9

Well the remain side was saying unemployment was very low but nobody listened so why bother now?

The problem is the kind of jobs being created.

recedite

Naysayers will be naysayers
She quotes a slowing of "employment growth" while ignoring the main point of the story which is a drop in unemployment.
Why the difference in these two?
Because.....

The number of self-employed people increased by 213,000 to 4.79 million - 15.1% of all people in work.

Or, in other words, people leaving their low-paid jobs and unemployment benefits and having the confidence to set up small businesses.

whatstherush

recedite wrote: »

Or, in other words, people leaving their low-paid jobs and unemployment benefits and having the confidence to set up small businesses.

Aren't all the gig economy jobs classified as self employed? Being an uber driver hardly classifies as setting up a small business.