Brexit Referendum Superthread

ancapailldorcha

Palmach wrote: »

Do you think they will stop co-operating with the UK after a Brexit?

The EU removes barriers to such cooperation though and makes it easier. Do you have anything to suggest that such cooperation will continue unimpeded post-Brexit?

Palmach wrote: »

Don't you think NATO is far more important in this role than the EU?

This doesn't negate the EU's importance in this regard.

Palmach

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The EU removes barriers to such cooperation though and makes it easier. Do you have anything to suggest that such cooperation will continue unimpeded post-Brexit?
This doesn't negate the EU's importance in this regard.

The above is untrue. Britain co-operates far more with other countries than with countries in the EU https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes

ancapailldorcha

Palmach wrote: »

The above is untrue. Britain co-operates far more with other countries than with countries in the EU https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes

This isn't a reason for erecting barriers to EU cooperation though.

Lemming

Palmach wrote: »

More scaremongering. There is not one scintilla of evidence that the UK will lose jobs because of a Brexit. Most trade is now covered and will be more so in the future by the WTO. Furthermore the UK is the 5th biggest economy on the planet and no one will not sign a trade deal with the British.

Actually for two of my mates it is a very, very real prospect. The company both work for has a strong base on the continent, one regularly travels to the continent, and the company deals in ITAR-controlled technology and with several other EU nations in that regard. Both work in different arms of the same company so two different sectors to be affected adversely.

So no, it's not scaremongering.

Edit: as for the rest of your guff, whilst yes the UK is the 5th largest economy on the planet, it's not the 5th largest trading block. And the important word is "Block". In an increasingly block-oriented world, nobody who is pro-leave has bothered to ask themselves WHY the next guy should run for a trade deal with the UK over say .... the EU, or Mercursor, etc. I'm sure they will get around to it, but how long will that take? US trade talks with the EU have been on-going for over ten years and the US have publicly stated that they have no appetite to negotiate a separate treaty for the UK. It comes down to simple numbers; which trade deal gives you the widest coverage? A single country, or a bloc?

Palmach

Lemming wrote: »

Actually for two of my mates it is a very, very real prospect. The company both work for has a strong base on the continent, one regularly travels to the continent, and the company deals in ITAR-controlled technology and with several other EU nations in that regard. Both work in different arms of the same company so two different sectors to be affected adversely.

So no, it's not scaremongering.

Edit: as for the rest of your guff, whilst yes the UK is the 5th largest economy on the planet, it's not the 5th largest trading block. And the important word is "Block". In an increasingly block-oriented world, nobody who is pro-leave has bothered to ask themselves WHY the next guy should run for a trade deal with the UK over say .... the EU, or Mercursor, etc. I'm sure they will get around to it, but how long will that take? US trade talks with the EU have been on-going for over ten years and the US have publicly stated that they have no appetite to negotiate a separate treaty for the UK. It comes down to simple numbers; which trade deal gives you the widest coverage? A single country, or a bloc?

There is no either or. One can trade with other countries whether in a bloc or not. Singapore, Switzerland and New Zealand are not in blocks and are doing just fine. We heard the scaremongering about the UK having to be in the Euro or else. How did that turn out?

Palmach

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

This isn't a reason for erecting barriers to EU cooperation though.

Eh you seem not to grasp my point. Nick Clegg bringing up the point was wrong. Security and defence are more in the NATO department and the UKs main allies are not int he EU. In short in or out won't make a whit of difference.

andrew

Palmach wrote: »

There is no either or. One can trade with other countries whether in a bloc or not. Singapore, Switzerland and New Zealand are not in blocks and are doing just fine. We heard the scaremongering about the UK having to be in the Euro or else. How did that turn out?

I think the point is more that

1. While the trade agreement is being negotiated there'll be uncertainty, which is bad.
2. The UK already has trade agreements via the EU, and wouldn't be able to improve upon them on its own, so why leave?

ancapailldorcha

Palmach wrote: »

Eh you seem not to grasp my point. Nick Clegg bringing up the point was wrong. Security and defence are more in the NATO department and the UKs main allies are not int he EU. In short in or out won't make a whit of difference.

This doesn't mean that EU membership doesn't assist such cooperation though. I think it is a pertinent point.

andrew wrote: »

I think the point is more that

1. While the trade agreement is being negotiated there'll be uncertainty, which is bad.
2. The UK already has trade agreements via the EU, and wouldn't be able to improve upon them on its own, so why leave?

Indeed. The pound has already lost value and is becoming somewhat volatile.

Palmach

andrew wrote: »

I think the point is more that

1. While the trade agreement is being negotiated there'll be uncertainty, which is bad.
2. The UK already has trade agreements via the EU, and wouldn't be able to improve upon them on its own, so why leave?

The argument is not just about trade. There will be uncertainty for a while but business will adjust quickly. As important is the right to control your borders and bring in laws approved by the Commons and being able to decide your own countries destiny.

oscarBravo

Palmach wrote: »

That canard has been raised time and again. Neither of the two countries are in Schengen and we have a CTA. There is no border between Norway and Sweden when one is in the EU and one is not. If the UK leaves I imagine there will be a quick deal to continue the CTA.

Norway is in the EEA.

Nobody's claiming that there couldn't possibly be a CTA after Brexit; the point is that we don't know how it will work, and merely hand-waving and telling people not to worry about it doesn't address those concerns.

ancapailldorcha

Palmach wrote: »

The argument is not just about trade. There will be uncertainty for a while but business will adjust quickly. As important is the right to control your borders and bring in laws approved by the Commons and being able to decide your own countries destiny.

How long will a while be? One source claims a minimum of 10 years. Meanwhile, Mark Carney, president of the Bank of England claims that Brexit is the biggest risk to the UK's financial stability (Source). In any case, uncertainty of any kind is a strong disincentive to any kind of long term investment in the UK which is bad for all concerned. Also, HSBC is considering moving its headquarters to Hong Kong. Many other firms may follow suit. Especially tempting will be Ireland with its low rate of corporation tax and full access to the single market.

andrew

Palmach wrote: »

The argument is not just about trade. There will be uncertainty for a while but business will adjust quickly. As important is the right to control your borders and bring in laws approved by the Commons and being able to decide your own countries destiny.

Are there any particular laws which aren't in place which you feel should be? In relation to border control, what's happening now that you'd rather not happen?

Palmach

andrew wrote: »

Are there any particular laws which aren't in place which you feel should be? In relation to border control, what's happening now that you'd rather not happen?

I have no idea as I am not in the UK. From speaking to people in the UK and reading the papers and online control of borders is one of the main driving factors that cause people to support the Leave camp. Not the only one but the main one. Therefore I would think these people want and end to the unrestricted free movement of people.

Palmach

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

How long will a while be? One source claims a minimum of 10 years. Meanwhile, Mark Carney, president of the Bank of England claims that Brexit is the biggest risk to the UK's financial stability (Source). In any case, uncertainty of any kind is a strong disincentive to any kind of long term investment in the UK which is bad for all concerned. Also, HSBC is considering moving its headquarters to Hong Kong. Many other firms may follow suit. Especially tempting will be Ireland with its low rate of corporation tax and full access to the single market.

The same guff was spouted when the UK refused to join the Euro. The City would be decimated banks would leave etc. Turned out to be nonsense.

ancapailldorcha

Palmach wrote: »

The same guff was spouted when the UK refused to join the Euro. The City would be decimated banks would leave etc. Turned out to be nonsense.

So you don't think loss of access to the world's largest single market regarding financial services is worth considering?

Palmach

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

So you don't think loss of access to the world's largest single market regarding financial services is worth considering?

http://www.economicvoice.com/the-city-has-everything-to-gain-and-nothing-to-fear-from-brexit/

Hot off the presses. The City does more trade with people outside the EU than inside so loss of access won't be an issue. Furthermore as I have repeatedly said countries trade with each other all the time even if they are not politically in any union.

Lemming

Palmach wrote: »

I have no idea as I am not in the UK. From speaking to people in the UK and reading the papers and online control of borders is one of the main driving factors that cause people to support the Leave camp. Not the only one but the main one. Therefore I would think these people want and end to the unrestricted free movement of people.

I am in the UK. I live here. And I would take what gets put up in media circles with an incredibly large grain of salt particularly where the EU is concerned. The 'perceived' border thing is a red-herring. It's populist sh*te that doesn't stand up to scrutiny. What gets moaned about is invariably some sort of poster-child family of 17 Romanians in social housing on $55k in benefits whilst demanding a larger house. That's not a border issue. That's a social welfare system abuse issue. And if you went into any deprived area in the UK, you'd no doubt find large native-born families of 3rd generation career welfare-recipients doing similar.

Further, anyone who is not an EU citizen is subject to UK sovereign border controls anyway. I've had Indian & Pakistani work-colleagues who had to get visas to travel elsewhere within the EU because their visas only allowed entrance to the UK on specifcally stated terms. The UK border control force was lampooned - I think last year, or possibly the year before - for failing spectacularly in its job. I recall the term "not fit for purpose" being used. But no, instead of actually recognising that home-grown people can f*ck up, the popular narrative is to blame someone else.

Lemming

Palmach wrote: »

http://www.economicvoice.com/the-city-has-everything-to-gain-and-nothing-to-fear-from-brexit/

Hot off the presses. The City does more trade with people outside the EU than inside so loss of access won't be an issue. Furthermore as I have repeatedly said countries trade with each other all the time even if they are not politically in any union.

So, the loss of access to your single biggest trading market - by almost half of all trade - is no big deal eh?

djpbarry

Palmach wrote: »

There is not one scintilla of evidence that the UK will lose jobs because of a Brexit.

The research lab I work in is partly funded by a European Research Council grant. My job is specifically tied to this grant. If the UK leaves the EU, it will no longer have access to ERC funding. Unless the UK government increases funding for science to make up the shortfall (which seems unlikely given the cost-cutting that’s taking place at present), jobs in the industry will be lost.

Palmach wrote: »

Do you think they will stop co-operating with the UK after a Brexit? Do you have to be in a Union with other countries to co-operate on security matters?

Well, the UK already has several opt-outs pertaining to security and justice matters, so…

Palmach wrote: »

As important is the right to control your borders and bring in laws approved by the Commons and being able to decide your own countries destiny.

Perhaps you could give an example of a piece of UK legislation that was not approved by the Commons?

Palmach wrote: »

From speaking to people in the UK and reading the papers and online control of borders is one of the main driving factors that cause people to support the Leave camp. Not the only one but the main one. Therefore I would think these people want and end to the unrestricted free movement of people.

No, they just want to stop immigrants arriving in Britain. I doubt they have any issue with Brits moving freely to other EU states.

View

Palmach wrote: »

There is no either or. One can trade with other countries whether in a bloc or not. Singapore, Switzerland and New Zealand are not in blocks and are doing just fine. We heard the scaremongering about the UK having to be in the Euro or else. How did that turn out?

Both Singapore and Switzerland ARE members of trade blocks. New Zealand isn't but has a myriad of agreements with ASEAN much like Norway & Switzerland have with the EU.

And the comparison with the U.K. debate over the Euro is false. The U.K. remainded a member of the EU irrespective of that decision. That is totally different to opting to leave the EU and subjecting themselves to tariffs on their exports to the EU and those non-EU countries they trade with using EU agreements (a total just shy of 2/3s of all UK exports).

Palmach

View wrote: »

Both Singapore and Switzerland ARE members of trade blocks. New Zealand isn't but has a myriad of agreements with ASEAN much like Norway & Switzerland have with the EU.

Exactly my point. Small economies like NZ can negotiate agreements you can be sure they'll be queuing up to sign ones with the UK. Also the trade blocks like ASEAN are far far weaker than the EU.

And the comparison with the U.K. debate over the Euro is false. The U.K. remainded a member of the EU irrespective of that decision. That is totally different to opting to leave the EU and subjecting themselves to tariffs on their exports to the EU and those non-EU countries they trade with using EU agreements (a total just shy of 2/3s of all UK exports).

Again I have little doubt tariffs will not be imposed and a deal will be done. Remember trade with the UK is in the rest of the EU's favour by several billion. My point on the Euro stands. Dire warnings were issued and nothing happened.

ancapailldorcha

Palmach wrote: »

Again I have little doubt tariffs will not be imposed and a deal will be done. Remember trade with the UK is in the rest of the EU's favour by several billion. My point on the Euro stands. Dire warnings were issued and nothing happened.

Well, it's certainly in everyone's interest to continue trading. However, there is a very real prospect of losing access to the single market for services which is a vital part of the UK economy. In addition, only about 6.5% of EU exports go to the UK but a trade deal will require ratification, something which many EU countries, especially those in Eastern Europe will have little incentive to look favorably upon.

Palmach

djpbarry wrote: »

The research lab I work in is partly funded by a European Research Council grant. My job is specifically tied to this grant. If the UK leaves the EU, it will no longer have access to ERC funding. Unless the UK government increases funding for science to make up the shortfall (which seems unlikely given the cost-cutting that’s taking place at present), jobs in the industry will be lost.

Not wishing to minimalise your situation but I'd say very few jobs overall rely entirely on EU funding. Yes they may be affected but overall on the macro level most companies will still do what they have always doen and export to the EU and those on the other side of the Channel will export to the UK..

Well, the UK already has several opt-outs pertaining to security and justice matters, so…

So for some people it is not enough which is one of the things that is driving this issue. http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jun/17/immigration-british-attitudes-harden-benefits That right wing xenophobic rag the Guardian.

Perhaps you could give an example of a piece of UK legislation that was not approved by the Commons?

None. Can you give me examples of EU directives or regulations approved by the Commons?

oscarBravo

Palmach wrote: »

Again I have little doubt tariffs will not be imposed and a deal will be done.

This, to be honest, strikes me as the archetypal response to any concerns expressed about the possible ramifications of Brexit. It's never "here's my detailed analysis based on carefully-researched investigation into the facts pertaining to the argument you've made"; it's always "it'll be fine, don't worry about it".

Trompette

djpbarry wrote: »

The research lab I work in is partly funded by a European Research Council grant. My job is specifically tied to this grant. If the UK leaves the EU, it will no longer have access to ERC funding. Unless the UK government increases funding for science to make up the shortfall (which seems unlikely given the cost-cutting that’s taking place at present), jobs in the industry will be lost.

Hi djpbarry, do you think ERC funding "make/print" the euro banknotes your UK lab get?
This money is from UK state but maybe you don't know that and no one pro-EU will tell you that.
In France we have the same argument for the farmers. All pro-EU say they will loose the founding...Ha, ha, ha.

Have a look at this post I wrote
You will find out that UK paid more than receive, around 5 billions in 2014 and I think the same every year. If the lab you work in is necessary, UK state will give it the money and the state will still have 5 billions to spend in what UK citizen want.

If I can give you an advice djpbarry, please don't blame me, if you didn't know the above, please read other media than pro-EU, you have 4 small months to understand how works EU and you will vote "leave".

andrew

Palmach wrote: »

I have no idea as I am not in the UK. From speaking to people in the UK and reading the papers and online control of borders is one of the main driving factors that cause people to support the Leave camp. Not the only one but the main one. Therefore I would think these people want and end to the unrestricted free movement of people.

I don't understand this reason, as there's no evidence that this has been bad economically for the UK (that I know of).

Scofflaw

andrew wrote: »

I don't understand this reason, as there's no evidence that this has been bad economically for the UK (that I know of).

The available evidence points the other way - but then the Leave campaign has a tendency to say that while it will allow the UK to take full control of its borders it wouldn't mean that the UK would close its doors to European immigrants (or Commonwealth ones, although that wouldn't be affected by leaving the EU anyway), even though immigration is a major factor driving Leave voters.

Which may seem somewhat contradictory, but there you go.

cordially,
Scofflaw

djpbarry

djpbarry wrote: »

The research lab I work in is partly funded by a European Research Council grant. My job is specifically tied to this grant. If the UK leaves the EU, it will no longer have access to ERC funding. Unless the UK government increases funding for science to make up the shortfall (which seems unlikely given the cost-cutting that’s taking place at present), jobs in the industry will be lost.

Just to reinforce this point further:

Stephen Hawking is among more than 150 fellows of the Royal Society who have come out in favour of staying in the European Union, arguing that Brexit could be a “disaster for science”.

The scientists, including three Nobel laureates and the Astronomer Royal, warn that any threat to freedom of movement could severely affect research in Britain.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4709730.ece

djpbarry

Palmach wrote: »

Exactly my point. Small economies like NZ can negotiate agreements you can be sure they'll be queuing up to sign ones with the UK. Also the trade blocks like ASEAN are far far weaker than the EU.

You think that by leaving the EU, the UK can negotiate a better trade deal with the EU than the one it currently has?

Palmach wrote: »

Again I have little doubt tariffs will not be imposed and a deal will be done. Remember trade with the UK is in the rest of the EU's favour by several billion.

Trade is in everyone’s interest, yes. But, like all Leave campaigners, you are vastly overstating the importance of UK trade to the rest of the EU. Access to the EU market is far more important to the UK than access to the UK market is to the EU.

Palmach wrote: »

Not wishing to minimalise your situation but I'd say very few jobs overall rely entirely on EU funding.

Commence shifting of goalposts.

You said “there is not one scintilla of evidence that the UK will lose jobs because of a Brexit”. Now you’re saying only “very few” jobs will be lost? Care to put a number on “very few”?

Palmach wrote: »

So for some people it is not enough which is one of the things that is driving this issue.

But you said that the UK will continue to cooperate with EU states on security matters – now you’re saying they will not?

Palmach wrote: »

None. Can you give me examples of EU directives or regulations approved by the Commons?

All of them. All British legislation is passed in the Commons. All of it.

djpbarry

Trompette wrote: »

Hi djpbarry, do you think ERC funding "make/print" the euro banknotes your UK lab get?
This money is from UK state but maybe you don't know that and no one pro-EU will tell you that.

The UK covers the ERC’s entire budget? Really?