The 'No to the EU' campaign
Discussion
alfie2244 said:
Not the best use of 5 minutes prime time TV . Taking the opportunity of ridiculing CMD's pathetic "re-negotiations" may have been a far better use of the time than a rant about Turkey IMO.
Exactly, x% of voters are going to vote Remain, y% are going to vote Leave, we can argue all day whether x>y or x<y or even if x=y, but the voters who will decide this are the z% who are currently undecided.That 5 minutes was completely wasted on that z%, much better to show up the lies that the Prime Minister and others were peddling today. For example Chukka Umunna, with "The EU deal is one the left can support". What the hell is he smoking? Never a greater example of the Westminster bubble. If Chukka Umunna is on the same side as Cameron what does that tell you, apart from something is deeply suspect. Or Cameron lying through his teeth in the news. Slimy and shifty doesn't even begin to cover it.
If you haven't figured out that every one of the twonks who currently think they rule by right rather than by will of the electorate, poor deluded fools we are, that every corporate chum, subsidy and grant claimant is now vigorously shilling for Brussels then you haven't been listening, frankly you're probably not even a sentient being. If you're happy to be taken for a fool and have your pockets raided then frankly there is no hope for you. Really no hope.
FiF said:
I'm sure that the UKIP video is factually accurate, if it's not then they do want shooting. My objection is that we saw a huge reaction in the GE because of the immigration / alleged racist arguments, which led to a huge anyone but UKIP sector, which led to a situation where regardless of subject matter a reaction of must be wrong just because UKIP. We saw it on here, tribalism at its worst.
By being first out of the blocks with that subject matter UKIP threaten to taint in many eyes the whole Leave campaign. People would be wrong to do that, of course, but people being a bit shallow and reluctant to engage with really complicated and, let's be honest, tedious issues, many will never get beyond it.
Of course some will just lap it up, but suspect they would be voting for leave anyway.
That in essence is why I'm so angry, the campaign is imo at risk of being lost before it's started.
I think that's a misplaced/overblown fear. The 'anything but UKIP' people have already made up their minds long ago, as have those who are determined to see racism everywhere. Those who have genuine concerns about immigration and especially the sort of immigration we have seen last year are frustrated by the total lack of mainstream politicians even talking about it, and I don't think UKIP stand to benefit anything by joining this conspiracy of silence.By being first out of the blocks with that subject matter UKIP threaten to taint in many eyes the whole Leave campaign. People would be wrong to do that, of course, but people being a bit shallow and reluctant to engage with really complicated and, let's be honest, tedious issues, many will never get beyond it.
Of course some will just lap it up, but suspect they would be voting for leave anyway.
That in essence is why I'm so angry, the campaign is imo at risk of being lost before it's started.
And for the avoidance of doubt, that sort of immigration is immigration from backwards Islamic countries with scant regard for freedom or democracy. Exactly the sort of place Erdogan seems determined to make Turkey. If we wanted to 'save' Turkey from going down this road we're probably 10 years too late.
FiF said:
Exactly, x% of voters are going to vote Remain, y% are going to vote Leave, we can argue all day whether x>y or x<y or even if x=y, but the voters who will decide this are the z% who are currently undecided.
That 5 minutes was completely wasted on that z%, much better to show up the lies that the Prime Minister and others were peddling today. For example Chukka Umunna, with "The EU deal is one the left can support". What the hell is he smoking? Never a greater example of the Westminster bubble. If Chukka Umunna is on the same side as Cameron what does that tell you, apart from something is deeply suspect. Or Cameron lying through his teeth in the news. Slimy and shifty doesn't even begin to cover it.
If you haven't figured out that every one of the twonks who currently think they rule by right rather than by will of the electorate, poor deluded fools we are, that every corporate chum, subsidy and grant claimant is now vigorously shilling for Brussels then you haven't been listening, frankly you're probably not even a sentient being. If you're happy to be taken for a fool and have your pockets raided then frankly there is no hope for you. Really no hope.
So, clearly you're still undecided......That 5 minutes was completely wasted on that z%, much better to show up the lies that the Prime Minister and others were peddling today. For example Chukka Umunna, with "The EU deal is one the left can support". What the hell is he smoking? Never a greater example of the Westminster bubble. If Chukka Umunna is on the same side as Cameron what does that tell you, apart from something is deeply suspect. Or Cameron lying through his teeth in the news. Slimy and shifty doesn't even begin to cover it.
If you haven't figured out that every one of the twonks who currently think they rule by right rather than by will of the electorate, poor deluded fools we are, that every corporate chum, subsidy and grant claimant is now vigorously shilling for Brussels then you haven't been listening, frankly you're probably not even a sentient being. If you're happy to be taken for a fool and have your pockets raided then frankly there is no hope for you. Really no hope.
:-)
Just a quick reminder as well...
Leaving the eu doesn't guarantee we will be out of the free movement of people zone.
That will probably be decided in the post brexit negotiations that we don't get to vote on, and the eu could make its position to be free market=free movement of people pre referendum.
Leaving the eu doesn't guarantee we will be out of the free movement of people zone.
That will probably be decided in the post brexit negotiations that we don't get to vote on, and the eu could make its position to be free market=free movement of people pre referendum.
cookie118 said:
Just a quick reminder as well...
Leaving the eu doesn't guarantee we will be out of the free movement of people zone.
That will probably be decided in the post brexit negotiations that we don't get to vote on, and the eu could make its position to be free market=free movement of people pre referendum.
But not leaving guarantee's free movement of people remains.Leaving the eu doesn't guarantee we will be out of the free movement of people zone.
That will probably be decided in the post brexit negotiations that we don't get to vote on, and the eu could make its position to be free market=free movement of people pre referendum.
cookie118 said:
Just a quick reminder as well...
Leaving the eu doesn't guarantee we will be out of the free movement of people zone.
That will probably be decided in the post brexit negotiations that we don't get to vote on, and the eu could make its position to be free market=free movement of people pre referendum.
I understand your thinking, but if we actually have a decisive OUT vote, I don't think any government could negotiate that and get away with it.Leaving the eu doesn't guarantee we will be out of the free movement of people zone.
That will probably be decided in the post brexit negotiations that we don't get to vote on, and the eu could make its position to be free market=free movement of people pre referendum.
PRTVR said:
cookie118 said:
Just a quick reminder as well...
Leaving the eu doesn't guarantee we will be out of the free movement of people zone.
That will probably be decided in the post brexit negotiations that we don't get to vote on, and the eu could make its position to be free market=free movement of people pre referendum.
But not leaving guarantee's free movement of people remains.Leaving the eu doesn't guarantee we will be out of the free movement of people zone.
That will probably be decided in the post brexit negotiations that we don't get to vote on, and the eu could make its position to be free market=free movement of people pre referendum.
Basing your leaving argument on it though, and opening with a potentially controversial video about it seems like pretty poor tactics to sway undecided voters by ukip.
"
Withdrawing from the EU is a dangerous move for the UK. Using the Costinot and RodriguezClare (2013) methodology, we generate counterfactual scenarios and show that UK future losses due to this move can sum up to 1.23% of the GDP in real terms in our optimistic scenario, and to a drop of 3.09% in our pessimistic one. When we factor in more realistic dynamic losses from lower productivity growth, a conservative estimate would double losses to 2.2% of GDP even in the most optimistic case. In the pessimistic case, there would be income falls of 6.3% to 9.5% of GDP, a loss of a similar size to that resulting from the global financial crisis of 2008/09.
"
http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/pa016_tech.pdf
What do people make of this? The possible negative economic affects is the only reason that I will struggle to put a cross in the no box.
Withdrawing from the EU is a dangerous move for the UK. Using the Costinot and RodriguezClare (2013) methodology, we generate counterfactual scenarios and show that UK future losses due to this move can sum up to 1.23% of the GDP in real terms in our optimistic scenario, and to a drop of 3.09% in our pessimistic one. When we factor in more realistic dynamic losses from lower productivity growth, a conservative estimate would double losses to 2.2% of GDP even in the most optimistic case. In the pessimistic case, there would be income falls of 6.3% to 9.5% of GDP, a loss of a similar size to that resulting from the global financial crisis of 2008/09.
"
http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/pa016_tech.pdf
What do people make of this? The possible negative economic affects is the only reason that I will struggle to put a cross in the no box.
t.cookie118 said:
That will probably be decided in the post brexit negotiations that we don't get to vote on, and the eu could make its position to be free market=free movement of people pre referendum.
The whole point of leaving the EU is that parliament is once again sovereign and cannot be bound. After leaving the EU with a suitable UK government free movement of people can end.Absolute hogwash is what I make of it. Economists who can't accurately measure changes in GDP one quarter to the next with no major changes making predictions to two decimal places about the effects of a major change, to within 2 decimal places based on two hypothetical scenarios.
I studied economics and while I can't claim great academic credentials I can only imagine the sort of crackpot assumptions that would go into a formula predicting such a complex set of changes in such an abstract variable.
The only thing that sort of statistic is any indication of at all is who funds the LSE.
I studied economics and while I can't claim great academic credentials I can only imagine the sort of crackpot assumptions that would go into a formula predicting such a complex set of changes in such an abstract variable.
The only thing that sort of statistic is any indication of at all is who funds the LSE.
Trif said:
"
Withdrawing from the EU is a dangerous move for the UK. Using the Costinot and RodriguezClare (2013) methodology, we generate counterfactual scenarios and show that UK future losses due to this move can sum up to 1.23% of the GDP in real terms in our optimistic scenario, and to a drop of 3.09% in our pessimistic one. When we factor in more realistic dynamic losses from lower productivity growth, a conservative estimate would double losses to 2.2% of GDP even in the most optimistic case. In the pessimistic case, there would be income falls of 6.3% to 9.5% of GDP, a loss of a similar size to that resulting from the global financial crisis of 2008/09.
"
http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/pa016_tech.pdf
What do people make of this? The possible negative economic affects is the only reason that I will struggle to put a cross in the no box.
The LSE have a couple of interesting talks coming up.Withdrawing from the EU is a dangerous move for the UK. Using the Costinot and RodriguezClare (2013) methodology, we generate counterfactual scenarios and show that UK future losses due to this move can sum up to 1.23% of the GDP in real terms in our optimistic scenario, and to a drop of 3.09% in our pessimistic one. When we factor in more realistic dynamic losses from lower productivity growth, a conservative estimate would double losses to 2.2% of GDP even in the most optimistic case. In the pessimistic case, there would be income falls of 6.3% to 9.5% of GDP, a loss of a similar size to that resulting from the global financial crisis of 2008/09.
"
http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/pa016_tech.pdf
What do people make of this? The possible negative economic affects is the only reason that I will struggle to put a cross in the no box.
On the 16th of this month they are hosting John McDonnell who will deliver a speech about "Labour's Economic Policy".
Tonight, they are giving a talk entitled "Going beyond dangerous climate change".
I think that I will ignore these EU funded idiots.
don4l said:
Trif said:
"
Withdrawing from the EU is a dangerous move for the UK. Using the Costinot and RodriguezClare (2013) methodology, we generate counterfactual scenarios and show that UK future losses due to this move can sum up to 1.23% of the GDP in real terms in our optimistic scenario, and to a drop of 3.09% in our pessimistic one. When we factor in more realistic dynamic losses from lower productivity growth, a conservative estimate would double losses to 2.2% of GDP even in the most optimistic case. In the pessimistic case, there would be income falls of 6.3% to 9.5% of GDP, a loss of a similar size to that resulting from the global financial crisis of 2008/09.
"
http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/pa016_tech.pdf
What do people make of this? The possible negative economic affects is the only reason that I will struggle to put a cross in the no box.
The LSE have a couple of interesting talks coming up.Withdrawing from the EU is a dangerous move for the UK. Using the Costinot and RodriguezClare (2013) methodology, we generate counterfactual scenarios and show that UK future losses due to this move can sum up to 1.23% of the GDP in real terms in our optimistic scenario, and to a drop of 3.09% in our pessimistic one. When we factor in more realistic dynamic losses from lower productivity growth, a conservative estimate would double losses to 2.2% of GDP even in the most optimistic case. In the pessimistic case, there would be income falls of 6.3% to 9.5% of GDP, a loss of a similar size to that resulting from the global financial crisis of 2008/09.
"
http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/pa016_tech.pdf
What do people make of this? The possible negative economic affects is the only reason that I will struggle to put a cross in the no box.
On the 16th of this month they are hosting John McDonnell who will deliver a speech about "Labour's Economic Policy".
Tonight, they are giving a talk entitled "Going beyond dangerous climate change".
I think that I will ignore these EU funded idiots.
That's our money being wasted.
Scuffers said:
if we do exit, I wonder where this leaves LSE?
just how many of our institutions/universities/etc are all dependant on EU money?
Perhaps they can be funded from the extra money we'll have in the coffers by not having to make a net contribution to the EU just how many of our institutions/universities/etc are all dependant on EU money?
(Not that I'd want my hard earned funding the LSE!)Scuffers said:
if we do exit, I wonder where this leaves LSE?
just how many of our institutions/universities/etc are all dependant on EU money?
Well there's no net loss of money, just a change in who allocates it. I predict a rather undignified scramble to secure funding and lots of economic studies showing how brilliant the government of the day is...just how many of our institutions/universities/etc are all dependant on EU money?
turbobloke said:
don4l said:
Trif said:
"
Withdrawing from the EU is a dangerous move for the UK. Using the Costinot and RodriguezClare (2013) methodology, we generate counterfactual scenarios and show that UK future losses due to this move can sum up to 1.23% of the GDP in real terms in our optimistic scenario, and to a drop of 3.09% in our pessimistic one. When we factor in more realistic dynamic losses from lower productivity growth, a conservative estimate would double losses to 2.2% of GDP even in the most optimistic case. In the pessimistic case, there would be income falls of 6.3% to 9.5% of GDP, a loss of a similar size to that resulting from the global financial crisis of 2008/09.
"
http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/pa016_tech.pdf
What do people make of this? The possible negative economic affects is the only reason that I will struggle to put a cross in the no box.
The LSE have a couple of interesting talks coming up.Withdrawing from the EU is a dangerous move for the UK. Using the Costinot and RodriguezClare (2013) methodology, we generate counterfactual scenarios and show that UK future losses due to this move can sum up to 1.23% of the GDP in real terms in our optimistic scenario, and to a drop of 3.09% in our pessimistic one. When we factor in more realistic dynamic losses from lower productivity growth, a conservative estimate would double losses to 2.2% of GDP even in the most optimistic case. In the pessimistic case, there would be income falls of 6.3% to 9.5% of GDP, a loss of a similar size to that resulting from the global financial crisis of 2008/09.
"
http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/pa016_tech.pdf
What do people make of this? The possible negative economic affects is the only reason that I will struggle to put a cross in the no box.
On the 16th of this month they are hosting John McDonnell who will deliver a speech about "Labour's Economic Policy".
Tonight, they are giving a talk entitled "Going beyond dangerous climate change".
I think that I will ignore these EU funded idiots.
That's our money being wasted.
Quick note on how economists come up with these very scientific and accurate sounding predictions. They use a statistical method called Regression Analysis which is great for looking complicated, but very limited in it's real world applications.
To take a simple example, supposing an economist wanted to measure the effect of putting a new camshaft in his car on fuel consumption, he would make such a formula accounting for every detail that might affect it, then say this cam will use 2.1325343% more fuel. What he might not say, depending on what he wants to prove, is that this hangs on a whole load of assumptions some of which are tenuous at best. And that it only really applies at a certain constant speed, ambient temperature, grade of fuel etc etc.
If you think how many variables could go into that just for swapping the cams in your car it's already quite a complex calculation, and the result is also subject to a few qualifications. Eg. the cam might work out more efficient if you use the car on track days at high revs, or much less efficient if you drive in traffic.
That's for a fairly well known change to a relatively predictable mechanical device with some fairly easily controlled variables.
Try doing that while accounting for all the possible variables in the British economy and the external factors which might influence that and it is simply an exercise in absurdity. The only possible purpose of which is to scare voters like Trif into thinking that leaving will make the country poorer. Don't fall for it.
To take a simple example, supposing an economist wanted to measure the effect of putting a new camshaft in his car on fuel consumption, he would make such a formula accounting for every detail that might affect it, then say this cam will use 2.1325343% more fuel. What he might not say, depending on what he wants to prove, is that this hangs on a whole load of assumptions some of which are tenuous at best. And that it only really applies at a certain constant speed, ambient temperature, grade of fuel etc etc.
If you think how many variables could go into that just for swapping the cams in your car it's already quite a complex calculation, and the result is also subject to a few qualifications. Eg. the cam might work out more efficient if you use the car on track days at high revs, or much less efficient if you drive in traffic.
That's for a fairly well known change to a relatively predictable mechanical device with some fairly easily controlled variables.
Try doing that while accounting for all the possible variables in the British economy and the external factors which might influence that and it is simply an exercise in absurdity. The only possible purpose of which is to scare voters like Trif into thinking that leaving will make the country poorer. Don't fall for it.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff