The 'No to the EU' campaign

[rs1952]

robm3 said:

AstonZagato said:

I am a partner in a financial services company.

We are looking at a move to Dublin, if the vote starts to look like an out.

I'm sure we are not alone.

That doesn't mean I'm blindly pro-EU. I have used the freedom of movement to work abroad. I rather enjoyed that.

I believe that the people should choose. We were never asked whether we wanted to sign up to ever closer union. We were asked if we wanted to join a Common Market. I like the idea of a common market. An overarching super state is less to my taste but, if my fellow citizens want it, so be it.

Well I see one or two benefits, lots of financial service companies would leave London. Instantly dropping house prices and the ratio of knobs to normal people in one fell swoop....

And also dropping the Treasury tax take in one fell swoop too, resulting in taxation increases for all the rest of us.

Still think its a good idea?

[turbobloke]

AstonZagato said:

robm3 said:

AstonZagato said:

I am a partner in a financial services company.

We are looking at a move to Dublin, if the vote starts to look like an out.

I'm sure we are not alone.

That doesn't mean I'm blindly pro-EU. I have used the freedom of movement to work abroad. I rather enjoyed that.

I believe that the people should choose. We were never asked whether we wanted to sign up to ever closer union. We were asked if we wanted to join a Common Market. I like the idea of a common market. An overarching super state is less to my taste but, if my fellow citizens want it, so be it.

Welll I see one or two benefits, lots of financial service companies would leave London. Instantly dropping house prices and the ratio of knobs to normal people in one fell swoop....

So the tax take drops substantially, tax rates skyrocket for the average working family, benefits are cut, the NHS closes, banks fail, no money to bail them out, Sterling collapses, the four horsemen ride across the land.

Tax rates for 'working families' skyrocketing doesn't automatically follow, and NHS closure must have been mentioned for comic effect. The rest was funnier still.

We've already seen 1 in 4 hedge funds leave the UK by 2010 in a Labour-inspired hedgie exodus at an estimated cost of over £0.5bn annually iirc (so between £5bn and £10bn in total) and we're being fed lower allowances at basic and higher rates with George Osborne pledging to 'protect the NHS' rather than close it, with a guaranteed £8 billion increase in spending per year above inflation by 2020.

Benefit cuts for those able but not willing to exercise self-reliance - was that meant to be a bad thing?

[mph1977]

zygalski said:

s2art said:

And wrong again. There are many analyses out there, now including one from the BoE. As I said, do your own homework.

My homework suggests that the BoE analysis hasn't yet begun.
I have to say, your argument is not convincing me that leaving the EU is in our best collective interests.

the UK is in an interesting position with regard to the EU - the nation that should have been i nthe EUro but wasn;t vs some of the States in the EUro who shouldn;t have been until their economic and structural issues were solved ... ( however the Germans suffering their two fold collective guilt (WW2 and letting the USSR /WarPac take control of the East and some other historically German territory) pushed to get everyone in ).

leaving the EU puts us 'outside'; for the purposes of various things what makes you think that Nissan, Honda and Toyota in particular , as well as the bits of Airbus that are in the UK won;t be pulled in fairly quickly ... as we've seen all ready with consumer electronics in some cases where lower wage costs in accession states caused a decision to move ) ... this is aside from the finance industry and various other things ...

if we do exit i predict the Mayors of Dublin and frankfurt having a massive bender - along with various other Maoyrs around the EU , as finance moves to Frankfurt and companies who want an English speaking HQ within the EU look at Ireland and perhaps the Netherlands as somewhere with bilingual at least natives ( the Dutch do prefer english as their first choice second language ... perhaps unsuprisingly given the historicla links with the Uk that date back a long way)

[turbobloke]

mph1977 said:

...what makes you think that Nissan, Honda and Toyota in particular , as well as the bits of Airbus that are in the UK won;t be pulled in fairly quickly...

Apart from the fact that from around 2002 Ghosn has been threatening to pull Nissan if the UK didn't join the EZ. We didn't join, the EZ started melting, Nissan is still here, and Ghosn shut his mouth - at least for a while. Whenever it opens again, it's same old.

The thing about scaremongering is that for continued effect, any at all, it has to escalate, and given it had little credibility at the outset this just makes things more obvious and actually dilutes the impact.

[AstonZagato]

I would have thought the four horsemen comment was a tiny clue that I wasn't entirely serious.

But given that 1/3rd of income taxes are paid by the top 1pct (which will be disproportionately from the City and /or non doms) who might leave if there is an out vote, there will be a substantial drop in tax. That has to be made up from somewhere. As the average working person can't leave and are the largest in number, the tax take from them will need to rise. Spending items such as benefits and the NHS will get squeezed.

Banks are still horrendously exposed to property. A collapse in London would cause a good few institutions much pain. Some might need propping up. The tax take has fallen and the government is struggling with debt from the last GFC. How can they do it? Runs on banks lead to contagion risks. Even the healthy struggle for liquidity.

I was exaggerating for effect but there is nevertheless a grain of truth. It does not take an enormous logical leap for bad things to happen. And this is not a call for an in vote. I'd personally prefer us to have a less close relationship with the EU. I wouldn't mind a few years in Dublin or Luxembourg. I'd probably pay less tax. . Certainly less to the UK.

It's just that there are risks to getting rid of the "knobs" who work in financial services and rebasing London property downwards.

Be careful what you wish for.

[turbobloke]

AstonZagato said:

I would have thought the four horsemen comment was a tiny clue that I wasn't entirely serious.

As a sign-off?! OK

AstonZagato said:

Be careful what you wish for.

I wish we were out of the evolving disaster known as the EU.

[elster]

mph1977 said:

zygalski said:

s2art said:

And wrong again. There are many analyses out there, now including one from the BoE. As I said, do your own homework.

My homework suggests that the BoE analysis hasn't yet begun.
I have to say, your argument is not convincing me that leaving the EU is in our best collective interests.

the UK is in an interesting position with regard to the EU - the nation that should have been i nthe EUro but wasn;t vs some of the States in the EUro who shouldn;t have been until their economic and structural issues were solved ... ( however the Germans suffering their two fold collective guilt (WW2 and letting the USSR /WarPac take control of the East and some other historically German territory) pushed to get everyone in ).

leaving the EU puts us 'outside'; for the purposes of various things what makes you think that Nissan, Honda and Toyota in particular , as well as the bits of Airbus that are in the UK won;t be pulled in fairly quickly ... as we've seen all ready with consumer electronics in some cases where lower wage costs in accession states caused a decision to move ) ... this is aside from the finance industry and various other things ...

if we do exit i predict the Mayors of Dublin and frankfurt having a massive bender - along with various other Maoyrs around the EU , as finance moves to Frankfurt and companies who want an English speaking HQ within the EU look at Ireland and perhaps the Netherlands as somewhere with bilingual at least natives ( the Dutch do prefer english as their first choice second language ... perhaps unsuprisingly given the historicla links with the Uk that date back a long way)

I can't see finance moving to Frankfurt, Dublin perhaps but not Frankfurt. Also without the UK then the Tobin Tax would be high on their lists of priorities in a way to bring in extra revenue to cover the shortfall of the UK leaving.

I wouldn't ever see Airbus losing Brits working for them, nothing would get done otherwise. Doubt the car manufacturers would be looking to leave due to employment laws in most of the countries where would be favorable.

As for the actual campaign Matt Sinclair is running it and is certainly not short of a few connections. I can see there will need to be a cap on spending as there is no shortage of funding for the No to EU campaign and would expect similar if not more coming in for the Yes. Americans funding No, Europeans funding Yes.

[TKF]

If the Out side wants to win I think they need to focus less on the financial side of things and more on the "Britishness" aspect. The financial argument is all hunch based and people don't generally like risk, preferring instead to stay with the status quo.

The best arguement I've seen is one politician who was honest and said "If it means we're all a little worse off I'm willing to accept that to get our country back". That would mean accepting the other side is right on the economics argument and so they'll not use it. And they will lose.

[Willy Nilly]

AstonZagato said:

I am a partner in a financial services company.

We are looking at a move to Dublin, if the vote starts to look like an out.

I'm sure we are not alone.

That doesn't mean I'm blindly pro-EU. I have used the freedom of movement to work abroad. I rather enjoyed that.

I believe that the people should choose. We were never asked whether we wanted to sign up to ever closer union. We were asked if we wanted to join a Common Market. I like the idea of a common market. An overarching super state is less to my taste but, if my fellow citizens want it, so be it.

Why would "you" move to Dublin if the UK pulled out of the EU?

The British Islands are sort of half way between the far east at the US so you can do business with both in a working day (probably a long one). This won't change if we leave the EU. I'm guessing that financial services businesses work in London because of its central location, it's skilled workforce in that area, there are a plentiful supply of lawyers and accountants nearby, they have London City, Heathrow and Gatwick to hand and an international train station. Then there are are regulations and taxation.

What of these things would change if we left the EU? There is nothing stopping the UK Government implementing some rather attractive taxation and regularity packages to keep the financial sector here

Switzerland isn't in the EU but Credit Suisse operate here, so why would they leave? Why would someone from China or Saudi Arabia stop doing business here?

Same with Honda, BMW, Toyota, VW and Nissan. The cars they build here go all over the world, yes the bulk probably go into the EU, so why would they pull out when they have the people, building, skills and infrastructure already in place and have been operating with £ Sterling all this time anyway?

To reiterate,

my and probably others perception is, rightly or wrongly, that the EU has a huge amount of influence on laws that we have to abide by while we, the British public, don't get much if any say on who makes these laws. They seem to be made by unknown, faceless, unelected and unaccountable people. This is the issue. If my perception is wrong, then feel free to show me how I/we can have my/our say. When was the EU presidential election? Who the hell is even the president? I never got a vote. Maybe I missed it.

Say what you like about our electoral system, but people get voted out. Look at the high profile politicians that lost their seats this time. This never happens at EU level.

Why should we have the same rules as Germany, Poland, Greece, France, Italy etc? They are all different countries with different history, different economies and different people.

Edited by Willy Nilly on Monday 25th May 11:36

[mikeiow]

I certainly wish we had less overarching influence from the EU....I recall my parents telling me how they voted for a trading treaty....and over the years it has gradually changed into contact with most elements of society, and at what I percieve to be a high cost.
Even on that, it is hard to find The Truth: I can read articles like http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/6... and easily be persuaded that it clearly costs us a fortune staying in Europe.....but how true is it.....I don't know, and like most people in Britain, I am not an economist, nor have endless days to research as one member here suggests we all do.....

I do hope Cameron can negotiate some things well.....my fear is they are wading in without understanding the meaning of the word "negotiate".
I doubt the Country would vote for such a massive-sounding change as "exit" - never underestimate the power of inertia and apathy - even if I personally suspect it would not make a massive difference to our economy.....

Right now I am firmly on the fence: there is no single easy place to find solid accurate information: I am very aware that 74% of statistics are made up on the spot....we live in interesting times!

[turbobloke]

If a company is benefiting from EU cartel/protectionism/subsidies and wants to move to keep the gravy train rolling that's exactly what it should do, as long as the rest of us in the UK aren't required to continue funding the authoritarian socialist monolith behind the dependency business models. Those that can will, those that partake in endless posturing (Nissan) can do one if they like.

[anonymous-user]

turbobloke said:

mph1977 said:

...what makes you think that Nissan, Honda and Toyota in particular , as well as the bits of Airbus that are in the UK won;t be pulled in fairly quickly...

Apart from the fact that from around 2002 Ghosn has been threatening to pull Nissan if the UK didn't join the EZ. We didn't join, the EZ started melting, Nissan is still here, and Ghosn shut his mouth - at least for a while. Whenever it opens again, it's same old.

The thing about scaremongering is that for continued effect, any at all, it has to escalate, and given it had little credibility at the outset this just makes things more obvious and actually dilutes the impact.

I think all of the major manufacturers would think twice about turning their backs on the UK, as would Germany.

2nd largest market in the EU for new cars, BMWs 4th largest market, similarly important for Mercedes? Look at the numbers.

I would much rather we stay in an emasculated and controlled EU but to let them carry on as they have been doing spells disaster for us all, sooner rather than later.

I understand the 'risk' of financial institutions leaving but they have been saying that at every opportunity for many years, and for many reasons. Put up or shut up, as they say, do you really think you'd be better off in a fiscally incompetent EU?

[zygalski]

How often should we have a referendum with regards to EU membership?
I'm thinking every 5 years, like a parliamentary term. Therefore we can quickly rectify a split if it all goes tits up & get back in sharpish. After all, the Kippers will all end up demanding another referendum if the vote is to stay in. What's sauce for the goose....
I'm sure the EU won't mind us popping in & out of the community every few years.

[AJS-]

turbobloke said:

If a company is benefiting from EU cartel/protectionism/subsidies and wants to move to keep the gravy train rolling that's exactly what it should do, as long as the rest of us in the UK aren't required to continue funding the authoritarian socialist monolith behind the dependency business models. Those that can will, those that partake in endless posturing (Nissan) can do one if they like.

Exactly this. The idea that a developed country of 60+ million can't survive perfectly well outside a political union is preposterous.

I found it both irritating and amusing that Open Europe made the absurd guess, under the guise of a detailed study, that GDP in 2030 might be up to 2.2% lower if we leave the EU. As though there were some sense in which an estimate of a small fraction of an abstract number 15 years hence were an argument against self government and parliamentary democracy.

[turbobloke]

REALIST123 said:

turbobloke said:

mph1977 said:

...what makes you think that Nissan, Honda and Toyota in particular , as well as the bits of Airbus that are in the UK won;t be pulled in fairly quickly...

Apart from the fact that from around 2002 Ghosn has been threatening to pull Nissan if the UK didn't join the EZ. We didn't join, the EZ started melting, Nissan is still here, and Ghosn shut his mouth - at least for a while. Whenever it opens again, it's same old.

The thing about scaremongering is that for continued effect, any at all, it has to escalate, and given it had little credibility at the outset this just makes things more obvious and actually dilutes the impact.

I think all of the major manufacturers would think twice about turning their backs on the UK, as would Germany.

2nd largest market in the EU for new cars, BMWs 4th largest market, similarly important for Mercedes? Look at the numbers.

I would much rather we stay in an emasculated and controlled EU but to let them carry on as they have been doing spells disaster for us all, sooner rather than later.

I understand the 'risk' of financial institutions leaving but they have been saying that at every opportunity for many years, and for many reasons. Put up or shut up, as they say, do you really think you'd be better off in a fiscally incompetent EU?

ISWYM but the likelihood of meaningful and lasting reform i.e. never closer union is nil, so the better option is to leave.

Nissan and Ghosn have lost credibility, it's difficult to take any future threat seriously. If they decide to go - and it's unlikely - more jobs are being created in a week than would be lost, including the supply chain.

The chances of the EU becoming less authoritarian and more financially prudent with fully signed-off accounts are even lower than the ECB base rate. The UK has its share of comedians in politics but the people running the EU show are clowns and having any aspect of our future prosperity under their dogmatic and malign control is hardly prudent.

[V88Dicky]

Can anyone ever see a day when we join, or are invited to join, NAFTA?

How would being a member of that trading bloc, and it is just trade as far as I can see, affect the UK? Would it be a good thing?

[turbobloke]

AJS- said:

I found it both irritating and amusing that Open Europe made the absurd guess, under the guise of a detailed study, that GDP in 2030 might be up to 2.2% lower if we leave the EU. As though there were some sense in which an estimate of a small fraction of an abstract number 15 years hence were an argument against self government and parliamentary democracy.

There's bound to be a lot more scaremongering ahead, all of it as unconvincing as that ^ from OE which nevertheless "might be" difficult to beat!

[BlackLabel]

elster said:

I can't see finance moving to Frankfurt, Dublin perhaps but not Frankfurt. Also without the UK then the Tobin Tax would be high on their lists of priorities in a way to bring in extra revenue to cover the shortfall of the UK leaving.

I wouldn't ever see Airbus losing Brits working for them, nothing would get done otherwise. Doubt the car manufacturers would be looking to leave due to employment laws in most of the countries where would be favorable.

As for the actual campaign Matt Sinclair is running it and is certainly not short of a few connections. I can see there will need to be a cap on spending as there is no shortage of funding for the No to EU campaign and would expect similar if not more coming in for the Yes. Americans funding No, Europeans funding Yes.

Perception is everything. All the 'stay in' campaign needs to do is plant a seed of uncertainty around businesses such as Nissan, Airbus or the banks leaving the UK and their job is done. History suggests that during such referendums undecided voters tend to stick with the status quo/the devil they know not because they particularly like the current situation but because change makes people feel uncomfortable.

[turbobloke]

BlackLabel said:

elster said:

I can't see finance moving to Frankfurt, Dublin perhaps but not Frankfurt. Also without the UK then the Tobin Tax would be high on their lists of priorities in a way to bring in extra revenue to cover the shortfall of the UK leaving.

I wouldn't ever see Airbus losing Brits working for them, nothing would get done otherwise. Doubt the car manufacturers would be looking to leave due to employment laws in most of the countries where would be favorable.

As for the actual campaign Matt Sinclair is running it and is certainly not short of a few connections. I can see there will need to be a cap on spending as there is no shortage of funding for the No to EU campaign and would expect similar if not more coming in for the Yes. Americans funding No, Europeans funding Yes.

Perception is everything. All the 'stay in' campaign needs to do is plant a seed of uncertainty around businesses such as Nissan, Airbus or the banks leaving the UK and their job is done. History suggests that during such referendums undecided voters tend to stick with the status quo/the devil they know not because they particularly like the current situation but because change makes people feel uncomfortable.

And yet the first 1975 referendum on the 'Common Market' took the route of change, given that the EU is now totally different!

Scaremongering isn't cutting it, the EU would seem to be even scarier.

[dbdb]

davepoth said:

NicD said:

I don't understand your 'certainty'. If what you say has any veracity, explain why DC, voted in by a relative landslide, has made the Ref such a priority?

Because of all the Eurosceptics in the Conservative Party. He doesn't have a majority without them, which he did when he was in coalition (rather perversely). If he wants to govern with any semblance of order he needs to keep them in line. A referendum, whatever the outcome, will shut them up at least until the next over-reaching EU treaty.

Cameron's EU referendum has more to do with internal Conservative party politics - containing and appeasing the Eurosceptic right - than it ever has with the British electorate.

The Conservatives did not win the election on the back of the EU referendum - it is not a clarion call to the British people, at least not to those outside the hot house of Piston Heads. The Conservatives did not win the election even because they are their ideas are in any way popular. The Conservatives (just about) won the election because the alternative was so unpalatable.

Cameron's government is not a government with a popular mandate - it is a government elected because of fear of the potentially dire consequences of a Labour government.

Indeed, there are parallels in the way the electorate played it safe in the way they voted in the general election (voting against the fear of Labour) to how it may vote in the EU referendum. The ordinary voters have no love for the EU, but then they probably don't hate it either. Farage grasped this - that the UK public are rather ambivalent to the EU, placing down their list of priorities. This is why he targeted immigration - which is not really an EU specific issue, but a much wider one.

As to the practicalities, I have stopped trying to predict what Cameron with do - other than that he will cave in to whomever is currently shouting loudest.

As an aside, if the UK electorate votes to stay in rather than leave the EU, will the Eurosceptic Tory Right accept the result with good grace? - Or will nothing change, with regular calls for a referendum for an 'out' at every bump in the road, like some of the more extreme Scottish Nationalists?