The 'No to the EU' campaign Vol 2

[Burwood]

steveatesh said:

Burwood said:

The money doesn't bother me. Full trade benefits, no political interference and some controls over immigration such as the emergency brake is ok by me.

They will look after the economics first and foremost and Dr Norths roadmap has always been there to do that.

As far as I can see the vote was to leave the EU. How the government do that is up to them.

In my opinion having access to the single market with other advantages to go with that route will appeal to the majority of voters whichever side they voted.

Certainly appeals to me!

Agreed. It's closer union that bothers me the most.

[NRS]

Zod said:

sidicks said:

Zod said:

don't agree. The majority of Leave voters (not all here, please note, before you get upset) voted for £350m per week for the NHS and restrictions on immigration, both of which have now been discounted by various Leave campaigners. For such voters, the niceties of being in or out of the EEA or EFTA or relying on WTO rules are not a concern.

Not true

For you perhaps.

The reality is we don't really know how Leave is broken down into different arguments. It's just a coalition of people who wanted to leave. However now that the decision has been made it will splinter much more into different groups based on their reasoning for leaving the EU. Was it democracy, sovereignty, the wish to go more right/ left wing, the wish to protect jobs in the UK, just plain stupidity/racism? Each group will want a different solution for leaving depending upon their priorities.

[steveatesh]

FiF said:

Secondly, let's just imagine that Remain won. Just for a moment, based on a composite vote from:-

Full on political and fiscal union, join the Eurozone, yahoo!
Or as above but not sure about Euro
Or maybe ever closer union but a lot lot slower.
Or OK as is now but no further, no sirree!
Or Well it's got problems, needs some reform, but on balance.
Or It needs a lot of reforms, better to do that from within.
Or It's a complete crap fest, but can't possibly vote Leave because I want cheap mobile roaming to check Facebook in Ibiza, through Farage is for Leave so that decides it, through the Government says we will get World War 3 , boils and locusts, somebody said that down the student union, though was a bit pissed at the time.

So Remain have won, how are you going to rationalise that little lot, when the EU turns round and carried on, carrying on. Presumably that wouldn't be a political sham because you got the result you wanted, or probably looking at that little lot, maybe didn't.

Yes it's a blatant strawman argument, I don't apologise for that, but it's useful to show the ridiculous nature of the Remainder argument that it's not what many voted for.

The study shows that a sensible exit plan can bring a majority of the country together if people are prepared to be adults, accept the result and move on.

Sounds to me like PlasticPig has a bowl of sour grapes....... Or maybe he's playing the victim card for leavers

[loafer123]

Perhaps EEA plus a cap on EU migration [at current levels] each year would be the quickest easiest deal ever done?

[minimoog]

AJS- said:

minimoog said:

So you disagree with the view that in registering what is in effect an anti-Tory protest vote, the 'poor' (for want of a better word) have been unable to grasp the significance of what they are doing? Because the alternative seem to be that they have willingly voted in BoJo and Gove. And that seems a tad far-fetched does it not?


(Usual caveat on generalising applies, naturally.)

Yes I disagree with that. It's pure conjecture and rather patronising conjecture at that. Rich, poor, old, young, educated, uneducated and everyone else voted how they did for their own reasons.

There's a lot more to it than liking Gove and BoJo more than Cameron and Osborne.

You could also go down that road in the other direction and say that the guilt trip about Jo Cox or the elaborate scaremongering gave Remain more votes than it might have done.

The votes are counted and it won't change.

No of course it won't change. I'm not suggesting otherwise.

I'm not talking about everyone else. I'm talking about the disaffected poor. the former Labour core voters if you will.

So people who have protest voted against one lot of Tories and who consequently will now be ruled by another set of Tories who hold them in equal contempt are not misguided. We'll have to differ on that.

Neither side covered themselves in glory regarding scaremongering, but Farage's queues of refugees and indeed the whole 'immigration is destroying Britain' rhetoric trumps any amount of economic doomsaying in my book. Your book says different and that's fine.

[Burwood]

loafer123 said:

Perhaps EEA plus a cap on EU migration at [current levels] each year would be the quickest easiest deal ever done?

It seems to me that freedom of movement with the benefit brake is the best we can hope for but happy to be proven wrong. The EU will be looking to plug that 12b pa some how.

[AJS-]

But they haven't voted for Boris Johnson or anyone else. They have voted to leave the EU. That's all.

It may have strengthened his hand, but that is not the issue here and I don't even see that a desire to bloody Cameron's nose was a significant factor in how people voted.

[gizlaroc]

Zod said:

sidicks said:

Zod said:

don't agree. The majority of Leave voters (not all here, please note, before you get upset) voted for £350m per week for the NHS and restrictions on immigration, both of which have now been discounted by various Leave campaigners. For such voters, the niceties of being in or out of the EEA or EFTA or relying on WTO rules are not a concern.

Not true

For you perhaps.

Everyone I know who voted leave did so because they think the EU in its current form is fked financially and a beauracratic old boys club.

More people I know went from leave to remain with the immigrant issue because they felt ashamed to be associated with that side of the argument.

Also, no one I really knew thought the €350m a week was even a matter for debate by the end of it, I think once people started to realise it was less than 1% of the UKs overheads running the country it became a none issue, just a matter of "Don't take the piss out of us, taking our money and then telling us what we can spend some of it on as you had back 25%".

The biggest shock for me though was the amount of people who were avid remainers who suddenly seemed to swap sides on the last day after Juncker said "there is no reform from within, the deal is done, like it or leave."
Most I know 'left'.



I genuinely think the gap would have been even bigger if 'leave' had not even mentioned immigration or the €350m a week and had concerntrated on the EU debt trap and the power hungry Juncker and his little dictatorship.



Interestingly, I was at the cricket with a dozen guys on Friday. I will be honest I was dreading it, 3 of them work in London in commercial property aquisitions and sales, 2 are at Reuters, one works our of the Netherlands and buys and sells currency to large corporations, one sells energy on a very large scale across Europe, a surgeon and another one looks after a very nice protfolio for Brewin Dolphin.
Now, I was expecting all of them to give me a very, very hard time. All of them voted leave. All of them my age so mid 40s.

The only people that voted remain were the 2 guys still at Uni and a nurse.

Also, my daughters Uni friends that are doing politics and the ones doing economics all seemed to vote 'leave' so not all youngsters voted remain either.


I think it is a bit ignorant that many are saying that only uneducated and racist people voted leave.

[sidicks]

NRS said:

The reality is we don't really know how Leave is broken down into different arguments. It's just a coalition of people who wanted to leave. However now that the decision has been made it will splinter much more into different groups based on their reasoning for leaving the EU. Was it democracy, sovereignty, the wish to go more right/ left wing, the wish to protect jobs in the UK, just plain stupidity/racism? Each group will want a different solution for leaving depending upon their priorities.

You're making claims about 'the majority' - please explain your source of information for this claim...

[Sam All]

gizlaroc said:

Zod said:

sidicks said:

Zod said:

don't agree. The majority of Leave voters (not all here, please note, before you get upset) voted for £350m per week for the NHS and restrictions on immigration, both of which have now been discounted by various Leave campaigners. For such voters, the niceties of being in or out of the EEA or EFTA or relying on WTO rules are not a concern.

Not true

For you perhaps.

Everyone I know who voted leave did so because they think the EU in its current form is fked financially and a beauracratic old boys club.

More people I know went from leave to remain with the immigrant issue because they felt ashamed to be associated with that side of the argument.

Also, no one I really knew thought the €350m a week was even a matter for debate by the end of it, I think once people started to realise it was less than 1% of the UKs overheads running the country it became a none issue, just a matter of "Don't take the piss out of us, taking our money and then telling us what we can spend some of it on as you had back 25%".

The biggest shock for me though was the amount of people who were avid remainers who suddenly seemed to swap sides on the last day after Juncker said "there is no reform from within, the deal is done, like it or leave."
Most I know 'left'.



I genuinely think the gap would have been even bigger if 'leave' had not even mentioned immigration or the €350m a week and had concerntrated on the EU debt trap and the power hungry Juncker and his little dictatorship.



Interestingly, I was at the cricket with a dozen guys on Friday. I will be honest I was dreading it, 3 of them work in London in commercial property aquisitions and sales, 2 are at Reuters, one works our of the Netherlands and buys and sells currency to large corporations, one sells energy on a very large scale across Europe, a surgeon and another one looks after a very nice protfolio for Brewin Dolphin.
Now, I was expecting all of them to give me a very, very hard time. All of them voted leave. All of them my age so mid 40s.

The only people that voted remain were the 2 guys still at Uni and a nurse.

Also, my daughters Uni friends that are doing politics and the ones doing economics all seemed to vote 'leave' so not all youngsters voted remain either.


I think it is a bit ignorant that many are saying that only uneducated and racist people voted leave.

Good post.

[minimoog]

AJS- said:

But they haven't voted for Boris Johnson or anyone else. They have voted to leave the EU. That's all.

I of course don't know the numbers so perhaps I'm setting too much store by this protest vote theory, in which case you make a fair point. But the handing off of their futures to neolibertarian right wing rule, free of the protections offered by EU employment laws is surely against their best interests. But as one interviewee in the now-infamous Hartlepool said about voting Leave - "We've got nowt anyway so what difference does it make?"

[sidicks]

gizlaroc said:

Everyone I know who voted leave did so because they think the EU in its current form is fked financially and a beauracratic old boys club.

More people I know went from leave to remain with the immigrant issue because they felt ashamed to be associated with that side of the argument.

Also, no one I really knew thought the €350m a week was even a matter for debate by the end of it, I think once people started to realise it was less than 1% of the UKs overheads running the country it became a none issue, just a matter of "Don't take the piss out of us, taking our money and then telling us what we can spend some of it on as you had back 25%".

Since when were 'UK overheads' £35bn per week?

[sidicks]

minimoog said:

I of course don't know the numbers so perhaps I'm setting too much store by this protest vote theory, in which case you make a fair point. But the handing off of their futures to neolibertarian right wing rule, free of the protections offered by EU employment laws is surely against their best interests. But as one interviewee in the now-infamous Hartlepool said about voting Leave - "We've got nowt anyway so what difference does it make?"

Let me guess - you're a regular on Richard Murphy's blog? He can't write more than 3 sentences without referring to "neoliberalism", normally incorrectly.

[Murph7355]

Zod said:

sidicks said:

Zod said:

don't agree. The majority of Leave voters (not all here, please note, before you get upset) voted for £350m per week for the NHS and restrictions on immigration, both of which have now been discounted by various Leave campaigners. For such voters, the niceties of being in or out of the EEA or EFTA or relying on WTO rules are not a concern.

Not true

For you perhaps.

Come on chaps. I get better debate from my 4yr old.

Zod - can you not see that your comment was also a "for you perhaps"?

No one has any clue why the majority or any other portion voted the way they did. Polls think they can tell us. Polls haven't had a great track record for some time. Statisticians might think they can. They'd be talking bks too. We know the various pillars of both debates. Some will be stronger in some people's minds than others, but the chances are it took all of them to one degree or another to get the result we did (both ways).

[gizlaroc]

sidicks said:

Since when were 'UK overheads' £35bn per week?

Most of the remainers were saying that after all kick backs etc. it was less than 1% contribution.

This chart was flung around....




Many were saying at our net contribution of around £8.5b a year was more like 2% of total UK spending budget, but many I know found that a non issue.

[Sam All]

Murph7355 said:

Zod said:

sidicks said:

Zod said:

don't agree. The majority of Leave voters (not all here, please note, before you get upset) voted for £350m per week for the NHS and restrictions on immigration, both of which have now been discounted by various Leave campaigners. For such voters, the niceties of being in or out of the EEA or EFTA or relying on WTO rules are not a concern.

Not true

For you perhaps.

Come on chaps. I get better debate from my 4yr old.

Zod - can you not see that your comment was also a "for you perhaps"?

No one has any clue why the majority or any other portion voted the way they did. Polls think they can tell us. Polls haven't had a great track record for some time. Statisticians might think they can. They'd be talking bks too. We know the various pillars of both debates. Some will be stronger in some people's minds than others, but the chances are it took all of them to one degree or another to get the result we did (both ways).

The EU campaign had people committed like never before, for good and bad.

[plasticpig]

steveatesh said:

Sounds to me like PlasticPig has a bowl of sour grapes....... Or maybe he's playing the victim card for leavers

No sour grapes here. The problem with EEA is twofold. We would still be contributing to the EU coffers and the control of immigration. Although the EEA has an emergency brake clause where the UK could in theory limit free movement I am in no way convinced it could be used to limit immigration to 10's of thousands which is a stated government objective. The contribution formula to the EU for EEA members would mean there would be a saving from what we currently pay but nowhere near the £350m a week used by the Brexit campaign.

[AJS-]

minimoog said:

I of course don't know the numbers so perhaps I'm setting too much store by this protest vote theory, in which case you make a fair point. But the handing off of their futures to neolibertarian right wing rule, free of the protections offered by EU employment laws is surely against their best interests. But as one interviewee in the now-infamous Hartlepool said about voting Leave - "We've got nowt anyway so what difference does it make?"

Again, instead of telling people what is in their best interests and speculating as to why people voted as they did, why not look at who actually voted for what? Why not look at why the Leave campaign was able to motivate so many people to vote for it?

The two camps were often having a different argument. Many people are concerned about immigration, sovereignty, democratic government and national identity. The only real response from Remain was to either call them racists or to threaten economic collapse.

Did it even occur to them that just maybe some people care more about theae things than GDP or EU employment laws?

[minimoog]

sidicks said:

Let me guess - you're a regular on Richard Murphy's blog? He can't write more than 3 sentences without referring to "neoliberalism", normally incorrectly.

Never heard of him.

[Blue62]

For anyone who is interested this is a summary of a conference call my old school chum was engaged in today with Alistair Darling, he is based in NYC and works for an Investment Bank.

Summary of his comments:

- No one on either side prepared for this and as a result there will be major uncertainty, which is the worst thing you can have
- At least with the 2008 crisis, you knew what you were dealing with and, however hard, what the medicine was
- Elections in France and Germany next year will have a part to play in how Brexit is dealt with. It is thought that France has even more eurosceptics than the UK.
- To get any deal, it is thought that the UK will have to accept freedom of movement as it is a key part of EU philosophy. However, EU may have to moderate a bit on this as this is a key issue causing the unpopularity of the EU across Europe.
- Scotland - don't expect another referendum too soon. Key issues last time were 1) unpopularity of the Euro 2) Border control with England. On op of this, Oil revenues have significantly declined.
- Labour party in Chaos
- The chance of another UK referendum is very low, unless negotiations produce a deal that the govt. can go back to the population with that is meaningfully different
- Other countries - as much as the EU is unpopular, the key difference is the Euro and few countries will contemplate having to set up a new currency. In Scotland, the Euro was not popular
- Why did people vote leave? Put simply, the UK was the only country that joined for purely trade reasons and has always been detached from the rest of Europe's philosophical thinking about integration. If people personally saw no benefit from Europe, why stay in? Many see no benefit (or believe so, whatever the reality).

BUT - we are where we are, we have two years to negotiate, and we should take as long as is needed to create the best situation possible.

That's it, for what it is worth, he went on to say they expect a 25bps cut.