The Brexit vote is somewhat similar to the upcoming general election vote. If the immigration fears were removed, the remain would win by a landslide as would Clinton. Economically speaking Britain is better off staying, but that immigration fear button is an easy one to push. The remain will still likely win, but it’s a whole lot closer than most people would have guessed.
And if pigs had wings, they could fly.
And if pigs had wings, they could fly.[/quote]
Not necessarily. There’s animals that have wings that can’t fly Rowland. 
Immigration in the UK is far more if an issue than the US. Currently at 300,000 per year, we have no way to control our borders and low skilled workers are feeling the crush. Also UK has a welfare state, which just cannot survive with free movement of labour, services and infrastructure is exasperated. Major political parties have ignored the issue, as they are based in London and feel little of the negative effects. Working classes are having revenge.
You know little or nothing about UK politics. UKIP is not far right, look at the wiki. Remain is supported by the wealthy, the establishment and people who benefit from the status quo, economists included. EU is corrupt and run by bankers, just like most first world governments, so no surprise leaders are supporting. Dig a bit deeper, there is good reason why half the UK wants to leave. A vote for Remain is a vote for Goldman Sachs
Then be a good little Limey and fall in line. Important people know what’s best. Otherwise, you’re a hateful Nazi[/quote]
He’s American.
It’s a little more nuanced than that, Chris. UKIP all but collapsed after the last election and have no real mandate for anything. Farage is not popular: he’s too chavvy for the establishment, he’s too plummy for the chavs. There is a significant Brexit sector, although I would say they’ll lose (I’ll be surprised if Cameron has called it wrong, for various reasons) and for middle-class liberals to continue ridiculing and ignoring that voting sector is foolhardy, in a post-Corbyn environment. The fringes of the Conservative party have always been more working class than Labour, since Thatcher. Gove and Johnson recognise that and are manipulating it for when Cameron is finished.
Labour need to pull their finger out and stop shooting themselves in the foot with stuff like Emily Thornberry’s white van fuckup. They had the chance to throw a bit of a shadow with this campaign, but they’ve done nothing, as usual.[/quote]
The Labour Party is dead. The turkeys voted for Christmas by supporting Remain and then ridiculing the working classes for two months and calling them racist. There is no way back now. They should have just not taken any stance on the referendum. Bob Geldof sneering and lecturing fisherman illustrated this succinctly. Islington, wealthy, metropolitan SJW types hate the working man, but need their votes. Jog on!
Then be a good little Limey and fall in line. Important people know what’s best. Otherwise, you’re a hateful Nazi[/quote]
He’s American.
It’s a little more nuanced than that, Chris. UKIP all but collapsed after the last election and have no real mandate for anything. Farage is not popular: he’s too chavvy for the establishment, he’s too plummy for the chavs. There is a significant Brexit sector, although I would say they’ll lose (I’ll be surprised if Cameron has called it wrong, for various reasons) and for middle-class liberals to continue ridiculing and ignoring that voting sector is foolhardy, in a post-Corbyn environment. The fringes of the Conservative party have always been more working class than Labour, since Thatcher. Gove and Johnson recognise that and are manipulating it for when Cameron is finished.
Labour need to pull their finger out and stop shooting themselves in the foot with stuff like Emily Thornberry’s white van fuckup. They had the chance to throw a bit of a shadow with this campaign, but they’ve done nothing, as usual.[/quote]
The Labour Party is dead. The turkeys voted for Christmas by supporting Remain and then ridiculing the working classes for two months and calling them racist. There is no way back now. They should have just not taken any stance on the referendum. Bob Geldof sneering and lecturing fisherman illustrated this succinctly. Islington, wealthy, metropolitan SJW types hate the working man, but need their votes. Jog on!
Immigration in the UK is far more if an issue than the US. Currently at 300,000 per year, we have no way to control our borders and low skilled workers are feeling the crush. Also UK has a welfare state, which just cannot survive with free movement of labour, services and infrastructure is exasperated. Major political parties have ignored the issue, as they are based in London and feel little of the negative effects. Working classes are having revenge.[/quote]
I agree that Europe’s immigration issues are far more problematic than the US. I was just drawing a parallel that in 2016, immigration is a major issue on people’s mind and it will be a major swing factor in any votes. Without the immigration angle, I don’t think the “leave” camp, or Trump have a leg to stand on. With it, it’s a whole different ball game.
Whether Britain will be better off leaving or staying, that’s up to the long term to determine. However there does seem to be a couple misunderstandings on the part of the “leave” camp.
First off, Britain’s GDP is about 1.5 - 2% higher as a part of the EU. This fact cannot be ignored. Now the leave camp may argue that there are ways to close that gap once they leave, and maybe there are. There’s certainly some ideas on the table to make up for the loss. But simply ignoring the economic costs is definitely not wise. The net 8 billion pounds a year they pay in membership dues is completely dwarfed by the trade advantages they gain by having access to the open market.
Secondly, the leave camp seems to be under the impression that Britain can just close the border and re-negotiate trade deals after they leave. But any attempts to re-access Europe’s open market is going to require acceptance of free movement of labour anyway. There’s just no chance trade deals that don’t include that concession will ever go through. So leave or stay, the labour / immigration argument is not solved.
I think it would be better for Britain to stay, and for Europe as a whole to begin working on fixing the numerous systemic problems within the EU and Euro. 
Immigration in the UK is far more if an issue than the US. Currently at 300,000 per year, we have no way to control our borders and low skilled workers are feeling the crush. Also UK has a welfare state, which just cannot survive with free movement of labour, services and infrastructure is exasperated. Major political parties have ignored the issue, as they are based in London and feel little of the negative effects. Working classes are having revenge.[/quote]
I agree that Europe’s immigration issues are far more problematic than the US. I was just drawing a parallel that in 2016, immigration is a major issue on people’s mind and it will be a major swing factor in any votes. Without the immigration angle, I don’t think the “leave” camp, or Trump have a leg to stand on. With it, it’s a whole different ball game.
Whether Britain will be better off leaving or staying, that’s up to the long term to determine. However there does seem to be a couple misunderstandings on the part of the “leave” camp.
First off, Britain’s GDP is about 1.5 - 2% higher as a part of the EU. This fact cannot be ignored. Now the leave camp may argue that there are ways to close that gap once they leave, and maybe there are. There’s certainly some ideas on the table to make up for the loss. But simply ignoring the economic costs is definitely not wise. The net 8 billion pounds a year they pay in membership dues is completely dwarfed by the trade advantages they gain by having access to the open market.
Secondly, the leave camp seems to be under the impression that Britain can just close the border and re-negotiate trade deals after they leave. But any attempts to re-access Europe’s open market is going to require acceptance of free movement of labour anyway. There’s just no chance trade deals that don’t include that concession will ever go through. So leave or stay, the labour / immigration argument is not solved.
I think it would be better for Britain to stay, and for Europe as a whole to begin working on fixing the numerous systemic problems within the EU and Euro. [/quote]
That 2% makes absolutely no difference to most people: they have been poor for generations and simply do not give a fuck about this argument. They aren’t part of the middle-class economy, or are only tangentially part of it, and they blame EU memebership for stuff such as most of the bad effects of immigration such as overstretching of public services in the poorest areas. People vote experientially and tribally. Someone who lives on a street where African illegals burn rubbish in their yards is simply thinking ‘Fuck Turkey and Italy and France’, not ‘I’m concerned about the future of our trade deals.’. Telling them why they are wrong is not useful in the same way that telling anyone their core beliefs based on their experiences doesn’t work.
It’s also nearly impossible to substantiate a figure like GDP being 2% higher with EU membership because you cannot do a genuine A-B test. So there is conjecture and speculation on both sides. There are many other issues like national sovereignty, immigration, unreadable treaties and constitutions, expense accounts being abused, people losing jobs…
Free trade and open borders was used as a bait and switch to introduce other laws that ended up eroding our freedom to choose our future…
We stayed out of the Euro, our economy would have been even worse if we’d joined that doomed currency. Ask any young French person if they like the EU… last I heard, joblessness in France was very high.
Nigel Farage predicted all this 12 years ago.
They may say they don’t care, but it’s there regardless. You can ignore gravity if you like, but the apple still falls If they’ve been poor for generations, they will be poorER unless they can come up with real, actionable solutions to bridge the gap. I’m not saying solutions aren’t there. I’m just saying not many people are actually talking about them in any realistic way right now.
Explaining to someone why they may be wrong might not work in swinging their vote, but it’s surely the right thing to try to do anyway is it not? What do you suggest as an alternative to reasoned debate?
The leave camp has some good points, but they are ignoring some of the economic risks, and are falsely under the impression that trade deals without open labour markets are possible in Europe. That would put the entire EU at risk, and they simply won’t allow that to happen. How many countries would be next in line with referendums if that were to happen? The EU has systemic problems no doubt, and many feel it was a doomed experiment from the start, but they will fight to keep it alive as long as they can. They won’t let Britain win this one.
They may say they don’t care, but it’s there regardless. You can ignore gravity if you like, but the apple still falls If they’ve been poor for generations, they will be poorER unless they can come up with real, actionable solutions to bridge the gap. I’m not saying solutions aren’t there. I’m just saying not many people are actually talking about them in any realistic way right now. [/quote]
How? That is a general statement. Poverty is pretty much static. More or less of fuck all is irrelevant. Poor people vote the least of all in the UK, mostly because it’s difficult to remain on the electoral register if you are transient, but mostly because there is nothing to engage them in politics. They aren’t stakeholders.
You’re assuming that poverty is all the same and universal principles apply. If that were true, everyone would be doing what you think would be best for them.
Explaining to someone why they may be wrong might not work in swinging their vote, but it’s surely the right thing to try to do anyway is it not? What do you suggest as an alternative to reasoned debate? [/quote]
No, it’s not the right thing to do. It’s crass and largely a waste of time.
The mainstream method is to campaign, as political parties do, if you are interested in changing people’s political positions, although that’s pretty difficult. Campaigning sways people’s opinions, in a small amount of cases, whatever the figure is about how many people are swing voters. Advertising, spin, etc. ‘Reasoned debate’ is rarely that, it’s just people restating their position and as such, it’s not emotionally engaging. If every political group published a manifesto in plain English and then STFU and allowed people to read and decide, then the world would be a more interesting place. As it is, we’re stuck with speakers, not doers, as a rule (there are, of course, exceptions, but they rather prove the rule). So you end up with all the special little boys and girls from the university debating club running the world. Britain is not the worst in the world, but its mass media has been steadily declining in quality, so you just get people adopting increasingly polarised positions (tempered through dumbass newspaper comment sections and Facebook groups), in much the same way as the US is circling the intellectual drain with its guns and abortions crap.
The alternative? Just stop. Manifestos. Speeches. Reading things. Less of the endless internet shitfest that gets people like Jo Cox murdered as every little no-mark thinks their opinion is worth debating, and children who have never been told to sit down and shut up keep flapping their jaws/pounding their keyboards, picking up knives.
They are ignoring the economic risks because they are not relevant to their narrative. They don’t care. You write as if money is the most important consideration in a highly emotive question such as this. It simply isn’t, for a lot of voters because they are unaffected by economic fluctuations or because they would really rather take the unknown, unquantifiable economic hit.
The thing is, you’re applying general arguments, but ignoring or not perceiving the actual issues in people’s minds. If you have never had a job, you don’t care if trade with Germany is disrupted, you just don’t want illegal Nigerians burning rubbish in your street. Explaining why immigrants benefit the economy and why it’s important we give money to Turkey is not an intelligent way to engage ‘Leave’ voters. Now, of course, it’s a generalisation that ‘Leave’ voters are all poor. Of course that’s not true. But people in places such as west Yorkshire and south Wales (heartlands of the ‘Leave’ campaign) and many other places have been left behind by the closures of the pits and the steelworks and the shipyards, etc. They aren’t part of any economy and are deeply, deeply mistrustful of any ‘Remain’ politicians. The people that brought them Hillsborough, the Battle of Orgreave, Jimmy Savile, and so on and so on. This people will think you are stupid if you start going on about the economy because it doesn’t address any of the reasons for their choice.
Now, you won’t agree with me because you don’t agree with me. I’m not talking about the variables you think are important. See how it works?
[fwiw, I’m calling it as a ‘Remain’ victory, not because of anything, but simply because middle class people vote more. I may be wrong, but I called the Scottish referendum down to the percentage point. 
I’m going to look like a dickhead in the pub if I’m wrong. ]
Immigration in the UK is far more if an issue than the US. Currently at 300,000 per year, we have no way to control our borders and low skilled workers are feeling the crush. Also UK has a welfare state, which just cannot survive with free movement of labour, services and infrastructure is exasperated. Major political parties have ignored the issue, as they are based in London and feel little of the negative effects. Working classes are having revenge.[/quote]
I agree that Europe’s immigration issues are far more problematic than the US. I was just drawing a parallel that in 2016, immigration is a major issue on people’s mind and it will be a major swing factor in any votes. Without the immigration angle, I don’t think the “leave” camp, or Trump have a leg to stand on. With it, it’s a whole different ball game.
Whether Britain will be better off leaving or staying, that’s up to the long term to determine. However there does seem to be a couple misunderstandings on the part of the “leave” camp.
First off, Britain’s GDP is about 1.5 - 2% higher as a part of the EU. This fact cannot be ignored. Now the leave camp may argue that there are ways to close that gap once they leave, and maybe there are. There’s certainly some ideas on the table to make up for the loss. But simply ignoring the economic costs is definitely not wise. The net 8 billion pounds a year they pay in membership dues is completely dwarfed by the trade advantages they gain by having access to the open market.
Secondly, the leave camp seems to be under the impression that Britain can just close the border and re-negotiate trade deals after they leave. But any attempts to re-access Europe’s open market is going to require acceptance of free movement of labour anyway. There’s just no chance trade deals that don’t include that concession will ever go through. So leave or stay, the labour / immigration argument is not solved.
I think it would be better for Britain to stay, and for Europe as a whole to begin working on fixing the numerous systemic problems within the EU and Euro. [/quote]
That 2% makes absolutely no difference to most people: they have been poor for generations and simply do not give a fuck about this argument. They aren’t part of the middle-class economy, or are only tangentially part of it, and they blame EU memebership for stuff such as most of the bad effects of immigration such as overstretching of public services in the poorest areas. People vote experientially and tribally. Someone who lives on a street where African illegals burn rubbish in their yards is simply thinking ‘Fuck Turkey and Italy and France’, not ‘I’m concerned about the future of our trade deals.’. Telling them why they are wrong is not useful in the same way that telling anyone their core beliefs based on their experiences doesn’t work.[/quote]
THIS
Talking about the UK economy in terms of GDP is a waste of time. Most growth in the UK is in the finance sector who exist in a bubble to themselves. People dont care, they feel that they are losing their communities, lacking job opportunities and cant get simple things like doctors appointments, that were not a problem ten years ago.
UK is the second biggest economy in Europe and can negotiate a lot of things. The US has more trade with the EU but does not have free movement of labour.
The is no reforming the EU, the thing is run by bankers who who do not care.
Blagggghhhhh
[quote=“HenHaoChi”]
We stayed out of the Euro, our economy would have been even worse if we’d joined that doomed currency. Ask any young French person if they like the EU… last I heard, joblessness in France was very high.
Nigel Farage predicted all this 12 years ago.[/quote]
That’s the problem of France. Germany, on the other hand, has been doing pretty well, as are Germany’s other neighbours such as Austria and the Netherlands.
I know quite a few French people who are my age (early 20s) and none of them dislikes the EU. The EU is extremely popular amongst young Europeans, at least amongst those who are still students. All British people I know (well they are all my age as well) voted to stay as well.
Anyways, it seems like the UK is not going anywhere. The remain campaign was really bad but the catastrophic scenarios of Brexit still prevailed.
[quote=“Gain”][quote=“HenHaoChi”]
We stayed out of the Euro, our economy would have been even worse if we’d joined that doomed currency. Ask any young French person if they like the EU… last I heard, joblessness in France was very high.
Nigel Farage predicted all this 12 years ago.[/quote]
That’s the problem of France. Germany, on the other hand, has been doing pretty well, as are Germany’s other neighbours such as Austria and the Netherlands.
I know quite a few French people who are my age (early 20s) and none of them dislikes the EU. The EU is extremely popular amongst young Europeans, at least amongst those who are still students. All British people I know (well they are all my age as well) voted to stay as well.
Anyways, it seems like the UK is not going anywhere. The remain campaign was really bad but the catastrophic scenarios of Brexit still prevailed.[/quote]
Not true, many hate the EU in France.thelocal.fr/20160330/france- … han-the-uk
Of course Germany are doing well, the EU has gifted them a cheap currency to benefit their exports.
[quote=“OrangeOrganics”]
Not true, many hate the EU in France.thelocal.fr/20160330/france- … han-the-uk
Of course Germany are doing well, the EU has gifted them a cheap currency to benefit their exports.[/quote]
I said young people. The middle-aged and older population are usually more Euro-skeptic as they tend to blame all their problems on the easiest target, aka the Union.
The arguments of how the UK would just be like Norway upon Brexit are all extremely simple-minded.
Norway is a part of the European single market, it follows almost all the EU rules and also pays the EU a ton of money annually. The only reason why they did not join the EU is that they wanted to keep their fishing rights, which is subjected to the Common Fisheries Policies of the EU and the EU’s exclusive economic zone. By bypassing the EU, Norway and Iceland retain their fishing rights, but they do comply with pretty much everything else. It is the same deal with Switzerland. If they don’t, then there will be negative consequences coming from the side of the EU. For example, after the Swiss referendum on limitation of access of EU immigrants, the EU suspended Switzerland’s membership on the Erasmus programme, which is why there are so few Swiss exchange students in other European countries as the free grant was cancelled.
By leaving the European Union, the UK would also leave the single market (well Cameron himself said so), which essentially puts the UK in the same position as any other non-EU states, and all the tariffs will come back.
The background of this is WTO’s MFN (most favoured nation) principle. All the WTO member states agreed to apply a minimal standard on reducing tariffs and trade barriers so that the flow of trade would be a lot smoother back in the days, and the MFN principle was come up with in order to prevent discrimination, and it requires all member states to treat all nations equally. However, exceptions are allowed, which is called preferential trade agreement, the European single market is one of them. Other examples include North American Free Trade Agreement, Southern Common Market, ASEAN, and all the FTAs.
So if the UK leaves the EU, it would pull out from this preferential trade agreement, then it would have to impose all the tariffs on the imported goods and services from the EU, and vice versa (which means the EU would have to impose all the tariffs on the imported goods and services from the UK).If both the UK and the EU decide that they will eliminate the tariffs between them, they will have to do the same to all other countries due to the MFN principle, including manufacturing power houses like America, Japan, Korea, China etc.
The EU takes up about half of the UK’s trade, if the UK leaves… well I guess the result is pretty evident. The UK is not really a manufacturing power like Germany is, the brightest sector is easily its finance, and that is largely based on its status as the gateway to the largest and richest single market in the world. If the UK leaves that market, it loses that gateway status, then it’d not be a stretch to say that the whole thing would go down in the toilet.
Sure, it wouldn’t be easy on the EU but they could manage as there are 27 other member states, and quite a number of them are pretty healthy and competitive economically, however, it would be absolutely catastrophic for the British economy.
And that’s just the economic part of the reasoning of why the UK should remain.
The Leave camp is winning slightly, with 15 of 382 results in so far:
uk.reuters.com/subjects/eu-referendum
Leave winning even more:
REMAIN: 47.9%
473,506 votes
LEAVE LEADING BY 1.4 PCT
REMAIN: 49.3%
530,625 votes
50%
LEAVE: 50.7%
545,343 votes
19 OF 382 AREAS REPORTING
Results updated: June 24, 0:49 GMT
LEAVE LEADING BY 1.4 PCT
REMAIN: 49.3%
530,625 votes
50%
LEAVE: 50.7%
545,343 votes
20 OF 382 AREAS REPORTING
Results updated: June 24, 0:53 GMT
LEAVE LEADING BY 4.4 PCT
REMAIN: 47.8%
561,373 votes
50%
LEAVE: 52.2%
612,594 votes
Mostly the boonies, which tend to be more right wing.
Nice … attitudes like that reassure Brexiters they are making the right decision.
Chris, you don’t understand the right and left in Britain. To say that Sunderland is more right-wing than the south is just daft.
Seriously, I can tell you now how every ward will vote and why. And so can the government. Which begs the question, the real question, why are they holding this bread and circuses panto in the middle of Cameron’s term? Do you you think this vote is about whether or not we break with the EU?
Reuters have cut their live tracker. The Guardian’s one is still working…
Leave is now winning by 4 percent.
theguardian.com/politics/ng- … d-analysis
EU referendum live results — tracker
Remain
46%
950,557
Leave
54%
1,114,907
341 of 382 local authorities still to declare
St Helens voted to leave 6 minutes ago
Angus voted to remain 6 minutes ago
Denbighshire voted to leave 7 minutes ago
West Lothian voted to remain 10 minutes ago
Eden voted to leave 10 minutes ago
Harlow voted to leave 11 minutes ago
Redcar & Cleveland voted to leave 11 minutes ago
East Renfrewshire voted to remain 12 minutes ago
Bury voted to leave 15 minutes ago
City of London voted to remain 16 minutes ago