Is the Brexit referendum too early?

[Mungler]

I'm quite relaxed about all of it now - if we stay in we'll only be in until the Euro collapses, and if there is something to be thankful for it is that we didn't throw away the pound for the Euro.

 

I take it we have all watched 'Brexit the movie' by now? Good. As you were.

[motty]

I'm worried. My missus was having the debate at the school where she is a TA, earlier. She was the only person present who will vote out. All the others have been brainwashed into thinking we will face economic armageddon.

[rodp]

Jesus - is there anyone or anything that isn't part of the perceived conspiracy against Vote Leave?

• The vote's too early - conspiracy! It's too late - conspiracy!
• Every single independent economic institute and think-tank worth a damn says Britain will be worse off - conspiracy!
• Our amateur-hour cavalier rhetoric has actually alienated some of our own economists - conspiracy!
• The Daily Mail has started accusing others of scaremongering to suit their agenda - rank hypocrisy conspiracy!
• The nearest approximation to the core Brexit voter is the Baby Boomer egoists and some people are starting to question their altruism - conspiracy!
• Nobody listens when I call the IFS a propaganda machine, and then they whisper "Have a word" when I say, "Young voters should all be forced to listen to Nigel down the pub because nobody puts the world to rights like right-minded Nig." - conspiracy!

I've struggled to decide which way to vote in the referendum, because in spite of the best efforts of the Vote Leave protagonists to conceal them with utter garbage, I think there are some legitimate reasons to consider it. I'm currently pro-remain - in a nutshell because I've no confidence that the problems identified by Vote Leave will get fixed by "Brexit".

 

I would say that it is a real shame for those who are certain about leaving that Boris and Gove have had so much of the limelight. In my view Farage actually has more credibility in this debate than both of those two self-servers.

 

I've debated the merits of sticking my head above the parapet here where the consensus appears against my position. But in the end I thought it might of some benefit to some to see that if there are a few votes to remain, that they are legitimate votes and not just the result of SPECTRE or HYDRA or whichever nefarious organisation it's believed is pulling the strings.

 

As you were!

Well if you want to vote for a million more immigrants,( mostly muslim) coming in over the next three years that's your choice. Just hope you'll do your bit and have them live near you because we're full round here

[12gauge82]

I personally think it will surprise and be quite a large majority who vote to leave. Some people will be voting out for the right reasons the majority will be voting out for the wrong reasons (immigration, muslims etc) whatever the reasons the outcome should be the right one. I speak to such a broad range of people in my job and so far the only person who I know is voting in will be an old school friend who spent years working in Austria.

 

It is the right time imo at least we have chance to get out before the ship sinks and takes us with it!

Why is concern's regarding mass immigration caused by EU membership a illegitimate reason to vote brexit? I personally feel it's a huge reason to vote out

[rodp]

Why is concern's regarding mass immigration caused by EU membership a illegitimate reason to vote brexit? I personally feel it's a huge reason to vote out

Perhaps because it doesn't personally affect him ...................................... yet ?

[Granett]

Rodp, I live in Southwark, London. How about you? Let me know, and we can find comparative statistics.

 

Also, can you tell me your source for the Muslim immigration statistics?

 

In the meantime here are two reports from Ipsos Mori and the London School of Economics:-

 

https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3466/Perceptions-are-not-reality-Things-the-world-gets-wrong.aspx

 

http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/EA019.pdf

 

Some extracts from those reports:-

 

"Muslims: we hugely over-estimate the proportion of Muslims in Britain we think one in five British people are Muslims (21%) when the actual figure is 5% (one in twenty).

 

Immigration: we think 24% of the population are immigrants which is nearly twice the real figure of 13%.

 

But the rest of the world is just as wrong

 

Muslims: people across just about all countries hugely overestimate the proportion of their population that are Muslim: the average guess across the countries is 16% when the actual proportion is 3%. For example, on average people in France think 31% of the population are Muslim, when the actual figure is only 8%. In Australia the average guess is nine times the actual proportion: people estimate it at 18%, when the actual proportion is only 2%."

 

"There is still no evidence of an overall negative impact of immigration on jobs, wages, housing or the crowding out of public services. Any negative impacts on wages of less skilled groups are small. One of the largest impacts of immigration seems to be on public perceptions."

[ferguson_tom]

Why is concern's regarding mass immigration caused by EU membership a illegitimate reason to vote brexit? I personally feel it's a huge reason to vote out

Sorry should of said the illegitimate reason of Muslim migration. There are a lot of people who think voting out will all of a sudden stop the asylum seekers from Syria, afganhistan etc trying to enter the UK. The free movement within the EU is for EU residents and as far as I know there are no 'Muslim' European countries.

 

I agree general mass immigration is a huge concern but this would not been such a problem if the EU were strict on who they allowed in rather than allowing any country just because they are in Europe!

[Vince Green]

Its not about immigration to me, its about paying a lot to be a member of a club that is bankrupt and most of the members are just sponging off us.

 

Its not going anywhere so why go down the pan with them?

 

Like a rat leaving a sinking ship? yes basically that's right. No shame in getting out while we still can is there?

[12gauge82]

Sorry should of said the illegitimate reason of Muslim migration. There are a lot of people who think voting out will all of a sudden stop the asylum seekers from Syria, afganhistan etc trying to enter the UK. The free movement within the EU is for EU residents and as far as I know there are no 'Muslim' European countries.

 

I agree general mass immigration is a huge concern but this would not been such a problem if the EU were strict on who they allowed in rather than allowing any country just because they are in Europe!

Ah gotcha

[Elmer Fudd.]

Confusion on which polls are correct.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/ladbrokes-data-shows-big-swing-towards-leave-brexit-vote-2016-5

One reason why betting behaviour has changed so dramatically this week might be the YouGov and ICM online opinion polls published on Monday that said that the race between the two campaigns was exactly neck-and-neck.

The results of opinion polls conducted online continue to show a really close contest — despite phone polls, analysts, and bookmakers indicating leads for Remain ranging from steady to very commanding.

It's possible that Britain's punters feel that there's a realistic possibility that the phone pollsters and analysts are misreading public opinion and online pollsters are being more accurate.

 

 

Vote remain and bend over and prepare for a liberal application of KY Jelly.....

Edited May 28, 2016 by Elmer Fudd.

[Mungler]

I think the out voters are well motivated and that there will be a high turn out at the polls.

[lord_seagrave]

My postal vote is done and on its way back.

 

 

LS

[simjakcal]

My postal vote is done and on its way back.

 

 

LS

 

yep mine arrived this morning.....OUT !!!

[Les*1066]

Its not about immigration to me, its about paying a lot to be a member of a club that is bankrupt and most of the members are just sponging off us.

 

Its not going anywhere so why go down the pan with them?

 

Like a rat leaving a sinking ship? yes basically that's right. No shame in getting out while we still can is there?

^^^ This ^^^

[Granett]

Vince, I'm unaware of newer or more unbiased research than the IFS study:-

 

http://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/8296

 

An extract:

 

"In the short run, our estimates therefore suggest that the overall effect of Brexit would be to damage the public finances. On the basis of estimates by NIESR, the effect could be between £20 billion and £40 billion in 201920, more than enough to wipe out the planned surplus. In the long run, lower GDP would likely mean lower cash levels of public spending."

[Danger-Mouse]

Vince, I'm unaware of newer or more unbiased research than the IFS study:-

 

http://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/8296

 

An extract:

 

"In the short run, our estimates therefore suggest that the overall effect of Brexit would be to damage the public finances. On the basis of estimates by NIESR, the effect could be between £20 billion and £40 billion in 201920, more than enough to wipe out the planned surplus. In the long run, lower GDP would likely mean lower cash levels of public spending."

 

lol @ "unbiased"

 

From their own webpage

 

Finance

How we are funded

The IFS is non-profit and non-political and receives funding from arrange of sources, including the Economic and Social Research Council, UK Government departments, foundations, the European Union, international organisations, companies and other non-profit organisations.

 

If you want be to believe a report that says we`re better off "In" then find me one by a group that has absolutely no funding from "them".

 

Even ignoring that they`re hardly "whiter than white".

 

From Wiki

 

Criticism

The Institute frequently speaks out on politically important issues and has at different times been criticised from both sides of the political spectrum. In October 2010, Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg accused the IFS of using methods that were "distorted and a complete nonsense"[12] after it challenged government claims that tax and benefit reforms in the June 2010 Budget were "progressive."[13] Left-wing think tank Tax Research UK stated in a report that the "Institute for Fiscal Studies is a body that persistently recommends tax increases that benefit the wealthiest in society at cost to those who make their living from work and the poorest in society".[14] On another occasion, the right-leaning magazine The Spectator published a leader stating that "‘institutes’ funded by research grants (which means, usually, tax money) will always argue for more expensive meddling by the state" and that the Institute for Fiscal Studies was "the most striking example" of this.[15]

Edited May 28, 2016 by Danger-Mouse

[12gauge82]

 

lol @ "unbiased"

 

From their own webpage

 

Finance

How we are funded

The IFS is non-profit and non-political and receives funding from arrange of sources, including the Economic and Social Research Council, UK Government departments, foundations, the European Union, international organisations, companies and other non-profit organisations.

 

If you want be to believe a report that says we`re better off "In" then find me one by a group that has absolutely no funding from "them".

 

Even ignoring that they`re hardly "whiter than white".

 

From Wiki

 

Criticism

The Institute frequently speaks out on politically important issues and has at different times been criticised from both sides of the political spectrum. In October 2010, Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg accused the IFS of using methods that were "distorted and a complete nonsense"[12] after it challenged government claims that tax and benefit reforms in the June 2010 Budget were "progressive."[13] Left-wing think tank Tax Research UK stated in a report that the "Institute for Fiscal Studies is a body that persistently recommends tax increases that benefit the wealthiest in society at cost to those who make their living from work and the poorest in society".[14] On another occasion, the right-leaning magazine The Spectator published a leader stating that "institutes funded by research grants (which means, usually, tax money) will always argue for more expensive meddling by the state" and that the Institute for Fiscal Studies was "the most striking example" of this.[15]

The whole EU system is rotten, I intuitively knew it but this just proves it. Goldman Sachs backing the remain side was enough for me, what's good for them is going to be bad for everyone else.

[Granett]

Danger Mouse, we're back to the Conspiracy!

 

Is that what most people voting to leave "for the economic argument" believe about the IFS?

 

Whose figures are more unbiased in your view?

[Mungler]

That's an estimate. Truth is, no one knows. However, the possible damage an exit may cause is neither a positive nor a cogent argument to remain.

 

Granett, just out of interest did you ever in the past argue that the UK should adopt the Euro currency?

[Danger-Mouse]

Danger Mouse, we're back to the Conspiracy!

 

Is that what most people voting to leave "for the economic argument" believe about the IFS?

 

Whose figures are more unbiased in your view?

 

How are we back to conspiracy? You stated the IFS was unbiased and I pointed out that part of their funding was provided by the EU. To believe that an organisation that is partially funded by the EU is unlikely to provide a report that suggests leaving that organisation is imo a pretty rational belief. It certainly casts doubt as to their bias even if it doesn`t completely prove it. As the saying goes "you don`t kill the goose that lays the golden eggs".

 

I will admit that an unbiased report may be impossible, or at least, very difficult, to find. Most people/organisations will have an opinion on leaving and will skew the evidence to support their argument. The economist Patrick Mimford writing for The Hampden Trust and The Freedom Association believes we`ll be better off out http://www.betteroffout.net/setting-business-free-into-the-global-economy-by-professor-patrick-minford-cbe/ but he and those organisations are decidedly pro-Brexit.

 

Economic reports/forecasts are notoriously inaccurate whenever they try and predict the future. The real truth is that nobody actually knows for sure exactly what will happen in the long run, there are simply too many variables.

 

So if the economic argument is your thing then all you can do is decide whether being tied to an organisation that shows far less growth rate in trade than any other continent over the last few years is worth it simply for safety reasons. A dubious safety though given the past eurozone crisis and the ones which will surely follow.

 

Or do you take a risk, step out into the brave new world and try and make it as a European country but not as part of the EU`s stifling, ever federalising, political organisation. A world where those who do not wish to trade in europe will no longer have to follow all the laws and directives of that union when manufacturing their goods even when not selling them there. A world where we can make our own trade negotiations with our seat on the WTO.

 

For me the decision is easy. Largely because the economic argument is not the number one priority for my desire to leave. I`ve always said that for me the primary issue is one of sovereignty and democracy. I want to live in a Great Britain where our democratically elected parliament makes the laws by which we live by. Where that same parliament will have the right and ability to make changes if we and they desire.

[Granett]

For me the argument had mainly been the Leavers shouting "conspiracy" and "bias", trying to rubbish decent research while offering up the sort of "pub bore" anecdotal "I can't walk down my road for benefit-claiming Muslims" evidence that they expect/demand anyone listening accept as "fact".

 

DM, your posts are obviously not in that category.

 

I'll have a look at the Hampden Trust and The Freedom Association and come back.

[Vince Green]

Its the same comparison as steering your own ship or just being towed by a much bigger ship that is not necessarily going where you want to go.

 

Leaving something is never going to be easy, whether its a job, a marriage or the EU. The default option to stay is always less effort, I'm sure we will have a bumpy ride for a while.

 

The remain campaign's whole argument appears to be trotting out experts (all of whom are on the payroll is some way or another) to point out that its going to be tougher out there on our own.

 

But when you get silly people on both sides saying things that are not true it just clouds the issues

 

http://home.bt.com/lifestyle/house-home/12-food-and-drink-favourites-that-could-be-threatened-by-brexit-11364064032288

 

I mean really?

Edited May 29, 2016 by Vince Green

[achosenman]

For me the EU is cancer, Brexit the chemo.

 

I cannot believe anyone who comlained about the Westminster expenses scandal would want to stay shackeled to a bunch of unelected, unaccountable, greedy parasites who make our own lot look like amateurs.

 

Big business want to stay in because it stifles competition. The EU has less growth than any other economic area. It is overburdened with red tape and tariffs. EU customers are getting less significant for UK exports each passing year.

 

The EU is positively anti democratic, and that alone is enough for me.

 

Atb

Edited May 29, 2016 by achosenman

[Vince Green]

The EU has less growth than any other economic area.

 

Atb

Yes they said that on the radio yesterday, the EU is actually the second worst performing economy in the world, only the Antarctic is lower. Britain on the other hand has one of the best.

 

If we leave the EU its them that will be goose and ducked

[Granett]

All very emotive stuff, but what are the sources?

 

Especially for the statement, "The remain campaign's whole argument appears to be trotting out experts (all of whom are on the payroll is some way or another) to point out that its going to be tougher out there on our own."

 

In terms of the repeated claims by Leavers of bias, what sources do you consider less biased than the IFS?