EU Referendum - How will you vote?

[unbeliever]

Looks like you misunderstood me: the UK exiting means its exports (to the EU) become non-EU imports to EU customers, so in terms of competitiveness, treated level with comparative exports from e.g. the US, Chinese, Norway, Switzerland, etc.

 

Are you familiar with the expression "non-tariff barriers"? I suggest you look it up

 

For EU competitors, that's a market bonanza (EU customers that used to buy from the UK when intra-EU) the like of which they haven't seen in decades. Particularly services...which is most of what the UK exports to the EU, and most services are commodities these days.

 

As I1L2T3 noted sometime earlier, the UK is not indispensable to its EU customers, very far from it.

 

Re. "changing sides", you're still not getting it (and I very much doubt you ever will, tbh): you need to see things from both sides to reach an informed decision.

 

 

Yes, of course. As I don't agree with you I must clearly be biased or stupid.

Now I see the error of my ways.

 

Never mind that I've been studying this matter for years and have switched over the last 6 years from being firmly pro-EU to firmly anti-EU. No I disagree with whatever is considered most progressive, so I must clearly be corrupt and/or stupid.

 

EU rules make it marginally easier for us to trade with the EU and noticably harder to trade outside it. At worst it's a "wash" in economic terms. In my opinion there will be a substantial net economic benefit, but it's not zero risk.

 

Above all I want my vote to count again. Everything else is small fry.

Edited June 11, 2015 by unbeliever
typos

[Bigthumb]

Looks like you misunderstood me: the UK exiting means its exports (to the EU) become non-EU imports to EU customers, so in terms of competitiveness, treated level with comparative exports from e.g. the US, Chinese, Norway, Switzerland, etc.

 

Are you familiar with the expression "non-tariff barriers"? I suggest you look it up

 

 

So what you are saying Volkswagen, Citroen, Renault etc would have the same import tarrifs on their goods that they wanted to sell us as our goods that we want to sell to them. Don't they export rather more to us than we do to them?

[tzijlstra]

We didn't have global influence as a g7 member and one of the 5 permanent members of the UN security council?

 

None of these supposed advantages of membership is unavailable to us outside the EU. Some of them are actually due to non-EU arrangements such as NATO.

We are free to enter into co-operative agreements with any other state without or without the EU. We don't need the EU for any of this stuff.

 

You mentioned "standards" 3 times. I'm not keen on this being overly centralised as standards have to cater to local culture etc.

 

Our government is at least determined by the people. I was sad to lose the AV referendum, but the people have spoken and that's that. There's actually nothing morally wrong with a system based on the idea that the electors choose a representative rather than a party.

Who determines EU policy?

 

For me this is not about immigration. But "a few Roma". That's some sort of joke right?

 

I haven't read anything constructive here that addresses the points I made, but let me entertain you. Global influence through the EU is very different from influence in G7 or UN. Ask Microsoft if they care when the G7 says they should respect consumer rights, they don't care, ask what they think when the EU comes knocking and they rapidly address all the points raised. Sure, if we want to bully North Korea the G7 and UN are really useful. But the economy of scale from being the biggest market in the world adds a bit of weight to debates.

 

There are thousands of advantages to being in the EU that are not available to external states. You don't recognise them because you don't come across as overly informed on the EU, as most detractors, but just looking in my own discipline: Exchange of students/academic staff, direct EU research funding that enables projects too large to take on at national level, universally accepted degrees throughout the EU, active knowledge transfer programs between academics and business funded and hosted by the EU and so on.

 

In terms of standards, you are aware that 'standard' is a generic descriptor and can be qualified further? Unified standards refers to production and trade standards, think EURO NCAP for car safety, there are hundreds more that affect the quality of the products you use every day, every financial manager worth their salt knows the standards used within the EU for money-transfers and so on. Established product standards and established labour standards refers to the fact that without the EU a lot of standards would never have been established and are now accepted throughout Europe.

 

A shared single market can not be achieved outside of the EU, the UK is already manoeuvring itself out of this at the moment and it is going to cost. Don't confuse a shared single market with a free trade agreement, they are not the same, again this is where standards come into play. People always think of the EU as having introduced a rule to have straight bananas (which isn't true) but forget about the rule that protect the rights of passengers on airlines and thousands more like it. Shared market, not free trade.

 

EU policy is determined by the governments of the member states in the EU commission and the heads of government during EU summits. It is ratified by a parliament that you and I have voted for or at least have had the chance to do so.

 

Your reference to NATO presumably refers to shared defence, this is wrong, currently several EU member states have bi-lateral or multi-lateral agreements on shared defence outside of NATO but shaped through the EU, the Germans work closely with their direct neighbours in joined brigades and divisions and even the UK has a strong bi-lateral working relation with France, particularly for the Air Force and Navy.

 

This debate shouldn't be about immigration, we are agreed on that, but for a lot of people this referendum is based on the immigration question, thanks to a certain mister Farage and in no small part to the Conservatives who foolishly keep repeating the untenable promise of a hard cap on immigration. If you don't think this debate is about immigration than I praise that in you, but the core of the situation is that we need to get that message across to the millions of people who take the Daily Mail or Sun as their ultimate font of knowledge.

 

I am now also curious about what you think this debate is about, because if it is self-determinism than I can only deduce that you were for Scottish independence and are an avid contributor to the Yorkshire National Party as well?

[unbeliever]

So what you are saying Volkswagen, Citroen, Renault etc would have the same import tarrifs on their goods that they wanted to sell us as our goods that we want to sell to them. Don't they export rather more to us than we do to them?

 

 

Thank you.

I've been saying this all day.

Get ready for the far fetched scare stories about paying 5 times as much for food.

[I1L2T3]

So what you are saying Volkswagen, Citroen, Renault etc would have the same import tarrifs on their goods that they wanted to sell us as our goods that we want to sell to them. Don't they export rather more to us than we do to them?

 

If we stay in the EEA or EFTA it would be the same as now (for motors) -the downside would be us having to abide by the rules the EU makes but having no say whatsoever about them. Outside those organisations and all bets are off.

 

---------- Post added 11-06-2015 at 14:34 ----------

 

Thank you.

I've been saying this all day.

Get ready for the far fetched scare stories about paying 5 times as much for food.

 

Can you prove our food costs would not increase? I can point to extensive agricultural protectionism by the two countries often used as templates for our exit - Norway and Switzerland. Seriously, where is your evidence?

 

As for motors you know that most vehicle production in the UK is by overseas companies. If we left the EEA/EFTA there are no guarantees that tariffs would not be introduced by the EU. None at all. Can you prove there are guarantees? The threat of tariffs could even be used as a way to entice those manufacturers onto the continent. Can you prove those manufacturers would even stay in the UK anyway?

[Bigthumb]

Thank you.

I've been saying this all day.

Get ready for the far fetched scare stories about paying 5 times as much for food.

 

Just imagine if we started buying UK made cars instead of VWs BMWs and Fiats. We would also have to buy Australian and Chilean wine, which oddly doesn't currently cost any more than French stuff despite them being thousands of miles away and not in the EU.

[L00b]

So what you are saying Volkswagen, Citroen, Renault etc would have the same import tarrifs on their goods that they wanted to sell us as our goods that we want to sell to them. Don't they export rather more to us than we do to them?

Yes. But the resulting effect would be less UK-made and tariffed Fords and Nissans sold to the EU, and more Volkswagen, Citroen, Renault etc. sold without any tariff intra-EU ('substituting' for the tariffed Fords and Nissans).

 

Moreover, re. continental EU car makers exporting more to the UK than UK makers to the continental EU, the markets that matter for Volkswagen, Citroen, Renault etc. these days are China, India and Brazil. In that order. There's also plenty of related reasons why all the Koreans based their EU plants in Eastern Europe rather than in Western Europe or the UK. Their core target markets are all east of Germany.

 

But cars are a bad analogy, because VAG and Mercedes would still sell just as many units here. Employees payrises would just be deferred for that little bit longer while their bosses pay the tariff uplift on the windscreen tag

 

...No more EU work legislation to worry about, see

 

(Exportable-) services hold the analogy better, e.g. a British, French or German solicitor can handle international commercial law just the same these days, and all 3 have substantially similar set up costs, running costs and overheads (for now, whilst UK in EU). The French and German ones can perfectly go nab the British clients intra-EU once the British gets too expensive through non-tariff barriers. Alternatively, the British one can keep lowering its fees to keep competitive. And become less profitable. And pay less tax. Round and round she goes.

 

Now multiply by all UK service exporting to the EU.

 

Whilst their EU competitors (whose lobbying influence with Brussels is non-trivial, particularly German financiers and legal types) patiently wait and pray that the UK does Brexit.

Edited June 11, 2015 by L00b

[Bigthumb]

If we stay in the EEA or EFTA it would be the same as now (for motors) -the downside would be us having to abide by the rules the EU makes but having no say whatsoever about them. Outside those organisations and all bets are off.

 

---------- Post added 11-06-2015 at 14:34 ----------

 

 

Can you prove our food costs would not increase? I can point to extensive agricultural protectionism by the two countries often used as templates for our exit - Norway and Switzerland. Seriously, where is your evidence?

 

As for motors you know that most vehicle production in the UK is by overseas companies. If we left the EEA/EFTA there are no guarantees that tariffs would not be introduced by the EU. None at all. Can you prove there are guarantees? The threat of tariffs could even be used as a way to entice those manufacturers onto the continent. Can you prove those manufacturers would even stay in the UK anyway?

 

A quick look through my shopping shows I bought Australian wine, Kenyan beans, Columbian bananas and Egyptian potatoes. I'm struggling to see why prices should rise. I have friends in Croatia who tell me that prices have increased since they joined the EU 2 years ago. Gas and Electricity prices increased by 20-25% almost immediately which had a knock on price increase on most other goods.

Edited June 11, 2015 by Bigthumb

[unbeliever]

I haven't read anything constructive here that addresses the points I made, but let me entertain you. Global influence through the EU is very different from influence in G7 or UN. Ask Microsoft if they care when the G7 says they should respect consumer rights, they don't care, ask what they think when the EU comes knocking and they rapidly address all the points raised. Sure, if we want to bully North Korea the G7 and UN are really useful. But the economy of scale from being the biggest market in the world adds a bit of weight to debates.

 

There are thousands of advantages to being in the EU that are not available to external states. You don't recognise them because you don't come across as overly informed on the EU, as most detractors, but just looking in my own discipline: Exchange of students/academic staff, direct EU research funding that enables projects too large to take on at national level, universally accepted degrees throughout the EU, active knowledge transfer programs between academics and business funded and hosted by the EU and so on.

 

In terms of standards, you are aware that 'standard' is a generic descriptor and can be qualified further? Unified standards refers to production and trade standards, think EURO NCAP for car safety, there are hundreds more that affect the quality of the products you use every day, every financial manager worth their salt knows the standards used within the EU for money-transfers and so on. Established product standards and established labour standards refers to the fact that without the EU a lot of standards would never have been established and are now accepted throughout Europe.

 

A shared single market can not be achieved outside of the EU, the UK is already manoeuvring itself out of this at the moment and it is going to cost. Don't confuse a shared single market with a free trade agreement, they are not the same, again this is where standards come into play. People always think of the EU as having introduced a rule to have straight bananas (which isn't true) but forget about the rule that protect the rights of passengers on airlines and thousands more like it. Shared market, not free trade.

 

EU policy is determined by the governments of the member states in the EU commission and the heads of government during EU summits. It is ratified by a parliament that you and I have voted for or at least have had the chance to do so.

 

Your reference to NATO presumably refers to shared defence, this is wrong, currently several EU member states have bi-lateral or multi-lateral agreements on shared defence outside of NATO but shaped through the EU, the Germans work closely with their direct neighbours in joined brigades and divisions and even the UK has a strong bi-lateral working relation with France, particularly for the Air Force and Navy.

 

This debate shouldn't be about immigration, we are agreed on that, but for a lot of people this referendum is based on the immigration question, thanks to a certain mister Farage and in no small part to the Conservatives who foolishly keep repeating the untenable promise of a hard cap on immigration. If you don't think this debate is about immigration than I praise that in you, but the core of the situation is that we need to get that message across to the millions of people who take the Daily Mail or Sun as their ultimate font of knowledge.

 

I am now also curious about what you think this debate is about, because if it is self-determinism than I can only deduce that you were for Scottish independence and are an avid contributor to the Yorkshire National Party as well?

 

 

I favoured the Scotland referendum. I thought the Scottish should decide for themselves. If the EU was a functional democratic institution, it's accounts would pass auditing every once in a while.

 

I've never read the daily mail or the Sun. Have you read anything other than the Guardian.

 

We are completely free to enter into agreements with other free states or blocks of states where it serves our mutual interests. We don't have to join a political union to do it. Defence, trade, or other agreements are open to us anyway. Like we wouldn't have safe cars without the EU. Come on, surely you can do better.

 

You're playing the old pro-EU trick of suggesting that we can only have the things currently organised under the EU umbrella if we stay in. It's c#£p.

 

You talk as though we are in agreement with the EU over these collectivised matters. I certainly wasn't in agreement with the EU that there should be a civil war in Ukraine. So much for keeping peace in Europe.

 

Free trade is enough. It keeps the peace and preserves accountability.

Water down democracy at your peril.

[I1L2T3]

A quick look through my shopping shows I bought Australian wine, Kenyan beans, Columbian bananas and Egyptian potatoes. I'm struggling to see why prices should rise. I have friends in Croatia who tell me that prices have increased since they joined the EU 2 years ago. Gas and Electricity prices increased by 20-25% almost immediately which had a knock on price increase on most other goods.

 

Inflation in Croatia is 0.1%