EU Referendum - How will you vote?

[L00b]

The PM has released cabinet ministers from collective responsibility for the purposes of the referendum campaign. There is still a government position on the matter. It is in fact your statement which is false.

The government does support remain as a policy, I acknowledge that.

 

But your claim was that the Treasury has produced a gloomy report because "treasury works for the government and the government are for remain", which is the point I was addressing.

 

The report has been prepared by the Civil Service for presentation to Parliament, not just the Remainers or just the Brexiters, it is independent, has been using universally-accepted economic forecast models and its predictions also range, in the other direction, to a more rose-tinted -3.4%.

 

As can be clearly seen from the linked graph, it is the most pessimistic of all, I'll readily acknowledge that. But in context, you did refer originally to the worst prediction. The Treasury's is it. So what say you about the others? (see below, and link).

A shallow dip is not going to do any significant damage.

 

<...>

 

The loss to the economy predicted is smaller than many routine revisions in GDP predictions made between annual budgets.

I'll refer you again to this, which usefully summarises all the predictions of the 'serious organisations' you referred to earlier, including the rosiest version by Economists for Brexit.

 

You can work out the median: at around -4%, it is equivalent to the 2008 "shallow dip"

As I keep saying, the predictions associated with the ERM and Euro were the reverse of the truth.

So why do you believe the CBI? In fact, why believe any economical forecasting at any time? Edited June 12, 2016 by L00b

[unbeliever]

The government does support remain as a policy, I acknowledge that.

 

But your claim was that the Treasury has produced a gloomy report because "treasury works for the government and the government are for remain", which is the point I was addressing.

 

The report has been prepared by the Civil Service for presentation to Parliament, not just the Remainers or just the Brexiters, it is independent, has been using universally-accepted economic forecast models and its predictions also range, in the other direction, to a more rose-tinted -3.4%.

I'll refer you again to this, which usefully summarises all the predictions of the 'serious organisations' you referred to earlier, including the rosiest version by Economists for Brexit.

 

You can work out the median: at around -4%, it is equivalent to the 2008 "shallow dip":|

So why do you believe the CBI?

 

I don't believe the CBI. The remainers do. Even for those that do believe it, it is not very serious.

 

I suspect that your plot is loss of total growth, rather than an actual fall. It's hard to tell without context.

Edited June 12, 2016 by unbeliever

[L00b]

I don't believe the CBI. The remainers do. Even for those that do believe it, it is not very serious.

Any improvements on that reply, or is that the sum total of it?

[unbeliever]

Any improvements on that reply, or is that the sum total of it?

 

Can you confirm that your plot shows drop in GDP rather than loss of growth.

"Manque a gagner" means "miss/fail to win/gain" I think.

[I1L2T3]

See my edited post. HM Treasury. Serious enough for you?

 

It's the same Osborne-led HM Treasury that unbeliever until 2 months ago, and as part of his staunch Tory stance, was backing to the hilt.

 

Now it seems they're the biggest liars on the face of the planet.

[L00b]

Can you confirm that your plot shows drop in GDP rather than loss of growth.

It is loss of growth by 2030.

 

The -3.4% of the Treasury report is loss of GDP.

Edited June 12, 2016 by L00b

[unbeliever]

I do confirm that indeed.

 

From this post a few days ago:

 

"Manque a gagner" means "miss/fail to win/gain" I think.

I'm sorry, but my French is not brilliant.

 

When you refer to 4% median, I'm 99% certain that it's a reduction in growth, not a contraction.

[El Cid]

I don't believe the CBI.

 

I have seen graphs detailing people support for either IN or OUT, by age; are there graphs showing support based on type, ie large companies, small companies, exporters, importers, stock market traders ect.

[L00b]

The MEPs are not in charge.

They're as much in charge of EU legislation as British MPs are in charge of the UK's legislation.

There is indeed technical loss of sovereignty to these other bodies.

 

It's far smaller, and rarely affects domestic UK law.

WTO: its rules dictate the terms of every trade treaty independently reached by the UK with any non-EU third party who is also a WTO member. Besides any EU law in the matter.

 

UN: its 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (the Refugee Convention) dictate the UK's current asylum laws. Besides any EU law in the matter.

 

There's a very long list of international agreement/treaties with direct influence on the UK's legislation and, to an extent, legal decisions of its judiciary, that have absolutely nothing to do with the EU. International bodies are usually the by-product of such international agreement/treaties, created to administer the implementation, continuity and 'life' of the treaty/agreement.

 

E.g. there is an EU commission and an EU Parliament (beside others) because there is an EU Treaty in the first place which says that there must be one of these, and it codifies what it is, what are its prerogatives, how it's formed <etc.> The Commission and Parliament (and the other 7 EU bodies) don't exist independently of the base EU Treaty, they only exist and continue to exits thanks to it. Same with the UN, same with the WTO <etc.>

 

Each international treaty is its own jurisdiction, "trumping" the UK if the UK signs up to it. That's a fundamental principle of international law going back centuries and still as valid as it ever was.

Edited June 12, 2016 by L00b

[unbeliever]

They're as much in charge of EU legislation as British MPs are in charge of the UK's legislation.

 

Im sorry, but with all due respect, that's codswallop.

The commission initiates all legislation and effectively controls the machinery of EU government.

 

If not then the PM's deal with the EU is meaningless as it is a deal with the commission on which the parliament has yet to vote.

 

So which is it. Is the PM's deal false, or is the commission in charge?

Edited June 12, 2016 by unbeliever