When the campaigns started I felt a lot of leAvers spent most of their time whinging about unfairness rather than making their case. Now it seems like they believe.
Leave down to 2.38 on Betfair; surely leave will firm up based on profit taking soon if nothing else ?
Just as an aid to a few of us, and this isn't aimed at you because I've noticed it over the last few days, but could we possibly use consistent terminology?
Tighten for a price coming in Drifting for a price going out
or something?
I'm sometimes having to triple read things to get the meaning of 'down,' 'up' etc in given posts. I'm guessing the second half of your sentence means the price has tightened and therefore you think when people profit it will drift again?
The BBC are already running with this big time (in their completely impartial way of course). We have a government that is not particularly incentivised to stop pressure on the £, almost the reverse. At the moment we are talking 10ths of a cent but if this gathers momentum it has the potential to be a game changer. Watch the markets today, especially the £.
Pesky old BBC reporting news that you don't like. The other week they were reporting the high immigration numbers. Presumably that was less biased :-)
At the moment the £ is off about half a cent since midnight. It is not a particularly significant or large intraday change. But I suspect it will be presented as far more significant. If we get to a whole cent then the headlines will be lurid and some Leavers just might hesitate.
This is not over, not by a long chalk.
It seems to me that it is a strategic error for Remain to rely on almost purely materialistic arguments for their case.
I agree but the annual conference of those who love the EU was held in a telephone box in Leicester Square this year. This has been Remain's problem. Even Cameron admits the EU is frustrating and annoying. But when he says it will reform he is now faced with, "well, you tried that."
His deal was a big mistake. A promise of seeking future reform might have been more credible.
If he had come back from Brussels with the promise of reform, in whatever area you think is critical, do you really think that the likes of @Richard_Tyndall and others on here would have said: "ah yes, great job, Dave. Finally a change in our relationship, we're looking forward to a new, bright future."?
Of course not: they would have been just as dismissive, just as sceptical of it ever happening as they are now of the current deal. Leave aside that I think the current deal is a good one, and fundamentally changes our relationship with the EU (if not the EU itself), any deal Dave brought back from Brussels was going to be dismissed as not-enforceable so can we stop with the "it was a bad deal, if only..." thing.
The likes of @Richard_Tyndall are not swing voters. I started out wanting to vote remain, but the deal was terrible and the campaign first tried to take me for a fool by pretending it wasn't. If they had given me a positive reason to stay in I could have been convinced - and millions like me as well.
Yep! That was the turning point for most Conservative Leavers on here and probably elsewhere too. I remember on the day it happened everyone here saying WTF is he doing?
Yup, me too. After that was off the table, I thought about the whole issue afresh - and decided my heart and head agreed with other for Leave. My residual loyalty to Cameron vanished.
Tony Gallagher, Sun Ed says he wants a full week to push Brexit home.
Sounds like the Sun are going to throw their full weight behind Leave?
Definitely. It's 1.7m Leave leaflets every day courtesy of the Sun. My point re Sky coverage is that this is clearly a coordinated effort to talk it up. They normally spend more time on the Guardian or Mail.
It's very noticeable. I'm beginning to wonder what the Times will do. I assumed it would go for Remain.
As for it being terrible, this is the bit I don't get. It codifies no ever closer union, gets us an opt-out from banking union, solves the euro issue with EZ vs non-EZ and has a bit of fluff on immigration and competitiveness.
Except it's not legally binding, as the vice-president of the European Parliament, the president of the European Parliament, and our Parliament have already made clear. So actually, it solves nothing: it expresses a possible view on how a limited range of things might be solved after we vote to remain, agreed by a limited number of the participants required to secure said reform. The only question left is, when we've made major concessions to secure reform before, how well has that gone?
Yeah. I don't think he was referring to those those, do you now?
I mean, jeez, most people are struggling to make ends meet and are up to their fontanelle in debt.
But pensions are an investment. No getting round that, I'm afraid.
Most people just don't walk to the station thinking of their pension as an investment. And if you really think long-term pensions are in trouble, apart from the pretty disgraceful comments by Cameron, then you're welcome to it but, again, it really wasn't what was being mentioned.
2. Events dear boy. If you're the Establishment and over 30 years you have bought the main parties so that they do your bidding, and suddenly some cretin offers a referendum and you might lose it, what do you do? Letting plebs vote to remove your power and authority isn't going to happen if you can stop it - democracy is Revolution, and you've worked very hard to quash democratic choice to prevent revolutionary votes against you.
I've never understood this story. If leaving the EU brings power back from the EU, it's the British establishment that then gets to wield it, no?
Remain still have a 11 lead on the economy, that is what did for Ed.
For someone professing to support Leave you sure post a lot of posts on the other side
I think one of the biggest mistakes Remain made was to correlate a General Election with the EU Ref. A terrible, terrible, mistake.
By the way, nunu, you sleep even less than me. Or do you live abroad?
I just don't have my blinkers on like most on here, this has really become an echo chamber. As for my sleeping patterns I am unemployed at the moment which fits the pattern of me voting leave. Most people (almost all) who have middle class professional jobs are going to vote remain in my experience. They are just not going to risk that. Its only people who don't have anything to lose who will vote out mainly.
I was speaking to a friend yesterday who is perplexed that I am voting Leave. "Don't you have any investments?" he asked.
Because most voters 'have investments'
Jeez. I mean, jeeeeeeeez.
I'm glad it's just not just me who eye-rolled there.
Investments = pensions.
Eye-roll away on a middle class forum but it just ain't where most people are at. The people who matter.
Anyway this is hair-splitting. It wasn't to what he was referring. He knows it, but that's fine. Let's move on
2. Events dear boy. If you're the Establishment and over 30 years you have bought the main parties so that they do your bidding, and suddenly some cretin offers a referendum and you might lose it, what do you do? Letting plebs vote to remove your power and authority isn't going to happen if you can stop it - democracy is Revolution, and you've worked very hard to quash democratic choice to prevent revolutionary votes against you.
I've never understood this story. If leaving the EU brings power back from the EU, it's the British establishment that then gets to wield it, no?
Exactly, and without any pesky foreigners interfering with their plans. An exit from the EU will be a victory for the Establishment, not a defeat.
Sterling is currently off against every currency the BBC can
Pesky old BBC reporting news that you don't like. The other week they were reporting the high immigration numbers. Presumably that was less biased :-)
At the moment the £ is off about half a cent since midnight. It is not a particularly significant or large intraday change. But I suspect it will be presented as far more significant. If we get to a whole cent then the headlines will be lurid and some Leavers just might hesitate.
This is not over, not by a long chalk.
It seems to me that it is a strategic error for Remain to rely on almost purely materialistic arguments for their case.
I agree but the annual conference of those who love the EU was held in a telephone box in Leicester Square this year. This has been
His deal was a big mistake. A promise of seeking future reform might have been more credible.
If he had come back from Brussels with the promise of reform, in whatever area you think is critical, do you really think that the likes of @Richard_Tyndall and others on here would have said: "ah yes, great job, Dave. Finally a change in our relationship, we're looking forward to a new, bright future."?
Of course not: they would have been just as dismissive, just as sceptical of it ever happening as they are now of the current deal. Leave aside that I think
The likes of @Richard_Tyndall are not swing voters. I started out wanting to vote remain, but the deal was terrible and the campaign first tried to take me for a fool by pretending it wasn't. If they had given me a positive reason to stay in I could have been convinced - and millions like me as well.
Yep! That was the turning point for most Conservative Leavers on here and probably elsewhere too. I remember on the day it happened everyone here saying WTF is he doing?
Yup, me too. After that was off the table, I thought about the whole issue afresh - and decided my heart and head agreed with other for Leave. My residual loyalty to Cameron vanished.
Tony Gallagher, Sun Ed says he wants a full week to push Brexit ehind Leave?
Definitely. It's 1.7m Leave leaflets every day courtesy of the Sun. My point re Sky coverage is that this is clearly a coordinated effort to talk it up. They normally spend more time on the Guardian or Mail.
It's very noticeable. I'm beginning to wonder what the Times will do. I assumed it would go for Remain.
Yougov had 70% of Sun readers voting Leave anyway so it is not likely to make a huge difference, it also had 60% of Times readers backing Remain so I cannot see the Times as strong for Leave
Pesky old BBC reporting news that you don't like. The other week they were reporting the high immigration numbers. Presumably that was less biased :-)
At the moment the £ is off about half a cent since midnight. It is not a particularly significant or large intraday change. But I suspect it will be presented as far more significant. If we get to a whole cent then the headlines will be lurid and some Leavers just might hesitate.
This is not over, not by a long chalk.
It seems to me that it is a strategic error for Remain to rely on almost purely materialistic arguments for their case.
I agree but the annual conference of those who love the EU was held in a telephone box in Leicester Square this year. This has been Remain's problem. Even Cameron admits the EU is frustrating and annoying. But when he says it will reform he is now faced with, "well, you tried that."
His deal was a big mistake. A promise of seeking future reform might have been more credible.
If he had come back from Brussels with the promise of reform, in whatever area you think is critical, do you really think that the likes of @Richard_Tyndall and others on here would have said: "ah yes, great job, Dave. Finally a change in our relationship, we're looking forward to a new, bright future."?
Of course not: they would have been just as dismissive, just as sceptical of it ever happening as they are now of the current deal. Leave aside that I think the current deal is a good one, and fundamentally changes our relationship with the EU (if not the EU itself), any deal Dave brought back from Brussels was going to be dismissed as not-enforceable so can we stop with the "it was a bad deal, if only..." thing.
The likes of @Richard_Tyndall are not swing voters. I started out wanting to vote remain, but the deal was terrible and the campaign first tried to take me for a fool by pretending it wasn't. If they had given me a positive reason to stay in I could have been convinced - and millions like me as well.
Yep! That was the turning point for most Conservative Leavers on here and probably elsewhere too. I remember on the day it happened everyone here saying WTF is he doing?
Yup, me too. After that was off the table, I thought about the whole issue afresh - and decided my heart and head agreed with other for Leave. My residual loyalty to Cameron vanished.
Tony Gallagher, Sun Ed says he wants a full week to push Brexit home.
Yes, we both remember that after two well publicised all-nighters, we all thought the PM was going to come back with something like his Bloomberg speech outline, rather than (to think of a @TSE analogy), a little lube to help out as the EU bent us over and.....
Oh, and tampons. Don't forget the tampons!
If ever there was an image of Dave & George's EU failure - it's tampons. One of those things the vast majority of people never ever talk about - ever. And get a bit uncomfortable shopping for. The last time they made political news was Phil Woolas' expenses.
I think Remain will squeak it on the day. The opportunity to 'take control' of immigration has clearly enticed a lot of undecideds, but will it be 50%+1 of the electorate (i'm expecting a GE level of turnout)? I think there will be a lot of swingback from the types who worry about strains on public services AND job security. it'll be close though (52-48), and that's the fault of a remain campaign that have brought a bendy banana to a gunfight. Of course Leave were going to go hard on immigration, and crying racist at Leave isn't going to cut it.
2. Events dear boy. If you're the Establishment and over 30 years you have bought the main parties so that they do your bidding, and suddenly some cretin offers a referendum and you might lose it, what do you do? Letting plebs vote to remove your power and authority isn't going to happen if you can stop it - democracy is Revolution, and you've worked very hard to quash democratic choice to prevent revolutionary votes against you.
I've never understood this story. If leaving the EU brings power back from the EU, it's the British establishment that then gets to wield it, no?
Exactly, and without any pesky foreigners interfering with their plans. An exit to the EU will be a victory for the Establishment, not a defeat.
and most of all for its press. There must be absolute delight amongst its proprietors today.
2. Events dear boy. If you're the Establishment and over 30 years you have bought the main parties so that they do your bidding, and suddenly some cretin offers a referendum and you might lose it, what do you do? Letting plebs vote to remove your power and authority isn't going to happen if you can stop it - democracy is Revolution, and you've worked very hard to quash democratic choice to prevent revolutionary votes against you.
I've never understood this story. If leaving the EU brings power back from the EU, it's the British establishment that then gets to wield it, no?
Exactly, and without any pesky foreigners interfering with their plans. An exit from the EU will be a victory for the Establishment, not a defeat.
Not those who lose their comfy secondments to Brussels
I think Remain will squeak it on the day. The opportunity to 'take control' of immigration has clearly enticed a lot of undecideds, but will it be 50%+1 of the electorate (i'm expecting a GE level of turnout)? I think there will be a lot of swingback from the types who worry about strains on public services AND job security. it'll be close though (52-48), and that's the fault of a remain campaign that have brought a bendy banana to a gunfight. Of course Leave were going to go hard on immigration, and crying racist at Leave isn't going to cut it.
Interesting that you think that Leave's only chance is, er, racism.
I feel like PB is experiencing its own remain pushback this morning, a little less leave heavy. Good for variety, but a portent of the coming week as waverers face the prospect of a leave win? I feel it's the only thing that can win it for remain now, a backlash against that possibility.
The BBC are already running with this big time (in their completely impartial way of course). We have a government that is not particularly incentivised to stop pressure on the £, almost the reverse. At the moment we are talking 10ths of a cent but if this gathers momentum it has the potential to be a game changer. Watch the markets today, especially the £.
Pesky old BBC reporting news that you don't like. The other week they were reporting the high immigration numbers. Presumably that was less biased :-)
At the moment the £ is off about half a cent since midnight. It is not a particularly significant or large intraday change. But I suspect it will be presented as far more significant. If we get to a whole cent then the headlines will be lurid and some Leavers just might hesitate.
This is not over, not by a long chalk.
It seems to me that it is a strategic error for Remain to rely on almost purely materialistic arguments for their case.
Isn't that symptomatic of those who head Remain though?
To them, nations and democracy are a bit passé. Money, very definitely, is not.
I think people who do not have to worry about finding enough to pay the bills, put food on the table and keep a roof over their families' heads often have the exquisite luxury of being able to contemplate the broader picture. For most people, though, money and having enough of it to enjoy a decent life is at the centre of things.
Just as you had the exquisite luxury of being able to contemplate the broader picture when you disregarded the effects that immigration was having on working class neighbourhoods and working class lives.
The overseas vote will be interesting to watch, shame it won't be broken out as the registration and counting process doesn't allow for it.
Certainly out here there's been a lot of interest, people who didn't vote in the GE have been registering for postal votes. Demographics of Brits here are very interesting, 240,000 Brits in Dubai, almost all of whom are ABC1 and probably 60% Conservative, much younger than UK in general, no-one retires here and the majority expect to return to the UK a few years down the line.
From conversations I'd say about 75% Leave, most out here see the democracy argument, see the EU as inward-looking as opposed to international in mindset.
The demographics for EU-resident Brits will be completely different, as will be their votes in the referendum. Shame we won't see more statistics on this.
There was a global survey on this yesterday (YouGov, I think), weighted by number of Brits in each country. The figures were something like 68-32 for Remain, on a fairly large sample (1800?). Others may have the correct figures - I only noted it in passing because I'm sceptical that all that many overseas voters will really vote, and the methodological challanges must be considerable.
As for it being terrible, this is the bit I don't get. It codifies no ever closer union, gets us an opt-out from banking union, solves the euro issue with EZ vs non-EZ and has a bit of fluff on immigration and competitiveness.
Except it's not legally binding, as the vice-president of the European Parliament, the president of the European Parliament, and our Parliament have already made clear. So actually, it solves nothing: it expresses a possible view on how a limited range of things might be solved after we vote to remain, agreed by a limited number of the participants required to secure said reform. The only question left is, when we've made major concessions to secure reform before, how well has that gone?
Plus 28 heads of state agree a deal and then the ECJ or whoever strikes it down - and the UK says: Oh, OK then well at least we gave it a go.
Nope. It is hugely unlikely to be struck down or not incorporated into a treaty and do you know what? If it is and then isn't, we can choose to Leave the EU at that point on the landslide victory for UKIP which would follow.
Another case, I'm afraid, of people not trusting our politicians to do what they want and so blaming the EU.
It looks like a Brexit win. So scary it's unbelievable. I know remain have been accused of using scare tactics, but what they have said is not the half of it. But then as an economist I'm in the unenviable position of understanding all this. We are facing the Perfect Storm.
Let me get this straight. You are the economist who, just a few days ago was going on about the disaster of the pound having fallen off a cliff and how bad that was going to be at 1.27 to the Euro and were seemingly unaware that tat was higher than it had been for almost the whole of 2009-2014.
I mean I know economists are supposed to be scorned for how often they get predictions wrong but it must take a really bad one to get it so wrong about what has already happened.
I think Remain will squeak it on the day. The opportunity to 'take control' of immigration has clearly enticed a lot of undecideds, but will it be 50%+1 of the electorate (i'm expecting a GE level of turnout)? I think there will be a lot of swingback from the types who worry about strains on public services AND job security. it'll be close though (52-48), and that's the fault of a remain campaign that have brought a bendy banana to a gunfight. Of course Leave were going to go hard on immigration, and crying racist at Leave isn't going to cut it.
That's probably how I see it, too.
Whatever, Cameron is looking like toast. Unless the result is 55%+ Remain (looking unlikely right now) I genuinely don't think he's got enough goodwill or authority to carry on.
I really don't see how Leave at 2.3 is value. Maybe it is because I have spent so long believing Leave would lose. I wonder how many polls it would take for them to become favourite. Not many by the looks of it.
In US Dollar terms, the UK is down 7.6% YTD, France 6.5%, and Germany 7.7%. The markets are - basically - saying that Brexit is bad for both the EU and the UK.
I think it would be in everyone's interests for an outline UK/EU deal to be agreed within a few weeks of the 23rd, even if the detailed discussions, and comprehensive deal ends up taking years longer.
I do wonder what will happen if, after a Leave vote, immigration stays at the current level for a while.
Well, quite.
High immigration is linked to a booming economy. As Osborne has noted, you can reduce immigration significantly by crashing the economy. Not sure that is BoZo's ideal scenario
What booming economy ?
Immigration up, UK GDP forecast reduced.
1.6% growth isn't booming, it's below the UK trend.
Our GDP per capita is basically the same now as it was in 2006.
And that's the important one to most people. Growth of 1% when the population gets 1% bigger isn't growth to anyone except statisticians.
Not to mention the trillion pounds plus the incompetents of Downing Street have borrowed in that decade.
And yet we're told that all immigrants are net tax contributors.
Mr. kle4, although I expected Remain to be doing significantly better at this stage, that was my thinking too when I made the 60/40 Remain win prediction.
As the day draws near those who don't know will likely go for what they (rightly or wrongly) deem the safe option. That's Remain.
The overseas vote will be interesting to watch, shame it won't be broken out as the registration and counting process doesn't allow for it.
Certainly out here there's been a lot of interest, people who didn't vote in the GE have been registering for postal votes. Demographics of Brits here are very interesting, 240,000 Brits in Dubai, almost all of whom are ABC1 and probably 60% Conservative, much younger than UK in general, no-one retires here and the majority expect to return to the UK a few years down the line.
From conversations I'd say about 75% Leave, most out here see the democracy argument, see the EU as inward-looking as opposed to international in mindset.
The demographics for EU-resident Brits will be completely different, as will be their votes in the referendum. Shame we won't see more statistics on this.
There was a global survey on this yesterday (YouGov, I think), weighted by number of Brits in each country. The figures were something like 68-32 for Remain, on a fairly large sample (1800?). Others may have the correct figures - I only noted it in passing because I'm sceptical that all that many overseas voters will really vote, and the methodological challanges must be considerable.
What I'm wondering about this is, if it's really true that there's a significant Remain advantage in overseas + Gibraltar + NI that the current pollsters aren't picking up because they're only polling GB, how do the pollsters feel about knowing their reported numbers are going to be off? I know technically their polls are supposed to be accurate reports of the groups they survey, but they know they're going to be judged by comparing their reported numbers with the actual outcome. If there's really a big effect, you have to wonder if they might be tempted to stick their thumbs on the Remain side of the scale of what they are surveying to compensate...
The overseas vote will be interesting to watch, shame it won't be broken out as the registration and counting process doesn't allow for it.
Certainly out here there's been a lot of interest, people who didn't vote in the GE have been registering for postal votes. Demographics of Brits here are very interesting, 240,000 Brits in Dubai, almost all of whom are ABC1 and probably 60% Conservative, much younger than UK in general, no-one retires here and the majority expect to return to the UK a few years down the line.
From conversations I'd say about 75% Leave, most out here see the democracy argument, see the EU as inward-looking as opposed to international in mindset.
The demographics for EU-resident Brits will be completely different, as will be their votes in the referendum. Shame we won't see more statistics on this.
There was a global survey on this yesterday (YouGov, I think), weighted by number of Brits in each country. The figures were something like 68-32 for Remain, on a fairly large sample (1800?). Others may have the correct figures - I only noted it in passing because I'm sceptical that all that many overseas voters will really vote, and the methodological challanges must be considerable.
Interesting, thanks Nick, will go and find it. Nearly 3k comments here yesterday, difficult to wade through if you had to go and work for a day while making sure not to lose money on the cricket being a damn draw!
Some basic demographic stats on UK expats by region or country would be really useful, but they don't seem to exist anywhere! Workers v retirees in the EU would be the interesting one. I guess the PM's pensions scaremongering might get through to those happily retired in France and Spain.
In US Dollar terms, the UK is down 7.6% YTD, France 6.5%, and Germany 7.7%. The markets are - basically - saying that Brexit is bad for both the EU and the UK.
I think it would be in everyone's interests for an outline UK/EU deal to be agreed within a few weeks of the 23rd, even if the detailed discussions, and comprehensive deal ends up taking years longer.
It might be in everyone's interests, but even an outline deal so soon sounds impossible.
I really don't see how Leave at 2.3 is value. Maybe it is because I have spent so long believing Leave would lose. I wonder how many polls it would take for them to become favourite. Not many by the looks of it.
I would make Leave the narrow favourite. (55:45). I think you need to see poll leads of 5-6% (53:47ish) to be comfortable it will be a victory because of:
1. Northern Ireland 2. Expats 3. People bottling it in the privacy of the polling booth 4. DKs breaking for the status quo (although there aren't many DKs left, of course)
But. We are at 5-6% (maybe 7%) now. So, right now Leave should be favourite.
Personally I'm fairly pessimistic for Remain, even though I know a couple of Leavers who are now having qualms. It's possible that the late Labour assault from Corbyn, Brown and others will shift opinion back, in which case VolcanoPete is right that Corbyn being seen as the man who saved the day will take us into uncharted waters, and his decision to wait till the final fortnight before going full blast will look sensible.
But my impression is that CDE voters tend to feel that none of the parties are much good so they may as well go by instinct, and their instinct is currently anti-establishment and hence pro-Leave. The perceived overhyping of the negative effects has led to them being completely disregarded, which is almost certainly a very serious mistake, but there we are. I'd see the correct odds as being about 55-60% on Leave.
Last night tyson was lamenting that Brexit would mean that young, vibrant Italians would no longer be able to visit our shores. I pointed out that a UK passport allows visa-free travel to 175 countries worldwide, which exceeds the current number of EU member states by some margin, and asked about Italian passports. As ever, he was here to emote and virtue signal, so answer came there none.
So I've had a look myself. An outfit called Henley & Partners produce an annual 'Visa Restrictions Index' which covers the topic. Italy is joint 3rd with the UK. They get the 175 countries too (as do France, Spain & Finland). Only Germany and Sweden do better (177 & 176 respectively). Croatia appears to be the 'worst' country in the EU at the moment. Its passport only gets you to 149 countries.
Which only makes me more puzzled. Never mind tyson, what on earth was Osborne going on about on the Welsh tourism thing?
Do Remain think that the UK is going to introduce visa requirements for tourist travel?
I do wonder what will happen if, after a Leave vote, immigration stays at the current level for a while.
Well, quite.
High immigration is linked to a booming economy. As Osborne has noted, you can reduce immigration significantly by crashing the economy. Not sure that is BoZo's ideal scenario
What booming economy ?
Immigration up, UK GDP forecast reduced.
1.6% growth isn't booming, it's below the UK trend.
Our GDP per capita is basically the same now as it was in 2006.
And that's the important one to most people. Growth of 1% when the population gets 1% bigger isn't growth to anyone except statisticians.
Not to mention the trillion pounds plus the incompetents of Downing Street have borrowed in that decade.
And yet we're told that all immigrants are net tax contributors.
I don't think anyone has said 'all'. My mother-in-law (here on a Portuguese passport) doesn't get any money from the UK government, but given she's retired it's hard to argue that she's a net tax contributor.
In US Dollar terms, the UK is down 7.6% YTD, France 6.5%, and Germany 7.7%. The markets are - basically - saying that Brexit is bad for both the EU and the UK.
I think it would be in everyone's interests for an outline UK/EU deal to be agreed within a few weeks of the 23rd, even if the detailed discussions, and comprehensive deal ends up taking years longer.
The deal is there, Robert.
No change until Article 50 served, then two years negotiation on continuing free trade terms.
That's infinitely better then the usual cobbled together Eurozone crisis solutions.
It looks like a Brexit win. So scary it's unbelievable. I know remain have been accused of using scare tactics, but what they have said is not the half of it. But then as an economist I'm in the unenviable position of understanding all this. We are facing the Perfect Storm.
Let me get this straight. You are the economist who, just a few days ago was going on about the disaster of the pound having fallen off a cliff and how bad that was going to be at 1.27 to the Euro and were seemingly unaware that tat was higher than it had been for almost the whole of 2009-2014.
I mean I know economists are supposed to be scorned for how often they get predictions wrong but it must take a really bad one to get it so wrong about what has already happened.
I'm sure Leave campaigners would agree that Parliament is sovereign,therefore Parliament has the final say on the EUref decision.They need reminding the status of the referendum is merely "advisory".A majority of MPs in Parliament may choose NOT to accept the peoples' "advice" because that's all it is.It is non-binding.
David Allen Green @DavidAllenGreen 5m5 minutes ago In essence: the EU referendum is non-binding and advisory. The real issue is what then follows any vote for Brexit.
In US Dollar terms, the UK is down 7.6% YTD, France 6.5%, and Germany 7.7%. The markets are - basically - saying that Brexit is bad for both the EU and the UK.
I think it would be in everyone's interests for an outline UK/EU deal to be agreed within a few weeks of the 23rd, even if the detailed discussions, and comprehensive deal ends up taking years longer.
The deal is there, Robert.
No change until Article 50 served, then two years negotiation on continuing free trade terms.
That's infinitely better then the usual cobbled together Eurozone crisis solutions.
Yes, but until the outline is announced, there will be uncertainty.
How does a pre-deal decision demonstrate that Cameron's renegotiation is legally binding? It demonstrates we have some limited existing protection, but it doesn't do anything to prove that Cameron's supposed renegotiation is anything more than a promise.
Another case, I'm afraid, of people not trusting our politicians to do what they want and so blaming the EU.
I blame both of them equally, which is why I'm voting to leave. I don't intend to give the EU the chance to say the deal ws an international treaty between heads of government under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, and therefore under Article 34 cannot be held to create obligations for the EU as a third party not involved in the agreement. Nor do I intend to give the current government the chance to throw up its hands and say, "Well, you voted to remain, and clearly you would have done so without this renegotiation, so I guess we're stuck with EU membership." My whole problem with the EU is precisely this: the way it creates this undemocratic firebreak between the executive and the electorate. But if you want to be fooled by Cameron's renegotiation, and by the Port Services Directive, and by all the other measures which have been parked until the referendum is over, then be my guest.
Last night tyson was lamenting that Brexit would mean that young, vibrant Italians would no longer be able to visit our shores. I pointed out that a UK passport allows visa-free travel to 175 countries worldwide, which exceeds the current number of EU member states by some margin, and asked about Italian passports. As ever, he was here to emote and virtue signal, so answer came there none.
So I've had a look myself. An outfit called Henley & Partners produce an annual 'Visa Restrictions Index' which covers the topic. Italy is joint 3rd with the UK. They get the 175 countries too (as do France, Spain & Finland). Only Germany and Sweden do better (177 & 176 respectively). Croatia appears to be the 'worst' country in the EU at the moment. Its passport only gets you to 149 countries.
Which only makes me more puzzled. Never mind tyson, what on earth was Osborne going on about on the Welsh tourism thing?
Do Remain think that the UK is going to introduce visa requirements for tourist travel?
I don't think Tyson was talking about tourists, but about the Italian ex-pat community, living and working in the UK. Their numbers will, presumably, be much reduced after a Brexit.
I do wonder what will happen if, after a Leave vote, immigration stays at the current level for a while.
Well, quite.
High immigration is linked to a booming economy. As Osborne has noted, you can reduce immigration significantly by crashing the economy. Not sure that is BoZo's ideal scenario
What booming economy ?
Immigration up, UK GDP forecast reduced.
1.6% growth isn't booming, it's below the UK trend.
Our GDP per capita is basically the same now as it was in 2006.
And that's the important one to most people. Growth of 1% when the population gets 1% bigger isn't growth to anyone except statisticians.
Not to mention the trillion pounds plus the incompetents of Downing Street have borrowed in that decade.
And yet we're told that all immigrants are net tax contributors.
Quite. That immigrants as a group might pay more tax then they claim in benefits, doesn't mean that the situation couldn't be substantially improved by having no immigrants claiming benefits or by restricting immigration to only higher-rate taxpayers.
Good closing paragraph, as the polling chap said. Cameron's in a right old mess.
I don't expect Cameron to fall on his sword on the Friday - but he's toasty. I can't believe that a few months ago, I quietly hoped he might change his mind and stay on!
Yes my point about Richard is that (one of) his (many) criticisms is that the deal will be struck down anyway, and is worthless, etc. Echoed by many on here, and by Michael Gove also.
As for it being terrible, this is the bit I don't get. It codifies no ever closer union, gets us an opt-out from banking union, solves the euro issue with EZ vs non-EZ and has a bit of fluff on immigration and competitiveness.
It means that a UK govt can identify any piece of EU legislation and say: "EVER CLOSER UNION - NON!" We didn't have that clause and managed to not sign the Fiscal Compact, so imagine what we could not sign with it.
Or is it that you worry about what future governments might not not sign...?
Even ignoring whether it will be struck down or not the deal does not do most of the things you claim. It certainly doesn't solve the EZ vs non EZ issue as all it says is that the if the EZ majority are in favour of something we object to then they will discuss it with us and then carry on as planned. And it certainly does not codify the end of Ever Closer Union.
I'm sure Leave campaigners would agree that that Parliament is sovereign,therefore Parliament has the final say on the EUref decision.They need reminding the status of the referendum is merely "advisory".A majority of MPs in Parliament may choose NOT to accept the peoples' "advice" because that's all it is.It is non-binding.
David Allen Green @DavidAllenGreen 5m5 minutes ago In essence: the EU referendum is non-binding and advisory. The real issue is what then follows any vote for Brexit.
Article to come in FT.
It'd be perfectly legal. But absolute chaos would follow such a course. No Tory government could survive such a decision. We'd stumble toward a GE, and what then?
Here's an idea. How about a General Election immediately after the vote? The Government is pro-Remain. If we vote to leave, that suggests no confidence in the Government. So they could legitimately call a vote of no confidence in the HoC and expect it to pass
For added fun, rival Tory candidates could campaign on competing platforms
BoZo on his Faragist platform of "Keep out the wogs"
Someone else on a platform of try and rescue the economy from Brexit disaster
Don't suppose the Paris in your name has any connection with you living there?
Yes, that's right. Brexit has been in the news pretty much everyday here for the last couple weeks, and from people i've spoken with, they are taking quite an interest. As others have mentioned on here regarding europeans thoughts, no one seems to have taken seriously the prospect we may leave.
I really don't see how Leave at 2.3 is value. Maybe it is because I have spent so long believing Leave would lose. I wonder how many polls it would take for them to become favourite. Not many by the looks of it.
I would make Leave the narrow favourite. (55:45). I think you need to see poll leads of 5-6% (53:47ish) to be comfortable it will be a victory because of:
1. Northern Ireland 2. Expats 3. People bottling it in the privacy of the polling booth 4. DKs breaking for the status quo (although there aren't many DKs left, of course)
But. We are at 5-6% (maybe 7%) now. So, right now Leave should be favourite.
But only marginally.
Yes, all of those factors are quite worrying with what is currently a modest lead in opinion polls.
Last night tyson was lamenting that Brexit would mean that young, vibrant Italians would no longer be able to visit our shores. I pointed out that a UK passport allows visa-free travel to 175 countries worldwide, which exceeds the current number of EU member states by some margin, and asked about Italian passports. As ever, he was here to emote and virtue signal, so answer came there none.
So I've had a look myself. An outfit called Henley & Partners produce an annual 'Visa Restrictions Index' which covers the topic. Italy is joint 3rd with the UK. They get the 175 countries too (as do France, Spain & Finland). Only Germany and Sweden do better (177 & 176 respectively). Croatia appears to be the 'worst' country in the EU at the moment. Its passport only gets you to 149 countries.
Which only makes me more puzzled. Never mind tyson, what on earth was Osborne going on about on the Welsh tourism thing?
Do Remain think that the UK is going to introduce visa requirements for tourist travel?
I don't think Tyson was talking about tourists, but about the Italian ex-pat community, living and working in the UK. Their numbers will, presumably, be much reduced after a Brexit.
If tyson wasn't (he explicitly said 'visit', but fair enough), what about Osborne?
Don't suppose the Paris in your name has any connection with you living there?
Yes, that's right. Brexit has been in the news pretty much everyday here for the last couple weeks, and from people i've spoken with, they are taking quite an interest. As others have mentioned on here regarding europeans thoughts, no one seems to have taken seriously the prospect we may leave.
It's not that you don't have a valid opinion: of course you do. But you're likely to be a tad pro-EU really if you live in Paris.
I think this is the wake up call Europe needs. We will leave, followed by other countries eventually and the EU project will fold. Then we will re-draw the map. It's a map that won't include Schengen.
p.s. I do quite a bit of work in France, esp Paris. As you know, the country is in its own tumult at the moment.
Last night tyson was lamenting that Brexit would mean that young, vibrant Italians would no longer be able to visit our shores. I pointed out that a UK passport allows visa-free travel to 175 countries worldwide, which exceeds the current number of EU member states by some margin, and asked about Italian passports. As ever, he was here to emote and virtue signal, so answer came there none.
So I've had a look myself. An outfit called Henley & Partners produce an annual 'Visa Restrictions Index' which covers the topic. Italy is joint 3rd with the UK. They get the 175 countries too (as do France, Spain & Finland). Only Germany and Sweden do better (177 & 176 respectively). Croatia appears to be the 'worst' country in the EU at the moment. Its passport only gets you to 149 countries.
Which only makes me more puzzled. Never mind tyson, what on earth was Osborne going on about on the Welsh tourism thing?
Do Remain think that the UK is going to introduce visa requirements for tourist travel?
It's another Voters Are Stupid riff from Remain. It goes with WW3, bus passes and roaming phone charges.
Here's an idea. How about a General Election immediately after the vote? The Government is pro-Remain. If we vote to leave, that suggests no confidence in the Government. So they could legitimately call a vote of no confidence in the HoC and expect it to pass
For added fun, rival Tory candidates could campaign on competing platforms
BoZo on his Faragist platform of "Keep out the wogs"
Someone else on a platform of try and rescue the economy from Brexit disaster
That is a total straw man of farages position. With net migration in the tens of thousands, 3 million wogs could come here so long as 3 million Brits leave. The BNP immigration smear is an ineffective relic.
I'm sure Leave campaigners would agree that that Parliament is sovereign,therefore Parliament has the final say on the EUref decision.They need reminding the status of the referendum is merely "advisory".A majority of MPs in Parliament may choose NOT to accept the peoples' "advice" because that's all it is.It is non-binding.
David Allen Green @DavidAllenGreen 5m5 minutes ago In essence: the EU referendum is non-binding and advisory. The real issue is what then follows any vote for Brexit.
Article to come in FT.
It'd be perfectly legal. But absolute chaos would follow such a course. No Tory government could survive such a decision. We'd stumble toward a GE, and what then?
Nah we need to forget all that stuff. There would be a media-led national riot.
The decision, whichever way it goes, will be enforced.
I do wonder what will happen if, after a Leave vote, immigration stays at the current level for a while.
Well, quite.
High immigration is linked to a booming economy. As Osborne has noted, you can reduce immigration significantly by crashing the economy. Not sure that is BoZo's ideal scenario
What booming economy ?
Immigration up, UK GDP forecast reduced.
1.6% growth isn't booming, it's below the UK trend.
Our GDP per capita is basically the same now as it was in 2006.
And that's the important one to most people. Growth of 1% when the population gets 1% bigger isn't growth to anyone except statisticians.
Not to mention the trillion pounds plus the incompetents of Downing Street have borrowed in that decade.
And yet we're told that all immigrants are net tax contributors.
Quite. That immigrants as a group might pay more tax then they claim in benefits, doesn't mean that the situation couldn't be substantially improved by having no immigrants claiming benefits or by restricting immigration to only higher-rate taxpayers.
The problem with this is that when you do give the Home Office the power to decide who's allowed to immigrate, they manage to turn the large profits you naturally get with unregulated EU immigration into the substantial losses they make with non-EU immigration. I guess they do this because British voters want the government to let their dependent family members in, but don't want competition from people whose goal is to work.
You can see this bias in rules for letting spouses in, where a high-income British person is allowed to bring in their dependent spouse, but a low-income British person isn't allowed to let their high-income foreign spouse in to support them, because the British person is considered incapable of supporting their family and the Home Office won't count the money the foreigner would be making.
Of course you could say, "First we take back the power for the Home Office to decide things, then we fix its incentives so that it doesn't do stupid shit". The problem is that the former happens almost immediately, whereas the latter doesn't happen until some time after hell freezes over.
It will be interesting to see how the press is affected after the 24th. I suspect a massive reduction in advertising revenue will follow as companies cut spending on advertising in newspapers that supported Brexit. Apparently the Daily Mail is already suffering a loss of revenue.
I'm sure Leave campaigners would agree that Parliament is sovereign,therefore Parliament has the final say on the EUref decision.They need reminding the status of the referendum is merely "advisory".A majority of MPs in Parliament may choose NOT to accept the peoples' "advice" because that's all it is.It is non-binding.
David Allen Green @DavidAllenGreen 5m5 minutes ago In essence: the EU referendum is non-binding and advisory. The real issue is what then follows any vote for Brexit.
Article to come in FT.
And that's when lawyerly language meets political reality.
Don't suppose the Paris in your name has any connection with you living there?
Yes, that's right. Brexit has been in the news pretty much everyday here for the last couple weeks, and from people i've spoken with, they are taking quite an interest. As others have mentioned on here regarding europeans thoughts, no one seems to have taken seriously the prospect we may leave.
It's not that you don't have a valid opinion: of course you do. But you're likely to be a tad pro-EU really if you live in Paris.
I think this is the wake up call Europe needs. We will leave, followed by other countries eventually and the EU project will fold. Then we will re-draw the map. It's a map that won't include Schengen.
p.s. I do quite a bit of work in France, esp Paris. As you know, the country is in its own tumult at the moment.
There haven't been border controls in Europe for a lot longer than Schengen.
The fact is that manning the borders between France and Belgium, and Germany's more than 5,000 roads that leave the country, is not economically possible. We couldn't even close the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic at the height of the Troubles.
Schengen - or son of Schengen - will last a lot longer than the EU.
I do wonder what will happen if, after a Leave vote, immigration stays at the current level for a while.
Well, quite.
High immigration is linked to a booming economy. As Osborne has noted, you can reduce immigration significantly by crashing the economy. Not sure that is BoZo's ideal scenario
What booming economy ?
Immigration up, UK GDP forecast reduced.
1.6% growth isn't booming, it's below the UK trend.
Our GDP per capita is basically the same now as it was in 2006.
And that's the important one to most people. Growth of 1% when the population gets 1% bigger isn't growth to anyone except statisticians.
Not to mention the trillion pounds plus the incompetents of Downing Street have borrowed in that decade.
And yet we're told that all immigrants are net tax contributors.
Quite. That immigrants as a group might pay more tax then they claim in benefits, doesn't mean that the situation couldn't be substantially improved by having no immigrants claiming benefits or by restricting immigration to only higher-rate taxpayers.
The whole immigrants pay more tax than they claim in benefits meme deliberately omits the cost of the extra public services they use.
Last night tyson was lamenting that Brexit would mean that young, vibrant Italians would no longer be able to visit our shores. I pointed out that a UK passport allows visa-free travel to 175 countries worldwide, which exceeds the current number of EU member states by some margin, and asked about Italian passports. As ever, he was here to emote and virtue signal, so answer came there none.
So I've had a look myself. An outfit called Henley & Partners produce an annual 'Visa Restrictions Index' which covers the topic. Italy is joint 3rd with the UK. They get the 175 countries too (as do France, Spain & Finland). Only Germany and Sweden do better (177 & 176 respectively). Croatia appears to be the 'worst' country in the EU at the moment. Its passport only gets you to 149 countries.
Which only makes me more puzzled. Never mind tyson, what on earth was Osborne going on about on the Welsh tourism thing?
Do Remain think that the UK is going to introduce visa requirements for tourist travel?
I don't think Tyson was talking about tourists, but about the Italian ex-pat community, living and working in the UK. Their numbers will, presumably, be much reduced after a Brexit.
If tyson wasn't (he explicitly said 'visit', but fair enough), what about Osborne?
I don't know what Osborne said, but I don't think anyone seriously expects restrictions in EU tourism to the UK. Why would they? The freedom of movement that many Leavers want to abolish is about living, working, studying and retiring, not tourism.
Don't suppose the Paris in your name has any connection with you living there?
Yes, that's right. Brexit has been in the news pretty much everyday here for the last couple weeks, and from people i've spoken with, they are taking quite an interest. As others have mentioned on here regarding europeans thoughts, no one seems to have taken seriously the prospect we may leave.
It's not that you don't have a valid opinion: of course you do. But you're likely to be a tad pro-EU really if you live in Paris.
I think this is the wake up call Europe needs. We will leave, followed by other countries eventually and the EU project will fold. Then we will re-draw the map. It's a map that won't include Schengen.
p.s. I do quite a bit of work in France, esp Paris. As you know, the country is in its own tumult at the moment.
There haven't been border controls in Europe for a lot longer than Schengen.
The fact is that manning the borders between France and Belgium, and Germany's more than 5,000 roads that leave the country, is not economically possible. We couldn't even close the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic at the height of the Troubles.
Schengen - or son of Schengen - will last a lot longer than the EU.
Just a few more Brussels and Bataclans and I can assure you the borders will be staffed.
RCS, the logistics of it is tough but they will find a way. Most of the world. Actually, all of the world, staffs their borders.
It's down to will. At the moment the liberal EU luvvies can't believe that we should place checks on free movement. They think the world is lovely and liberal. The fact that not everyone shares this perspective and are hell-bent on criminal activity never entered their elitist dreams.
Don't suppose the Paris in your name has any connection with you living there?
Yes, that's right. Brexit has been in the news pretty much everyday here for the last couple weeks, and from people i've spoken with, they are taking quite an interest. As others have mentioned on here regarding europeans thoughts, no one seems to have taken seriously the prospect we may leave.
It's not that you don't have a valid opinion: of course you do. But you're likely to be a tad pro-EU really if you live in Paris.
I think this is the wake up call Europe needs. We will leave, followed by other countries eventually and the EU project will fold. Then we will re-draw the map. It's a map that won't include Schengen.
p.s. I do quite a bit of work in France, esp Paris. As you know, the country is in its own tumult at the moment.
There haven't been border controls in Europe for a lot longer than Schengen.
The fact is that manning the borders between France and Belgium, and Germany's more than 5,000 roads that leave the country, is not economically possible. We couldn't even close the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic at the height of the Troubles.
Schengen - or son of Schengen - will last a lot longer than the EU.
Just a few more Brussels and Bataclans and I can assure you the borders will be staffed.
There'll be spot checks, sure.
But don't forget, we don't have many terrorist attacks now compared to the 1970s. The IRA, the Basque terrorists, the Red Brigades, the Baader-Meinhof. In most years in the 1970s, thousands of people in Europe died in terrorist incidents.
Today, it's less than 10% of that number,
And the borders (and this was pre-Schengen) were still open. Because it would be economically disastrous to border regions to attempt to passport check people.
Again, if the UK and the Republic kept the Common Travel Area during a period when the IRA was at its peak, why would you expect the EU to seal massively more porous borders when the numbers are order of magnitude lower, and the likelihood it will cut attacks negligable?
RCS, the logistics of it is tough but they will find a way. Most of the world. Actually, all of the world, staffs their borders.
It's down to will. At the moment the liberal EU luvvies can't believe that we should place checks on free movement. They think the world is lovely and liberal. The fact that not everyone shares this perspective and are hell-bent on criminal activity never entered their elitist dreams.
The same logic would suggest that we should have staffed borders along the England/Scotland and England/Wales borders.
Don't suppose the Paris in your name has any connection with you living there?
Yes, that's right. Brexit has been in the news pretty much everyday here for the last couple weeks, and from people i've spoken with, they are taking quite an interest. As others have mentioned on here regarding europeans thoughts, no one seems to have taken seriously the prospect we may leave.
It's not that you don't have a valid opinion: of course you do. But you're likely to be a tad pro-EU really if you live in Paris.
I think this is the wake up call Europe needs. We will leave, followed by other countries eventually and the EU project will fold. Then we will re-draw the map. It's a map that won't include Schengen.
p.s. I do quite a bit of work in France, esp Paris. As you know, the country is in its own tumult at the moment.
The challenge for Remain now re a Vow is the contagion factor. If Brexit looks likely - and the EU offers goodies to keep us. The only one that matters is free movement.
What about every other member who's domestic issues with it too? It's a mess either way. I don't see a way out of this corner.
On other issues I see that the South Yorkshire plods spare no expense when it comes to defending themselves:
' South Yorkshire Police spent at least £2.1m on legal fees representing its suspended Chief Constable David Crompton during the Hillsborough Inquests, the BBC has discovered.
Mr Crompton's barrister alone was paid over £1m to represent him. '
RCS, the logistics of it is tough but they will find a way. Most of the world. Actually, all of the world, staffs their borders.
It's down to will. At the moment the liberal EU luvvies can't believe that we should place checks on free movement. They think the world is lovely and liberal. The fact that not everyone shares this perspective and are hell-bent on criminal activity never entered their elitist dreams.
There have been no real border checks in the post second world war period in Western Europe
RCS, the logistics of it is tough but they will find a way. Most of the world. Actually, all of the world, staffs their borders.
It's down to will. At the moment the liberal EU luvvies can't believe that we should place checks on free movement. They think the world is lovely and liberal. The fact that not everyone shares this perspective and are hell-bent on criminal activity never entered their elitist dreams.
There have been no real border checks in the post second world war period in Western Europe
I do wonder what will happen if, after a Leave vote, immigration stays at the current level for a while.
Well, quite.
High immigration is linked to a booming economy. As Osborne has noted, you can reduce immigration significantly by crashing the economy. Not sure that is BoZo's ideal scenario
What booming economy ?
Immigration up, UK GDP forecast reduced.
1.6% growth isn't booming, it's below the UK trend.
Our GDP per capita is basically the same now as it was in 2006.
And that's the important one to most people. Growth of 1% when the population gets 1% bigger isn't growth to anyone except statisticians.
Not to mention the trillion pounds plus the incompetents of Downing Street have borrowed in that decade.
And yet we're told that all immigrants are net tax contributors.
Quite. That immigrants as a group might pay more tax then they claim in benefits, doesn't mean that the situation couldn't be substantially improved by having no immigrants claiming benefits or by restricting immigration to only higher-rate taxpayers.
The whole immigrants pay more tax than they claim in benefits meme deliberately omits the cost of the extra public services they use.
RCS, the logistics of it is tough but they will find a way. Most of the world. Actually, all of the world, staffs their borders.
It's down to will. At the moment the liberal EU luvvies can't believe that we should place checks on free movement. They think the world is lovely and liberal. The fact that not everyone shares this perspective and are hell-bent on criminal activity never entered their elitist dreams.
The same logic would suggest that we should have staffed borders along the England/Scotland and England/Wales borders.
I actually agree with Robert that there will not be controlled borders in much of Europe, Schengen or no Schengen. But your comparison with England/Wales/Scotland is false as they are not separate states. I European terms that would be like having a controlled border between Bavaria and Thuringia.
Don't suppose the Paris in your name has any connection with you living there?
Yes, that's right. Brexit has been in the news pretty much everyday here for the last couple weeks, and from people i've spoken with, they are taking quite an interest. As others have mentioned on here regarding europeans thoughts, no one seems to have taken seriously the prospect we may leave.
It's not that you don't have a valid opinion: of course you do. But you're likely to be a tad pro-EU really if you live in Paris.
I think this is the wake up call Europe needs. We will leave, followed by other countries eventually and the EU project will fold. Then we will re-draw the map. It's a map that won't include Schengen.
p.s. I do quite a bit of work in France, esp Paris. As you know, the country is in its own tumult at the moment.
There haven't been border controls in Europe for a lot longer than Schengen.
The fact is that manning the borders between France and Belgium, and Germany's more than 5,000 roads that leave the country, is not economically possible. We couldn't even close the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic at the height of the Troubles.
Schengen - or son of Schengen - will last a lot longer than the EU.
Just a few more Brussels and Bataclans and I can assure you the borders will be staffed.
The murder of the police chief and his wife by ISIS in France overnight won't help to calm fears either. @SeanT noted on the last thread that this was a known tactic - and to upload the killings to social media.
Where is SUNIL in his hour of glory? He needs to be found, paraded and raised to the rafters. But where is he? He must be found brought forward and lauded. But where is he?
I'm calling for a total and complete shutdown of PB until our representatives can figure out just what is going on.
Don't suppose the Paris in your name has any connection with you living there?
Yes, that's right. Brexit has been in the news pretty much everyday here for the last couple weeks, and from people i've spoken with, they are taking quite an interest. As others have mentioned on here regarding europeans thoughts, no one seems to have taken seriously the prospect we may leave.
It's not that you don't have a valid opinion: of course you do. But you're likely to be a tad pro-EU really if you live in Paris.
I think this is the wake up call Europe needs. We will leave, followed by other countries eventually and the EU project will fold. Then we will re-draw the map. It's a map that won't include Schengen.
p.s. I do quite a bit of work in France, esp Paris. As you know, the country is in its own tumult at the moment.
The challenge for Remain now re a Vow is the contagion factor. If Brexit looks likely - and the EU offers goodies to keep us. The only one that matters is free movement.
What about every other member who's domestic issues with it too? It's a mess either way. I don't see a way out of this corner.
I'm with Charles in the sense that I wobbled about the EU once the ramifications of Maastricht became clear, became a BOOer after Lisbon, but it was hardly something to man the barricades over.
I liked Cameron, and I think it was his Bloomberg speech that did for him. He set people's expectations high. As an experienced negotiator, my eyes bugged out when he blew his position even before the wrangling started. After that, his mismanagement of the deal he actually achieved made him dead to me.
I can see it from the EU's perspective of course. If they gave in to UK special pleading, then pretty much all of the EU8/A10 would be lining up for their own special cases. Governance would become a nightmare. There's a sizeable minority in the EU ranks that would welcome a Brexit just to stop any more of that nonsense.
RCS, the logistics of it is tough but they will find a way. Most of the world. Actually, all of the world, staffs their borders.
It's down to will. At the moment the liberal EU luvvies can't believe that we should place checks on free movement. They think the world is lovely and liberal. The fact that not everyone shares this perspective and are hell-bent on criminal activity never entered their elitist dreams.
There have been no real border checks in the post second world war period in Western Europe
I'm not sure that's right. I remember crossing the France Spain border twice in about 1989, once on a motorway and once on a tiny, tiny road high up in the pyrenees, and there being border controls. Spain was definitely in the EEC by this stage.
Four years later, I repeated the journey, and they had gone.
I do wonder what will happen if, after a Leave vote, immigration stays at the current level for a while.
Well, quite.
High immigration is linked to a booming economy. As Osborne has noted, you can reduce immigration significantly by crashing the economy. Not sure that is BoZo's ideal scenario
What booming economy ?
Immigration up, UK GDP forecast reduced.
1.6% growth isn't booming, it's below the UK trend.
Our GDP per capita is basically the same now as it was in 2006.
And that's the important one to most people. Growth of 1% when the population gets 1% bigger isn't growth to anyone except statisticians.
Not to mention the trillion pounds plus the incompetents of Downing Street have borrowed in that decade.
And yet we're told that all immigrants are net tax contributors.
Quite. That immigrants as a group might pay more tax then they claim in benefits, doesn't mean that the situation couldn't be substantially improved by having no immigrants claiming benefits or by restricting immigration to only higher-rate taxpayers.
The whole immigrants pay more tax than they claim in benefits meme deliberately omits the cost of the extra public services they use.
Nonsense. The UCL analysis specifically includes things such as health and education costs.
Don't suppose the Paris in your name has any connection with you living there?
Yes, that's right. Brexit has been in the news pretty much everyday here for the last couple weeks, and from people i've spoken with, they are taking quite an interest. As others have mentioned on here regarding europeans thoughts, no one seems to have taken seriously the prospect we may leave.
It's not that you don't have a valid opinion: of course you do. But you're likely to be a tad pro-EU really if you live in Paris.
I think this is the wake up call Europe needs. We will leave, followed by other countries eventually and the EU project will fold. Then we will re-draw the map. It's a map that won't include Schengen.
p.s. I do quite a bit of work in France, esp Paris. As you know, the country is in its own tumult at the moment.
Oh I am pro-EU guilty as charged - but having said that I don't buy into any of this project fear stuff - I genuinely don't believe we will be particularly worse off, i've just not been convinced of the benefits of leaving (sovereignty isn't an issue for me and i'm not going to be the proverbial turkey that votes to restrict my own freedom of movement!).
I think if we left and joined some sort of EFTA type agreement and actually worked for a future like you describe, we could see that begin to take shape with Sweden and Denmark joining, and potentially the future breakup of the EU into something looser. If we go out-out I'm not sure, I think in that case it will be seen more as us exiting stage left, and things will continue on as before.
Yup definitely, it's in a bad place right now. After that Austria election I am wondering that maybe Marine LP can actually win in 2017 - she's a very good, charismatic politician, and France is currently very unhappy!
I do wonder what will happen if, after a Leave vote, immigration stays at the current level for a while.
Well, quite.
High immigration is linked to a booming economy. As Osborne has noted, you can reduce immigration significantly by crashing the economy. Not sure that is BoZo's ideal scenario
What booming economy ?
Immigration up, UK GDP forecast reduced.
1.6% growth isn't booming, it's below the UK trend.
Our GDP per capita is basically the same now as it was in 2006.
And that's the important one to most people. Growth of 1% when the population gets 1% bigger isn't growth to anyone except statisticians.
Not to mention the trillion pounds plus the incompetents of Downing Street have borrowed in that decade.
And yet we're told that all immigrants are net tax contributors.
Quite. That immigrants as a group might pay more tax then they claim in benefits, doesn't mean that the situation couldn't be substantially improved by having no immigrants claiming benefits or by restricting immigration to only higher-rate taxpayers.
The whole immigrants pay more tax than they claim in benefits meme deliberately omits the cost of the extra public services they use.
The problem with all surveys is that they only look at bits. Yes an immigrant taking a minimum wage job in the uk may be low cost but it doesn't include the cost in benefits of the local person who would have got that minimum wage job if the immigrant had never arrived.
RCS, the logistics of it is tough but they will find a way. Most of the world. Actually, all of the world, staffs their borders.
It's down to will. At the moment the liberal EU luvvies can't believe that we should place checks on free movement. They think the world is lovely and liberal. The fact that not everyone shares this perspective and are hell-bent on criminal activity never entered their elitist dreams.
There have been no real border checks in the post second world war period in Western Europe
It's all part of the ISIS reality check wake-up.
Get used to it Europe. The rest of the world has.
The trouble is it's a shit security model. Pie crust just doesn't work, whether that's networks or borders. It's trivial to bypass or subvert border controls.
RCS, the logistics of it is tough but they will find a way. Most of the world. Actually, all of the world, staffs their borders.
It's down to will. At the moment the liberal EU luvvies can't believe that we should place checks on free movement. They think the world is lovely and liberal. The fact that not everyone shares this perspective and are hell-bent on criminal activity never entered their elitist dreams.
There have been no real border checks in the post second world war period in Western Europe
I'm not sure that's right. I remember crossing the France Spain border twice in about 1989, once on a motorway and once on a tiny, tiny road high up in the pyrenees, and there being border controls. Spain was definitely in the EEC by this stage.
Four years later, I repeated the journey, and they had gone.
Were you actually stopped, though?
Pre Schengen , there be border posts on roads, but they'd be unmanned. Or, occasionally, they'd be an overweight conscriptee smoking a cigarette and waving all the cars through.
Comments
Just as an aid to a few of us, and this isn't aimed at you because I've noticed it over the last few days, but could we possibly use consistent terminology?
Tighten for a price coming in
Drifting for a price going out
or something?
I'm sometimes having to triple read things to get the meaning of 'down,' 'up' etc in given posts. I'm guessing the second half of your sentence means the price has tightened and therefore you think when people profit it will drift again?
Everyone will now ignore me and that's fine hehe
It's very noticeable. I'm beginning to wonder what the Times will do. I assumed it would go for Remain.
Brexit 2.36
Will we get crossover today?
http://politicalodds.bet/eu-referendum?time=7#i
Edit: there's £300k matched in the last hour on that Betfair market. At 8:30am!
Edit2: 2.30 now!
Anyway this is hair-splitting. It wasn't to what he was referring. He knows it, but that's fine. Let's move on
If it crosses I'm buying remain, I'm sensing a market over reaction here
Good closing paragraph, as the polling chap said. Cameron's in a right old mess.
Once crossover happens (if it does), Remain becomes the value bet IMHO.
Both down a staggering 0.5 %
And pound down less than 1% on dollar
Fox. Shot.
Plus 28 heads of state agree a deal and then the ECJ or whoever strikes it down - and the UK says: Oh, OK then well at least we gave it a go.
Nope. It is hugely unlikely to be struck down or not incorporated into a treaty and do you know what? If it is and then isn't, we can choose to Leave the EU at that point on the landslide victory for UKIP which would follow.
Another case, I'm afraid, of people not trusting our politicians to do what they want and so blaming the EU.
I mean I know economists are supposed to be scorned for how often they get predictions wrong but it must take a really bad one to get it so wrong about what has already happened.
Whatever, Cameron is looking like toast. Unless the result is 55%+ Remain (looking unlikely right now) I genuinely don't think he's got enough goodwill or authority to carry on.
I think it would be in everyone's interests for an outline UK/EU deal to be agreed within a few weeks of the 23rd, even if the detailed discussions, and comprehensive deal ends up taking years longer.
And yet we're told that all immigrants are net tax contributors.
As the day draws near those who don't know will likely go for what they (rightly or wrongly) deem the safe option. That's Remain.
Some basic demographic stats on UK expats by region or country would be really useful, but they don't seem to exist anywhere! Workers v retirees in the EU would be the interesting one. I guess the PM's pensions scaremongering might get through to those happily retired in France and Spain.
1. Northern Ireland
2. Expats
3. People bottling it in the privacy of the polling booth
4. DKs breaking for the status quo (although there aren't many DKs left, of course)
But. We are at 5-6% (maybe 7%) now. So, right now Leave should be favourite.
But only marginally.
But my impression is that CDE voters tend to feel that none of the parties are much good so they may as well go by instinct, and their instinct is currently anti-establishment and hence pro-Leave. The perceived overhyping of the negative effects has led to them being completely disregarded, which is almost certainly a very serious mistake, but there we are. I'd see the correct odds as being about 55-60% on Leave.
Last night tyson was lamenting that Brexit would mean that young, vibrant Italians would no longer be able to visit our shores. I pointed out that a UK passport allows visa-free travel to 175 countries worldwide, which exceeds the current number of EU member states by some margin, and asked about Italian passports. As ever, he was here to emote and virtue signal, so answer came there none.
So I've had a look myself. An outfit called Henley & Partners produce an annual 'Visa Restrictions Index' which covers the topic. Italy is joint 3rd with the UK. They get the 175 countries too (as do France, Spain & Finland). Only Germany and Sweden do better (177 & 176 respectively). Croatia appears to be the 'worst' country in the EU at the moment. Its passport only gets you to 149 countries.
Which only makes me more puzzled. Never mind tyson, what on earth was Osborne going on about on the Welsh tourism thing?
Do Remain think that the UK is going to introduce visa requirements for tourist travel?
(I guess if you include VAT it might be close.)
No change until Article 50 served, then two years negotiation on continuing free trade terms.
That's infinitely better then the usual cobbled together Eurozone crisis solutions.
David Allen Green @DavidAllenGreen 5m5 minutes ago
In essence: the EU referendum is non-binding and advisory. The real issue is what then follows any vote for Brexit.
Article to come in FT.
Sell the rumour. Buy the news.
Here's an idea. How about a General Election immediately after the vote? The Government is pro-Remain. If we vote to leave, that suggests no confidence in the Government. So they could legitimately call a vote of no confidence in the HoC and expect it to pass
For added fun, rival Tory candidates could campaign on competing platforms
BoZo on his Faragist platform of "Keep out the wogs"
Someone else on a platform of try and rescue the economy from Brexit disaster
I think this is the wake up call Europe needs. We will leave, followed by other countries eventually and the EU project will fold. Then we will re-draw the map. It's a map that won't include Schengen.
p.s. I do quite a bit of work in France, esp Paris. As you know, the country is in its own tumult at the moment.
Nah we need to forget all that stuff. There would be a media-led national riot.
The decision, whichever way it goes, will be enforced.
You can see this bias in rules for letting spouses in, where a high-income British person is allowed to bring in their dependent spouse, but a low-income British person isn't allowed to let their high-income foreign spouse in to support them, because the British person is considered incapable of supporting their family and the Home Office won't count the money the foreigner would be making.
Of course you could say, "First we take back the power for the Home Office to decide things, then we fix its incentives so that it doesn't do stupid shit". The problem is that the former happens almost immediately, whereas the latter doesn't happen until some time after hell freezes over.
The fact is that manning the borders between France and Belgium, and Germany's more than 5,000 roads that leave the country, is not economically possible. We couldn't even close the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic at the height of the Troubles.
Schengen - or son of Schengen - will last a lot longer than the EU.
James Forsyth @JGForsyth
Former No 10 aide, and close Cameron friend, Chris Lockwood blaming Merkel for giving UK too little on immigration
Chris Lockwood @chrislockwd
I blame Merkel for this. Had she given Cameron emergency break on immigration this would be a lot easier.
It's down to will. At the moment the liberal EU luvvies can't believe that we should place checks on free movement. They think the world is lovely and liberal. The fact that not everyone shares this perspective and are hell-bent on criminal activity never entered their elitist dreams.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/video/2016/jun/14/labour-supporters-brexit-stoke-on-trent-eu-referendum-video
But don't forget, we don't have many terrorist attacks now compared to the 1970s. The IRA, the Basque terrorists, the Red Brigades, the Baader-Meinhof. In most years in the 1970s, thousands of people in Europe died in terrorist incidents.
Today, it's less than 10% of that number,
And the borders (and this was pre-Schengen) were still open. Because it would be economically disastrous to border regions to attempt to passport check people.
Again, if the UK and the Republic kept the Common Travel Area during a period when the IRA was at its peak, why would you expect the EU to seal massively more porous borders when the numbers are order of magnitude lower, and the likelihood it will cut attacks negligable?
What about every other member who's domestic issues with it too? It's a mess either way. I don't see a way out of this corner.
' South Yorkshire Police spent at least £2.1m on legal fees representing its suspended Chief Constable David Crompton during the Hillsborough Inquests, the BBC has discovered.
Mr Crompton's barrister alone was paid over £1m to represent him. '
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-36517918
Get used to it Europe. The rest of the world has.
I'm calling for a total and complete shutdown of PB until our representatives can figure out just what is going on.
I liked Cameron, and I think it was his Bloomberg speech that did for him. He set people's expectations high. As an experienced negotiator, my eyes bugged out when he blew his position even before the wrangling started. After that, his mismanagement of the deal he actually achieved made him dead to me.
I can see it from the EU's perspective of course. If they gave in to UK special pleading, then pretty much all of the EU8/A10 would be lining up for their own special cases. Governance would become a nightmare. There's a sizeable minority in the EU ranks that would welcome a Brexit just to stop any more of that nonsense.
Four years later, I repeated the journey, and they had gone.
I think if we left and joined some sort of EFTA type agreement and actually worked for a future like you describe, we could see that begin to take shape with Sweden and Denmark joining, and potentially the future breakup of the EU into something looser. If we go out-out I'm not sure, I think in that case it will be seen more as us exiting stage left, and things will continue on as before.
Yup definitely, it's in a bad place right now. After that Austria election I am wondering that maybe Marine LP can actually win in 2017 - she's a very good, charismatic politician, and France is currently very unhappy!
Pre Schengen , there be border posts on roads, but they'd be unmanned. Or, occasionally, they'd be an overweight conscriptee smoking a cigarette and waving all the cars through.