Brexit - Post Match Reaction

Needless to say, LD is being convenient with the truth. The idea that voters were under no doubt about the terms and consequences of a 'leave' vote i.e. leaving the EU meant unambiguously leaving the single market to is horse**** . If it was crystal-clear, leading members of the leave campaign certainly did their best to muddy matters.

 

Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market

Daniel Hannan MEP

 

Wouldn’t it be terrible if we were really like Norway and Switzerland? Really? They’re rich. They’re happy. They’re self-governing

Nigel Farage, Ukip leader

 

The Norwegian option, the EEA option, I think that it might be initally attractive for some business people

Matthew Elliot, Vote Leave chief executive

 

Increasingly, the Norway option looks the best for the UK

Arron Banks, Leave.EU founder

 

Only a madman would actually leave the market

Owen Paterson MP, Vote Leave backer

Stonger In deliberately misquoted such statements and took them out of context, like you are, as Andrew Neil beautifully exposed a while back :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sT8fkefynzM

And? More evidence that the leave campaig was trying to be all things to all people.

It exposes how the remain camp take quotes out of context to suggest that we did not know that leaving may well entail leaving the single market.

UK exports of goods to the rest of the EU accounted for 47% of total UK goods exports in 2015. I understand that number reduced to 44% at the last available official estimate. According to NIESR (the National Institute of Economic and Social Research) data EU goods exports to the UK account for about 16% of its total exports of goods.

 

So in reality we need them rather MORE than they need us.

I would argue that we need each other. What will happen to the French wine industry if they put tariffs on our goods, and the German car industry or the Danish bacon market or the Spanish tourist industry? The list goes on and on. We also contribute a sizeable amount to the EU budget so in terms of functioning they really do need us.

Brexit is a crisis entirely of the EU's making. They chose to tell Cameron to get stuffed when he tried to raise legitimate concerns over the level of migration.

President Xi of China:- "There are no winners in trade wars"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-38650487

He's not wrong

I would argue that we need each other. What will happen to the French wine industry if they put tariffs on our goods, and the German car industry or the Danish bacon market or the Spanish tourist industry? The list goes on and on. We also contribute a sizeable amount to the EU budget so in terms of functioning they really do need us.

 

Brexit is a crisis entirely of the EU's making. They chose to tell Cameron to get stuffed when he tried to raise legitimate concerns over the level of migration.

Exactly. It was the EU nationalists who created Brexit, not us. We didn't change, the EU did.

Exactly. It was the EU nationalists who created Brexit, not us. We didn't change, the EU did.

What is an EU nationalist?

Christ you haven't got a clue.

It exposes how the remain camp take quotes out of context to suggest that we did not know that leaving may well entail leaving the single market.

If you believe this poll then a substantial majority of the British people want to see their nation in the EU Single Market AND have controls imposed on EU immigration too: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/16/uk-voters-want-single-market-access-and-immigration-controls-poll-finds

The apparent fact that so many of our people believe that they can indeed 'have their cake and eat it' is testimony to just how badly some misunderstood the issue before them at the referendum and how effective the lies the Leave Campaign peddled during the referendum were.

And? Just more evidence that the leave campaign was trying to be all things to all people. See Hannan's mea culpa on Newsnight. For a proposition that was supposedly clear-cut, all I see is repeated evasion and qualifications. Just like the lies about £350m for the NHS, posters linking the migrant crisis to the EU, NHS logos on publicity material, claims Turkey's looming membership. The list goes on pal.

 

Read Shipman's book: the leave campaign knew it was being loose with truth but the truth was less important than message discipline and being wilfully provocative to dictate the news cycle.

That punishment budget never happened did it or the economic Armageddon after we voted out. These were promised by the leaders of remain or were they lying when they told us that - it works both ways.

If your population goes up by 330,000 every year as a result of migration then they all need to be housed, their children educated and access to the NHS. Are you telling me that this will not put pressure on public services?

It was the EU nationalists who created Brexit, not us. We didn't change, the EU did.

So why aren't we staying in the Customs Union? That is the old Common Market. Britain has been transformed since 1973 from the sick man of Europe to one of the leading economies.

The EU has changed, but so has Britain - we now vote for whoever makes the biggest, rashest promises. We're leaving the single market so we can control immigration? Immigration is the highest priority? Odd then that May has done nothing on non EU immigration in the past six months - just as she did nothing in years as Home Secretary.

If you believe this poll then a substantial majority of the British people want to see their nation in the EU Single Market AND have controls imposed on EU immigration too: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/16/uk-voters-want-single-market-access-and-immigration-controls-poll-finds

 

The apparent fact that so many of our people believe that they can indeed 'have their cake and eat it' is testimony to just how badly some misunderstood the issue before them at the referendum and how effective the lies the Leave Campaign peddled during the referendum were.

I don't really trust polls but to be fair I would expect that result when people are asked, do they want to have their cake and eat it?

Do you think that when Osborne stood up and told us that there would be a 'punishment budget' he was telling the truth?

If you believe this poll then a substantial majority of the British people want to see their nation in the EU Single Market AND have controls imposed on EU immigration too: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/16/uk-voters-want-single-market-access-and-immigration-controls-poll-finds

 

The apparent fact that so many of our people believe that they can indeed 'have their cake and eat it' is testimony to just how badly some misunderstood the issue before them at the referendum and how effective the lies the Leave Campaign peddled during the referendum were.

Precisely. The leave campaign excelled in strategic ambiguity. It's also the reason why brexiters on here almost always cite Cameron whenever this question arises.

I don't really trust polls but to be fair I would expect that result when people are asked, do they want to have their cake and eat it?

 

Do you think that when Osborne stood up and told us that there would be a 'punishment budget' he was telling the truth?

Well it hardly mattes now what the former Chancellor said because he is out of office and Remain lost the vote anyway. If you are trying to tell me that one sides lies somehow excuse the other's then I would say to you that this type of argument belongs in the playground.

That punishment budget never happened did it or the economic Armageddon after we voted out. These were promised by the leaders of remain or were they lying when they told us that - it works both ways.

 

If your population goes up by 330,000 every year as a result of migration then they all need to be housed, their children educated and access to the NHS. Are you telling me that this will not put pressure on public services?

Basic economics not a forte, I see. It depends on whether migrants pay more in taxes than they take out in welfare and the use of public services. There is no automatic reason why they should put more pressure on public services.

Precisely. The leave campaign excelled in strategic ambiguity. It's also the reason why brexiters on here almost always cite Cameron whenever this question arises.

The assumption that people that voted leave are stupid does not reflect well on those that wish for us to remain in the EU. Ironically since the referendum virtually every prediction made by the remain camp has been wrong - who is it exactly that is stupid?

The assumption that people that voted leave are stupid does not reflect well on those that wish for us to remain in the EU. Ironically since the referendum virtually every prediction made by the remain camp has been wrong - who is it exactly that is stupid?

Well fears that Sterling would crash and inflation rise have certainly been confounded!

Basic economics not a forte, I see. It depends on whether migrants pay more in taxes than they take out in welfare and the use of public services. There is no automatic reason why they should put more pressure on public services.

The tax returns of the mainly low wage Eastern European workers is hardly going to pay for the infrastructure needed to cope with the annual arrival of a city the size of Southampton is it? Perhaps you have seen in the news recently that there is an NHS crisis at the moment.

So why aren't we staying in the Customs Union? That is the old Common Market. Britain has been transformed since 1973 from the sick man of Europe to one of the leading economies.

It's misleading to suggest that the turnaround in our fortunes was solely down to the common market.

Britain continued to deteriorate after joining the common market, after which we had to go to the IMF with our begging bowl 3 years later. In fact, things only started to turn for the better for Britain, when thatchers market reforms came into effect ... a decade after joining the common market (although most lefties would never like to admit it)

Well fears that Sterling would crash and inflation rise have certainly been confounded!

Inflation is at 1.6% that is hardly a dramatic rise. Sterling fell but many argued that would be a good thing - bet the Greeks wished they could devalue their currency.

You must have been encouraged by the Governor of the Bank of England's comments. At least he could admit he was wrong!

The tax returns of the mainly low wage Eastern European workers is hardly going to pay for the infrastructure needed to cope with the annual arrival of a city the size of Southampton is it? Perhaps you have seen in the news recently that there is an NHS crisis at the moment.

The evidence suggests otherwise: EU migrants put in more than they take out.

The NHS crisis has virtually nothing to do with EU migration. Can't wait to see who you blame once the EU bogeyman disappears.

The evidence suggests otherwise: EU migrants put in more than they take out.

 

The NHS crisis has virtually nothing to do with EU migration. Can't wait to see who you blame once the EU bogeyman disappears.

Pay attention please. SG spoke of infrastructure, housing, schooling, health care, etc. No way do their taxes cover the infrastructure necessary to accommodate them.

I'm sure that you're happy though that you can steer the conversation away from the debacle of your earlier faux pas where you were shot down in flames by him.

The evidence suggests otherwise: EU migrants put in more than they take out.

 

The NHS crisis has virtually nothing to do with EU migration. Can't wait to see who you blame once the EU bogeyman disappears.

http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien/james-obrien-leave-voters-anger-theresa-may-speech/

Pay attention please. SG spoke of infrastructure, housing, schooling, health care, etc. No way do their taxes cover the infrastructure necessary to accommodate them.

 

I'm sure that you're happy though that you can steer the conversation away from the debacle of your earlier faux pas where you were shot down in flames by him.

http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/brexit05.pdf - pages 13-14.

I've cited it before - alas the collective intelligence of the brexit camp on here struggled to muster a response

Pay attention please. SG spoke of infrastructure, housing, schooling, health care, etc. No way do their taxes cover the infrastructure necessary to accommodate them.

 

I'm sure that you're happy though that you can steer the conversation away from the debacle of your earlier faux pas where you were shot down in flames by him.

Wrong as ever Wes.

EU migrants earn more than the UK national average, pay more tax and have lower unemployment rates. Its immigrants from Pakistan and Bangladesh (note not India) who on average have much lower employment rates and earning levels.

The evidence suggests otherwise: EU migrants put in more than they take out.

 

The NHS crisis has virtually nothing to do with EU migration. Can't wait to see who you blame once the EU bogeyman disappears.

That evidence depends on who you choose to believe.

So you really cannot see any correlation between the fact more people are coming to the country and thus using the NHS and the fact that the NHS is under pressure? Do you think that if our population fell by 330,000 each year then there would be the same amount of people using the NHS?

I will of course acknowledge that an ageing population and a knackered care system play their part!

You again make the assumption that you are either for or against migration - that could not be further from the truth, migration is a wonderful thing. Uncontrolled migration is scary.

The evidence suggests otherwise: EU migrants put in more than they take out.

 

The NHS crisis has virtually nothing to do with EU migration. Can't wait to see who you blame once the EU bogeyman disappears.

Do they put in enough to pay for the added infrastructure and services of a new City the size of Southampton every year?

Do they put in enough to pay for the added infrastructure and services of a new City the size of Southampton every year?

Yes. Im surprised you haven't grasped it yet. Successive Governments have failed to deliver real sustainable per capita economic growth so high immigration which boosts the headline rate is the next best thing.

Wrong as ever Wes.

 

EU migrants earn more than the UK national average, pay more tax and have lower unemployment rates. Its immigrants from Pakistan and Bangladesh (note not India) who on average have much lower employment rates and earning levels.

Read my post more carefully please. I never claimed that EU migrants earned less that the UK national average. I said that although they might generally pay more into the kitty than they took out, there was no way that the taxes of the recent mass immigration wave covered the infrastructure needed to accommodate them.

http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/brexit05.pdf - pages 13-14.

 

I've cited it before - alas the collective intelligence of the brexit camp on here struggled to muster a response

As Mandy Rice Davies would say 'they would say that wouldn't they'. For the other version read migration watch.

As Mandy Rice Davies would say 'they would say that wouldn't they'. For the other version read migration watch.

No they wouldn't say that. I take it that you don't have an answer.

Let's see: the top academic economist in the country vs. a shoddy thinktank whose made-up numbers have been repeatedly reported to the Press Complaints Commission.

Read my post more carefully please. I never claimed that EU migrants earned less that the UK national average. I said that although they might generally pay more into the kitty than they took out, there was no way that the taxes of the recent mass immigration wave covered the infrastructure needed to accommodate them.

Same as every other public infrastructure project - built with either PFI or borrowed money. As the Government can borrow at c1% and every year inflation erodes the debt's value it makes sense (within limits).

Read my post more carefully please. I never claimed that EU migrants earned less that the UK national average. I said that although they might generally pay more into the kitty than they took out, there was no way that the taxes of the recent mass immigration wave covered the infrastructure needed to accommodate them.

Les, old boy, who cleans your bottom and prepares your medicine?

Yes. Im surprised you haven't grasped it yet. Successive Governments have failed to deliver real sustainable per capita economic growth so high immigration which boosts the headline rate is the next best thing.

Maybe one reason the per capita growth figures are so poor is because of mass uncontrolled immigration.

Maybe one reason the per capita growth figures are so poor is because of mass uncontrolled immigration.

http://www.imf.org/~/media/files/publications/spillovernotes/spillovernote8

It was made clear by remain & leave side that we'd be leaving single market.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Les, old boy, who cleans your bottom and prepares your medicine?

I expected a response like this, as being found out for posting drivel with those pre-referendum quotes and being shot down in flames for it, your usual MO is to indulge in childish insults. I read your linked pages and found that the report admitted that the housing requirements of the recent mass immigration could not keep up with the demand. Of course, housing is also part of the infrastructure, but typically the report is happy to blame the government for not building enough houses, rather than the cause of the necessity.

It was made clear by remain & leave side that we'd be leaving single market.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Deja vu pal.

Can you provide unambiguous quotes from the leave side stating that leaving the EU definitely meant leaving the single market -and more importantly that the UK would lose the benefits of membership by leaving the EU.

Keep trying to have your cake and eat it.

The vote was quite unambiguous and I'm not sure why you keep trying to claim it was somehow more sinister.

There were two options, remain in the EU or leave the EU.

Since the 'EU' is an all encompassing term of the freedom of movement, single market, customs, laws, rules, regulations etc etc, it seems pretty clear that voting to 'leave' the 'EU' meant leaving all those things behind.

Deja vu pal.

 

Can you provide unambiguous quotes from the leave side stating that leaving the EU meant leaving the single market. Interesting as Claude would say you repeatedly cite the leave side in whose interests it was to convey the stark choice facing voters.

Gove & Johnson on that clip . They were the leave side. You wonder why you're called Remoaners . You can't even accept simple facts . During the referendum period both the leaders of the official remain side and the leaders of the official leave side stated leaving the eu would mean leaving the single market. It's not open to debate , it's not an opinion , it's a fact that they said it. Whether it's a good thing or not is open to debate, whether they said it , isn't

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No they wouldn't say that. I take it that you don't have an answer.

 

Let's see: the top academic economist in the country vs. a shoddy thinktank whose made-up numbers have been repeatedly reported to the Press Complaints Commission.

Well shall we have a little look at the authors then;

John Van Reenen – ‘Advisor to Chief Economist of DG Competition (since 2003), European Commission’

Jonathan Wadsworth - Research Fellow: Institute fur Zukunft Arbeit, (IZA), Bonn 2000- is that the same European University?

Gianmarco Ottaviano - Senior Non-Resident Fellow, Bruegel, Brussels, Belgium

So as they are all stakeholders in the EU; yes they would say that.

It's not even called the single market it's official title is the internal market ( says it all really) . It is a single market , but the EU call it the internal market

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I read your linked pages and found that the report admitted that the housing requirements of the recent mass immigration could not keep up with the demand. Of course, housing is also part of the infrastructure, but typically the report is happy to blame the government for not building enough houses, rather than the cause of the necessity.

Only one third of the population growth is due to EU immigration - two thirds is births/ increasing life expectancy and non EU immigration. Why the fixation with it? On average they are better educated, better paid, younger and healthier than resident Brits or non EU immigrants.

It's not even called the single market it's official title is the internal market ( says it all really) . It is a single market , but the EU call it the internal market

As distinct from the external (non EU markets). When there are lots of markets makes more sense to refer to the internal market no?

Gove & Johnson on that clip . They were the leave side. You wonder why you're called Remoaners . You can't even accept simple facts . During the referendum period both the leaders of the official remain side and the leaders of the official leave side stated leaving the eu would mean leaving the single market. It's not open to debate , it's not an opinion , it's a fact that they said it. Whether it's a good thing or not is open to debate, whether they said it , isn't

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No worse they peddled myth the UK could still enjoy the benefits of membership by being out. That there was no trade-off. If it was a contract, it would be rescinded for misrepresentation.

Keep trying to have your cake.

Well shall we have a little look at the authors then;

 

John Van Reenen – ‘Advisor to Chief Economist of DG Competition (since 2003), European Commission’

 

Jonathan Wadsworth - Research Fellow: Institute fur Zukunft Arbeit, (IZA), Bonn 2000- is that the same European University?

 

Gianmarco Ottaviano - Senior Non-Resident Fellow, Bruegel, Brussels, Belgium

 

So as they are all stakeholders in the EU; yes they would say that.

Eh? Apart from being factually incorrect, that shows nothing, unlike Migration Watch's numbers that have been shown to be bunkum. Keep up with the f**kwittery - you're giving Baldrick a run for his money.

Only one third of the population growth is due to EU immigration - two thirds is births/ increasing life expectancy and non EU immigration. Why the fixation with it? On average they are better educated, better paid, younger and healthier than resident Brits or non EU immigrants.

One third of the population growth - only!

I expected a response like this, as being found out for posting drivel with those pre-referendum quotes and being shot down in flames for it, your usual MO is to indulge in childish insults. I read your linked pages and found that the report admitted that the housing requirements of the recent mass immigration could not keep up with the demand. Of course, housing is also part of the infrastructure, but typically the report is happy to blame the government for not building enough houses, rather than the cause of the necessity.

Les - having narrowed the definition of infrastructure to exclude unhelpful contradictory evidence you then go on and misread -or at least misrepresent the passage in question

Bravo

Eh? Apart from being factually incorrect, that shows nothing, unlike Migration Watch's numbers that have been shown to be bunkum. Keep up with the f**kwittery - you're giving Baldrick a run for his money.

What they lied on their CVs as well Shurlock! Google them I took that from their CVs!

You are very naïve to just read one side of the story Shurlock. I read a number of sources and then make up my mind.

Have you read 'light up and Live' a paper on smoking by Phillip Morriss or 'Topping up' by William Grant? Its changed my life.

What they lied on their CVs as well Shurlock! Google them I took that from their CVs!

 

You are very naïve to just read one side of the story Shurlock.

No. How does being associated with IZA and Bruegel make someone an EU stakeholder? This is bizarre as well as sinister.

For that matter why does advising the European Commission on technical matters of competition policy show anything other than the individual is a leader in his field.

I respect research that has to pass the highest standards of quality control, not least because findings of bias would destroy an academic's reputation.

Unlike Migration Watch numbers which have been found to be pure bunkum.

No. How does being associated with IZA and Bruegel makes someone an EU stakeholder? This is bizarre as well as sinister.

 

For that matter why does advising the European Commission on technical matters of competition policy show anything other than the individual is a leader in his field.

 

I respect research that has to pass the highest standards of quality control and where findings of bias would destroy an academic's reputation.

They are funded by the EU.

They are funded by the EU.

So is Nigel Farage.