When Did You Last Go To A Newsagents?
ChatterBank1 min ago
One Sided ?
Are the Brexiters being undermined by the constant messages from national and international bodies like these ? ( whether they are right or wrong )?
http://
Do the brexiters also need some economic bodies / think tank etc etc , to come out on their side ?
http://
Do the brexiters also need some economic bodies / think tank etc etc , to come out on their side ?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Bazile. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
It obviously doesn't help when bodies support their desire not to have anyone rock the boat and keep the status quo and so build up arguments against Brexit. But hopefully there is a large proportion of the public who can spot a such a "hidden" agenda and accept that conclusions from a forecast depend a lot on what assumptions are made; and forecasters can choose those assumptions to paint whatever picture they wish.
It'd be difficult to find alternative bodies wishing to push the, 'yeah change everything and see what falls out as that'll be exciting', argument. It's not in their risk-reducing nature. But for most of us, economics is but one aspect of this. In the very unlikely result of there being a longer term financial cost it'd still be worth it to regain control of our own future path.
It'd be difficult to find alternative bodies wishing to push the, 'yeah change everything and see what falls out as that'll be exciting', argument. It's not in their risk-reducing nature. But for most of us, economics is but one aspect of this. In the very unlikely result of there being a longer term financial cost it'd still be worth it to regain control of our own future path.
"But hopefully there is a large proportion of the public who can spot a such a "hidden" agenda..."
That's a lot of faith to put in a public that votes for those who would privatise their healthcare and be uprooted from their family homes while welcoming future engineers and doctors with open arms and lavishing them with the fruits of our labour.
That's a lot of faith to put in a public that votes for those who would privatise their healthcare and be uprooted from their family homes while welcoming future engineers and doctors with open arms and lavishing them with the fruits of our labour.
It seems pretty obvious by now that the case for Brexit is not a promise but an aspiration. "Things *will* be better if the UK leaves the EU," we are told, but there is no real idea how this will be achieved. But, then, how could there be? The aftermath of a Brexit vote will be long, messy, complicated, and dependent on far more than what just the UK wants, as it severs itself from the EU and tries to build a different relationship. Who knows what that relationship will be? Will the countries we deal with be anxious to keep the status quo as far as possible, would they be somehow punitive instead (or at least unwilling to budge in the way we'd like), or would they see a non-EU UK as an exciting opportunity that everyone will bend over backwards for? Who knows?
This applies both ways, of course. I think the default assumption of the various bodies that have offered their analysis is that the attitude displayed towards Brexit by other countries today, one of scepticism and disapproval, is likely to carry on beyond a "leave" vote. This seems reasonable, in which case Brexit is likely to leave the UK somewhat worse off because everyone else will be in no mood to pander to our demands. But maybe the reality of Brexit would force other countries to change their tune. The only way to find out how Brexit would actually play out is to try it.
In that sense I can't say that the OECD prediction adds much material to the case for staying. It's a given that leaving the EU is taking a risk, but I can't say I believe that any attempt to quantify that risk is really going to be accurate (or, more to the point, the analysis is probably sound but we don't really know what the starting point is going to be, making any specific numbers relatively pointless). I think this is the tone the Brexit campaign should really be taking, which is to say that I don't think they really *need* any detailed analysis to be on their side. Apart from making them hypocrites, again the point is that Brexit is about an aspiration, not a promise.
I think this is the tone that Leave campaigners really need to start emphasising, though. They are far too dismissive of just about everyone who points out the risk, as if it doesn't exist. It does. They should be far more honest about that.
This applies both ways, of course. I think the default assumption of the various bodies that have offered their analysis is that the attitude displayed towards Brexit by other countries today, one of scepticism and disapproval, is likely to carry on beyond a "leave" vote. This seems reasonable, in which case Brexit is likely to leave the UK somewhat worse off because everyone else will be in no mood to pander to our demands. But maybe the reality of Brexit would force other countries to change their tune. The only way to find out how Brexit would actually play out is to try it.
In that sense I can't say that the OECD prediction adds much material to the case for staying. It's a given that leaving the EU is taking a risk, but I can't say I believe that any attempt to quantify that risk is really going to be accurate (or, more to the point, the analysis is probably sound but we don't really know what the starting point is going to be, making any specific numbers relatively pointless). I think this is the tone the Brexit campaign should really be taking, which is to say that I don't think they really *need* any detailed analysis to be on their side. Apart from making them hypocrites, again the point is that Brexit is about an aspiration, not a promise.
I think this is the tone that Leave campaigners really need to start emphasising, though. They are far too dismissive of just about everyone who points out the risk, as if it doesn't exist. It does. They should be far more honest about that.
There is the element of the , (for whatever reason) 'undecided '
I don't know if any polsters have have sought the opinions of this group as yet .
I suspect that those in this group who don't know which way to jump , because they are not up on the various arguements for and against ; might well be swayed by the opinions of these financial bodies
I don't know if any polsters have have sought the opinions of this group as yet .
I suspect that those in this group who don't know which way to jump , because they are not up on the various arguements for and against ; might well be swayed by the opinions of these financial bodies
And not one Bremainer admits the truth that will happen to the UK if we stay, that is we will cease to exist as a country and be ruled entirely by Germany so all their economic projections on staying in are false.
That is without doubt, it is the stated aim to just be one, and to be honest the only way the EU will ever work.
That is without doubt, it is the stated aim to just be one, and to be honest the only way the EU will ever work.
It's difficult to reduce the exit as being a mere aspiration since it was better before joining, we can sovereignty, and simple continuing the trend since, of things getting worse in the EU, indicates that the alternative will likely be far worse. One just needs to find the nerve to make the jump.
As for Obama, I don't recall him shooting down anything, except maybe his reputation. As I recall he implied making a trade agreement would be a long winded process as the UK wasn't important enough to bother with. Something that can not reasonably be believed, unless one is prepared to see that as a change of position from friendly country to hostile one.
But we all know that in reality it was just interfering where morally he ought not by using passive-aggressive menace in order to get what he wanted. Coupled with "butter wouldn't melt" plausible deniability when challenged on it afterwards, which some latched on to in order to maintain their "no threat made" belief.
As for Obama, I don't recall him shooting down anything, except maybe his reputation. As I recall he implied making a trade agreement would be a long winded process as the UK wasn't important enough to bother with. Something that can not reasonably be believed, unless one is prepared to see that as a change of position from friendly country to hostile one.
But we all know that in reality it was just interfering where morally he ought not by using passive-aggressive menace in order to get what he wanted. Coupled with "butter wouldn't melt" plausible deniability when challenged on it afterwards, which some latched on to in order to maintain their "no threat made" belief.
Were we better off before we joined the EU? I've heard this claim made a few times but I've never really understood why. In particular, we seemed to spend an inordinate about of time in the 50s and 60s trying to get into the EEC, or Common Market, or whatever it was then, and being told to sod off.
But either way, it doesn't seem to matter. Britain pre-EEC was long enough ago as to be essentially irrelevant for assessing our future prospects outside the EU as it is now. Both the UK, and the EU, and the world, have moved on.
But either way, it doesn't seem to matter. Britain pre-EEC was long enough ago as to be essentially irrelevant for assessing our future prospects outside the EU as it is now. Both the UK, and the EU, and the world, have moved on.
Jim, //we seemed to spend an inordinate about of time in the 50s and 60s trying to get into the EEC, or Common Market, //
I think that is precisely the problem. We signed up to a Common Market - and ended up with something far removed from that - something the British public hadn't envisaged or bargained for.
I think that is precisely the problem. We signed up to a Common Market - and ended up with something far removed from that - something the British public hadn't envisaged or bargained for.
Its the "politicians" in the eussr that will cause all the problems if we leave...if they see their dreams of an empire going down the swannee then just like spoilt and spiteful little kids they will try and cause trouble for us
businesses just want to keep on with business, trading and making money just as theyve always done...
businesses just want to keep on with business, trading and making money just as theyve always done...
Latest Posts
Morgan Freeman Speaks His Mind!
History1 min ago
Crosswords1 min ago
Microsoft Two Stage Verification
Technology2 mins ago
ChatterBank9 mins ago
Mad Mullahs Ever More Desparate To...
News12 mins ago
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|