Oink

And one only has to read the essays of Brutus and the letters of Agrippa to find some very compelling arguments for an anti-federalist position.

Oink

The problem is, we don't know. Any economist that tells you different is either full of hubris or is simply lying. We can predict and forecast all we like but even with the most sophisticated modelling using the most powerful computing there are simply far too many variables to be able to predict what's going to happen. The only thing we can really do is to tell you what happened but not what's going to happen.

Shard

No economist would assert anything but a best guess. Nevertheless, that's how major economic decisions are made.

Former Lancastrian

I wonder if any person or group is willing to put out a non partisan article on the pros and cons of a No or Yes vote.
Scouring the internet there are dozens of so called experts indicating what will happen but are they based on actual facts or what might or might not happen. Does anyone really know if for example the No vote won?
There are certain things we know for sure what would happen if a No vote occurred same as we know for a Yes vote.
A lot of the No vote is comprised of citizens who believe the UKs immigration policy is broken and needs to be fixed. They also believe the EU is introducing rules and legislation that puts certain UK firms at a disadvantage or just seem plain stupid as in the vacuum cleaner (no motors above 1600 watts).
Between 1980 and 2009 Acts put into Parliament in the UK consisted of 86% from the UK and 14% by the EU
From 2009 onwards the figures are now 47% from the UK and 53% from the EU.
In one example of red tape increasing British firms’ costs, the study found that a property developer had to pay more than £200,000 to relocate a colony of newts because of EU directives protecting the creatures’ natural habitat.
On the Yes side EasyJet, the budget airline, told Government officials that its entire business is only possible because EU countries agree to apply common rules to companies operating across borders.
Sure as part of the EU Brits are free to move around the EU be it for work, study or retirement and leaving the EU would make it harder but not impossible.
As I won't be eligible to vote I have no horse in this race. Id want to see an impartial pros and cons article that clearly spells out to the voter what they are voting on without the smoke and mirrors or untruths. Is that too much to ask?

Oink

There are plenty that will.

Shard

Not too much to ask, but as the pro and cons will be based on assumptions about the the future, there will be very different viewpoints. It's not a simple decision. There is an argument for leaving the decision to the political elite and not the general public.

Shard

They're just being strident in their views, just as one scientist may champion one theory over another, deep down knowing that the truth is unknown.

Former Lancastrian

And leaving such decisions to the political elite always works Haven't the political elite in Canada over the last few years introduced legislation that has been struck down by the Supreme Court (more political unelected elite). How is Harpers record against them at the moment? Bill C24, Bill C51 all excellent pieces of legislation

Shard

Sorry, don't know much about Canadian pols other than Harper is moron.

Novocastrian

I know this is BE and therefore not to be taken seriously, but is there any chance of you responding to post #23 with other than an ad hominem?

jimf

Is that not already the case essentially? What examples are there where UK input has created a regulation resulting in significant benefit to the UK?

Novocastrian

You miss the point. If you have no vote, you aren't more autonomous, you're less so.

I reluctantly suggest that Maggies' UK rebate would be one example, but of course that would be ignoring the lingering distrust of British Exceptionalism which it still engenders today.

What examples are there of your input making a political difference for you?

It's shit not being the King.

jimf

Every country and group consider themselves to be exceptional, the country that produced the Chauvins probably being the best example.

For all practical purposes then one vote or no vote is the same for the UK or for me.

EU needs an army to be taken seriously apparently...

Jean-Claude Juncker calls for EU army | World news | The Guardian

Novocastrian

Surely you're bright enough to understand the difference between perceived uniqueness and Exceptionalism? Perhaps not.

I acknowledge the weakness of my personal vs national voting rights point, but surely the UK as, I think the 4th or 5th largest (or 6th?), largest economy in the EU should be able to exert significant influence in the policy making.

If in fact they can't, at least part of the explanation is their negative, abrasive attitudes under Conservative governments since Thatcher.

Shard

Your assumption is that the EEA is the optimal economic relationship for Britain. The Eurosceptics are suggesting that Britain could do equally well by trading with the EEA As an outsider and instead building stronger economic links with the Americas, Asia and the Commonwealth. It's not a perverse position to take. However one would need to see a comparative analysis before deciding which economic path may be more fruitful.