SURVEY: Brexit, do you support it?

[Linzz]

Spot on.

the Guardian is reporting that 88% of 600 expert economists say that a vote to leave would have a negative impact on growth for 10-20 years. (Online survey with a 17% response rate) http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/28/economists-reject-brexit-boost-cameron

There's a desperate propaganda war to keep the UK in the EU. The implication is that the UK has benefited since joining the EU economically and thus an exit will mean economic disaster. Yet according to the Office of National Statistics economic growth peaked BEFORE joining the EU.and has declined ever since with lower lows and lower highs.No doubt I will be accused of conspiracy theory and desperation as per the previous posts, but you may be able to see how the media is being manipulated by the government if you simply use the government's own statistics.

British-GDP-Growth-since-1949.jpg

THis is growth rate - you don't seem to realise actually what that is and have picked one graph out of thsands of economic reviews of various aspects of the economy simply because you think erroneously it backs up your point of view.

Why not check on a standards of living graph?

REAL research is looking first and making your mind up after - you appear to be doing it the wrong way round.

you need to learn how to "research"...it's not the same as "search", Google or Facebook.

I have picked an economic growth graph because the Guardian article was about economic growth rate, how blindingly appropriate is that?

You still appear to have a condescending attitude to anyone who disagrees with you, I have never told you what you need to do. This is not a contest of egos.

Now you haven't read the article either - it's about the effect on the economy now not the history of growth rate - it talks about several economic factors too - which I mentioned earlier; you have the wrong end of the stick - it is I admit very difficult not to be condescending to some posters on this thread.

The article's opening statements are around economic growth and subsequent factors relating to that .In fact mentions economic growth 6 times throughout the article. Looks like you haven't read it in fact. I can only agree with you on your last point. Some posters do find it difficult not to be condescending but that's only a result of the size of their own ego, nothing consequential

Edited May 31, 2016 by Linzz

[billd766]

THis is growth rate - you don't seem to realise actually what that is and have picked one graph out of thsands of economic reviews of various aspects of the economy simply because you think erroneously it backs up your point of view.

Why not check on a standards of living graph?

REAL research is looking first and making your mind up after - you appear to be doing it the wrong way round.

you need to learn how to "research"...it's not the same as "search", Google or Facebook.

I have picked an economic growth graph because the Guardian article was about economic growth rate, how blindingly appropriate is that?

You still appear to have a condescending attitude to anyone who disagrees with you, I have never told you what you need to do.

This is not a contest of egos.

Regrettably, I fear that it is. I also fear it will get worse in the next three weeks.

This does not have to become a p!ssing contest, but invariably on Thai Visa (and elsewhere) it seems to.

Some people have difficulty understanding that opinions are just that - a personal view of any given situation.

Two people can be given the same data/facts/bullsh!t and come to a different conclusion about the best outcome.

There is no clear cut set of reasons for EXIT or REMAIN. In most cases it depends on your fundamental political standpoint and preconceptions. Being in the EU has not been all bad - it couldn't be, there has to have been benefits from such an alliance over 43 years. Those are recognised and acknowledged. Equally, an EXIT should not be all about the fear of a collapse of trade/economy/Pound etc - life will go on after EXIT. Will it be plain sailing and the land of milk and honey? - of course not. Will a vote to REMAIN ensure a better future for Britain? - frankly, I doubt out and (in my opinion only) I can see it only getting worse with more of the same.

If in your individual opinion you think that membership of the EU currently offers greater benefits for Britain (and will continue to do so in the future) then it is right to vote REMAIN. I have no issue with anyone who sees it that way and democracy allows them to vote differently to me.

For my part, the EU is broken. We can't mend it and it has changed dramatically from the EEC that I was in favour of back in the 1970's and was pro-European about for 30 years.

Tough decisions are not easy and invariably come at a cost. I prefer the risk of short-term pain for the long-term benefits, that I believe are associated with EXIT, rather than the terminal decline of the EU with a REMAIN vote. As said, I respect the democratic right of others to see things differently and vote accordingly - they are not wrong any more than I am.

quote " This is not a contest of egos.

Regrettably, I fear that it is. I also fear it will get worse in the next three weeks".

This is the sole reason why I cannot be bothered to post on this thread any more other than this time.

I made my decision a long while ago and it will not change.

I DO have the right to vote and my vote will be exercised by my proxy voter on the 23rd of June.

What ever the result, Brexit or Remain, I will accept it but I won't take part in any post mortems or any of the "your side cheated, Oh no they didn't, Oh yes they did" threads that will come out of the vote.

I got over that attitude when I left school in 1959.

[billd766]

Double post.

My apologies.

Edited May 31, 2016 by billd766

[cumgranosalum]

THis is growth rate - you don't seem to realise actually what that is and have picked one graph out of thsands of economic reviews of various aspects of the economy simply because you think erroneously it backs up your point of view.

Why not check on a standards of living graph?

REAL research is looking first and making your mind up after - you appear to be doing it the wrong way round.

you need to learn how to "research"...it's not the same as "search", Google or Facebook.

I have picked an economic growth graph because the Guardian article was about economic growth rate, how blindingly appropriate is that?

You still appear to have a condescending attitude to anyone who disagrees with you, I have never told you what you need to do.

This is not a contest of egos.

Regrettably, I fear that it is. I also fear it will get worse in the next three weeks.

This does not have to become a p!ssing contest, but invariably on Thai Visa (and elsewhere) it seems to.

Some people have difficulty understanding that opinions are just that - a personal view of any given situation.

Two people can be given the same data/facts/bullsh!t and come to a different conclusion about the best outcome.

There is no clear cut set of reasons for EXIT or REMAIN. In most cases it depends on your fundamental political standpoint and preconceptions. Being in the EU has not been all bad - it couldn't be, there has to have been benefits from such an alliance over 43 years. Those are recognised and acknowledged. Equally, an EXIT should not be all about the fear of a collapse of trade/economy/Pound etc - life will go on after EXIT. Will it be plain sailing and the land of milk and honey? - of course not. Will a vote to REMAIN ensure a better future for Britain? - frankly, I doubt out and (in my opinion only) I can see it only getting worse with more of the same.

If in your individual opinion you think that membership of the EU currently offers greater benefits for Britain (and will continue to do so in the future) then it is right to vote REMAIN. I have no issue with anyone who sees it that way and democracy allows them to vote differently to me.

For my part, the EU is broken. We can't mend it and it has changed dramatically from the EEC that I was in favour of back in the 1970's and was pro-European about for 30 years.

Tough decisions are not easy and invariably come at a cost. I prefer the risk of short-term pain for the long-term benefits, that I believe are associated with EXIT, rather than the terminal decline of the EU with a REMAIN vote. As said, I respect the democratic right of others to see things differently and vote accordingly - they are not wrong any more than I am.

quote " This is not a contest of egos.

Regrettably, I fear that it is. I also fear it will get worse in the next three weeks".

This is the sole reason why I cannot be bothered to post on this thread any more other than this time.

I made my decision a long while ago and it will not change.

I DO have the right to vote and my vote will be exercised by my proxy voter on the 23rd of June.

What ever the result, Brexit or Remain, I will accept it but I won't take part in any post mortems or any of the "your side cheated, Oh no they didn't, Oh yes they did" threads that will come out of the vote.

I got over that attitude when I left school in 1959.

"If I’m right, 25 days from now a lot of people are going to have a lot of accepting to do. Either all the Ukip activists and the many pro-Leave Tories who have campaigned for years as the voice of the people will have to accept that they’re not; or vast numbers of business leaders, economists, security experts and others will have to swallow the fact that voters are happy to ignore their advice." - William Hague, BBC........."

he also says there will be no CABAL to stay int anyway....mmmm...see about that.

Edited May 31, 2016 by cumgranosalum

[Grouse]

Nontabury, I have to ask you this, why are you so vehemently against anything in favour of the EU?

Most here have gone out of there way to explain that their decision to be pro or anti EU is a balanced, rational one.

You're a Yorkshireman right?

Is there really nothing you think the EU has done that's of any use whatsoever?

How about the banning of mass use of antibiotics by farmers to fatten livestock unlike in the USA? Good?

Your arguments would carry more weight if you showed more balance!

And before you go off on one I've already expressed my concern about the democratic deficit in the EU and the lamentable border force in the UK

He's not capable. He takes pride in sticking to his vexatious fixed positions. You are wasting your time engaging with him.

He's the type that posts images such as the one just above putting words into the mouths of British soldiers in the trenches - thinking that cheap, deranged photoshopping supports his argument. He'll now be sitting in front of his PC thinking that he's oh, so clever. So lets go back to the OP -

Ask this question of the Allied troops in the trenches -

Would you vote for a political and economic union that brought peace to Europe?

1. Yes.

2. No.

It would be a 99.1% yes vote.

The 0.9% no vote would be a bunch of vexatious Yorkshiremen who'd rather fight to the death than admit they are wrong.

It would seem presumptuous to speak for 5.7 million people who can't be asked.

Giving the EU the credit for keeping the peace is an insult to NATO.

Sent from my SMART_4G_Speedy_5inch using Tapatalk

please explain...

EU isn't responsible for maintaining the peace. If it was we would already have a Euro Army. Europe does have NATO bases. What the EU is causing is the rise of the far right.

Sent from my SMART_4G_Speedy_5inch using Tapatalk

Your naivety is astonishing!

Do you think the peace in Europe these last 70 years is due to military might? What nonsense.

Peace has been maintained by bonding countries together in a "club" if you like. The EU and its predecessors have achieved what centuries of wars failed to achieve which is peace and prosperity

NATO is for protection against external threats. NATO is under threat from Trump. Europe may need to defend itself in future. I favour doing more to support NATO and compelling members to pay their fair share.

[Grouse]

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/uk/675291/Lord-Alan-Sugar-Brexit-mugs-Remain-EU-referendum/amp?client=safari#

Wise words from Alan Sugar writing in The Express! (Amazed they published it!)

[Thaiwine]

In my opinion the peace has been kept for several reasons ,

one being it's not good for your economy to destroy your customers ability to buy your goods and services.

I do not see global style warfare in other continents that are not politicaly bound at the hip.

[Grouse]

In my opinion the peace has been kept for several reasons ,

one being it's not good for your economy to destroy your customers ability to buy your goods and services.

I do not see global style warfare in other continents that are not politicaly bound at the hip.

What on earth are you talking about? Kindly explain

[Grouse]

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-boris-johnson-break-up-britain-independent-scotland-nicola-sturgeon-dismantle-commonwealth-a7056181.html

Sensible words from The Independent as you would expect.

[Thaiwine]

In my opinion the peace has been kept for several reasons ,

one being it's not good for your economy to destroy your customers ability to buy your goods and services.

I do not see global style warfare in other continents that are not politicaly bound at the hip.

What on earth are you talking about? Kindly explain

erm don't kill your customers you will go hungry

[Basil B]

If I knew for certain that it was going to be "Remain In" win ... I would vote "Out".

I am not happy with the set up and feel there are many things that need changing I know it will be suicide to leave.

Further more I think that referendums that are voting for drastic changes should be two thirds in favour instead of a simple majority, then we will not have the losers calling for another referendum, we should have had it for the Scottish referendum and when we first joined the EU.

[Caps]

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-boris-johnson-break-up-britain-independent-scotland-nicola-sturgeon-dismantle-commonwealth-a7056181.html

Sensible words from The Independent as you would expect.

Still voting out

[jonesyb]

I don't know much about the pros and cons of either option. What I do know is the same people who are pushing to vote out on Facebook are all the same idiots who follow Farage and share Britain First posts

[Thaiwine]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2016/05/28/wto-chiefs-ludicrous-assertion-on-brexit-tariffs-and-trade/#428608f68dab

Forbes opinion on ex wto boss's comment brexit would be a blow to UK.(not ex, you mean current World Trade Organization chief Roberto Azevedo)

All very confusing.and misleading.

"Thus, we cannot have the two claims being made here. Both that Britain will not be a WTO member and also that Britain will be bound by WTO rules. We will thus be entirely free to set whatever import duties we desire. And as the only rational trade policy is one of unilateral free trade those duties should be set at a level of zero. Which, as Patrick Minford keeps pointing out, will make the UK economy grow by 3% or so."

The UK has effectively been a member of the WTO since 1948, initially one of the founding countries in GATT(General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) which was replaced by the WTO in 1995. All EU member states and the EU in its own right are full members of the WTO. The problem is that all EU member states share the tariff profile of the EU so in the event of a Brexit, the UK would have to establish a new tariff profile in order to maintain its membership. Any new tariff profile would subject to WTO rules and you cannot be a member without a tariff profile. It would be virtually impossible for the UK to trade as a non WTO member, currently 162 members..

"At the heart of the system — known as the multilateral trading system — are the WTO’s agreements, negotiated and signed by a large majority of the world’s trading nations, and ratified in their parliaments. These agreements are the legal ground-rules for international commerce. Essentially, they are contracts, guaranteeing member countries important trade rights. They also bind governments to keep their trade policies within agreed limits to everybody’s benefit."

Thanks for the well reasoned response

The trouble is, there is so much biased half truths and lies spouted in the media it makes it difficult to decide where the truth if any lies in any given topic.

Very true, but one thing you can take as fact is that there is no tariff profile for the United Kingdom in the WTO database, only for the European Union and all the other member countries.

The European Union and the WTO

This page gathers key information on the European Union’s participation in the WTO. The European Union (until 30 November 2009 known officially in the WTO as the European Communities for legal reasons) (more info) has been a WTO member since 1 January 1995. The 28 member States of the EU are also WTO members in their own right. The EU is a single customs union with a single trade policy and tariff. The European Commission — the EU’s executive arm — speaks for all EU member States at almost all WTO meetings.

https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/countries_e/european_communities_e.htm

Even if what Robert Azevedo is stating is unbiast and correct (which I don't belive to be the case) that the UK would have to pay 9 billion per year in tariffs we would be no worse off than we are now should we leave the EU as we pay that much if not more to the EU already.

[sandyf]

Very true, but one thing you can take as fact is that there is no tariff profile for the United Kingdom in the WTO database, only for the European Union and all the other member countries.

The European Union and the WTO

This page gathers key information on the European Union’s participation in the WTO. The European Union (until 30 November 2009 known officially in the WTO as the European Communities for legal reasons) (more info) has been a WTO member since 1 January 1995. The 28 member States of the EU are also WTO members in their own right. The EU is a single customs union with a single trade policy and tariff. The European Commission — the EU’s executive arm — speaks for all EU member States at almost all WTO meetings.

https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/countries_e/european_communities_e.htm

I'd read that in entirely the opposite way, Sandy.

"The 28 member states ... are also WTO members in their own right" and "The EC ... speaks for all EU member states ...".

The EU plus member states = 29 WTO members.

The Tariff Profile for UK reads "See tariff profile for the European Communities".

My interpretation - and it's no more than that since I don't know the details of the WTO's terms & conditions - would suggest that the EC speaks on behalf of the individual EU member states, not instead of them, and that the individual states accept the tariffs agreed by the EU on their behalf after having some input at an earlier stage.

EU tariff rates would therefore equally be the 'property' of the individual EU member and could be transferred to or used by an individual country should it choose to withdraw from the EU.

I'd say that the UK does have a tariff profile that just happens to be identical to that of the EU.

I am not disputing what you say because it is a mater of interpretation. If you go to the database and try and view the tariff profile there is not one available, the UK is just not listed. In the event of Brexit there would need to be a UK specific tariff profile submitted to the WTO, this may just be a paperwork exercise, or maybe not.

[nontabury]

"The main reason is a hunt for taxes to prop up failing economic policies and governments going broke, failing pension schemes and failing negative interest rates. The dream of socialism has only lined the pockets of those in power at the expense of lowering the living standards of the people" - full-blown conspiracy theory about the left? and the Brexit also have full-blown conspiracies about the right.........

It might be nice to make a couple of league tables one for conspiracy theories as promulgated by each side and then one of "experts" each side has rolled out....tot them up and you would get a clearer picture of who is the biggest bullshitter

The attempt to Federalize Europe as a mega-state with one centralized currency, tax regime, Parliament, Central bank ruled by non elected bureaucrats akin to the former USSR is authoritarianism of the Left. Why do you think separatist movements are growing and the rise of right wing third parties? Nothing to do with "conspiracy theories" it's real if you care to look. Whether you like growing nationalistic movements or not they happen when politicians think they're smarter than the great unwashed and there is a rise against corruption in government.Socialism is all very noble sounding when you are taxed to hell for the privilege of living for the "greater good" but in reality there's too many hands in the till from government employees and politicians warming their seats in privileged positions of power. The same reasons for the rise of Trump.

I haven't come across any full blown Brexit conspiracies about the right. Make a couple of league tables, you said it might be nice.....go for it.

Who is the biggest bullshitter?

Really just an outsized rant but I guess we will have to endure more of the same doom and gloom as we approach the big day. This time it is comparison to our old friends from the USSR. So, an elected central bank and civil service? When was that ever a part of our green and pleasant land other than in some some libertarian populist deluded dreams? This is what happens when the awful realisation that the vote may not be going their way dawns and the wheels begin to come off. Mega-this, mega-

-----///---/////-//////////------

It you don't think the EU at moment is in a sorry state,start checking out what those unelected bureaucrats in Brussels have in the pipeline. It's even more scary than the wild stories that the remain camp are at present dishing out.

Edited May 31, 2016 by nontabury

[sandyf]

All very confusing.and misleading.

"Thus, we cannot have the two claims being made here. Both that Britain will not be a WTO member and also that Britain will be bound by WTO rules. We will thus be entirely free to set whatever import duties we desire. And as the only rational trade policy is one of unilateral free trade those duties should be set at a level of zero. Which, as Patrick Minford keeps pointing out, will make the UK economy grow by 3% or so."

The UK has effectively been a member of the WTO since 1948, initially one of the founding countries in GATT(General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) which was replaced by the WTO in 1995. All EU member states and the EU in its own right are full members of the WTO. The problem is that all EU member states share the tariff profile of the EU so in the event of a Brexit, the UK would have to establish a new tariff profile in order to maintain its membership. Any new tariff profile would subject to WTO rules and you cannot be a member without a tariff profile. It would be virtually impossible for the UK to trade as a non WTO member, currently 162 members..

"At the heart of the system — known as the multilateral trading system — are the WTO’s agreements, negotiated and signed by a large majority of the world’s trading nations, and ratified in their parliaments. These agreements are the legal ground-rules for international commerce. Essentially, they are contracts, guaranteeing member countries important trade rights. They also bind governments to keep their trade policies within agreed limits to everybody’s benefit."

Thanks for the well reasoned response

The trouble is, there is so much biased half truths and lies spouted in the media it makes it difficult to decide where the truth if any lies in any given topic.

Very true, but one thing you can take as fact is that there is no tariff profile for the United Kingdom in the WTO database, only for the European Union and all the other member countries.

The European Union and the WTO

This page gathers key information on the European Union’s participation in the WTO. The European Union (until 30 November 2009 known officially in the WTO as the European Communities for legal reasons) (more info) has been a WTO member since 1 January 1995. The 28 member States of the EU are also WTO members in their own right. The EU is a single customs union with a single trade policy and tariff. The European Commission — the EU’s executive arm — speaks for all EU member States at almost all WTO meetings.

https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/countries_e/european_communities_e.htm

Even if what Robert Azevedo is stating is unbiast and correct (which I don't belive to be the case) that the UK would have to pay 9 billion per year in tariffs we would be no worse off than we are now should we leave the EU as we pay that much if not more to the EU already.

These EU contributions are going to have to stretch a long way. Boris Johnson first promised the NHS and now he is proposing to use them to remove VAT on energy. Its like the pot of gold will cure all.

[sandyf]

"The more I hear the sovereignty argument from Leave campaigners, usually coupled with how undemocratic the EU is, the more I compare and contrast that with our own legislative system and realise that it is the UK that is hopelessly undemocratic.

How can it be considered representative of the people with our unelected queen as head of state and our unelected lords in the upper chamber?

You may consider the House of Commons to be democratic, but it isn't anything of the sort. Several governments over the last generation were voted in by less than 25 per cent of those eligible to vote (that is, the total number of people on the national electoral register). This weak system serves only the interests of the major political parties but does nothing to strengthen the fabric of our democracy.

How those who speak of “a profoundly undemocratic” EU can miss the irony of their comment has proven to be a source of constant amazement to me. "

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/letters/if-the-eu-is-undemocratic-its-time-to-look-again-at-the-british-parliament-a7056326.html

[nontabury]

I'm having problems copying/paste some Facebook articles. So that should make some people happy, not having to face reality.

Edited May 31, 2016 by nontabury

[Grouse]

In my opinion the peace has been kept for several reasons ,

one being it's not good for your economy to destroy your customers ability to buy your goods and services.

I do not see global style warfare in other continents that are not politicaly bound at the hip.

What on earth are you talking about? Kindly explain

erm don't kill your customers you will go hungry

Do you really not see how the ESCC, EEC and now EU fit with that? Really?

[Grouse]

If I knew for certain that it was going to be "Remain In" win ... I would vote "Out".

I am not happy with the set up and feel there are many things that need changing I know it will be suicide to leave.

Further more I think that referendums that are voting for drastic changes should be two thirds in favour instead of a simple majority, then we will not have the losers calling for another referendum, we should have had it for the Scottish referendum and when we first joined the EU.

Now that is a very sensible idea! Just like that Scottish golf club that had a vote on whether to allow lady members. It failed because 2/3 majority was required. Yes, add some hysteresis to the system to stop hunting and give some stability! Edited May 31, 2016 by Grouse

[Grouse]

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-boris-johnson-break-up-britain-independent-scotland-nicola-sturgeon-dismantle-commonwealth-a7056181.html

Sensible words from The Independent as you would expect.

Still voting out

And your point is?

You are not interested in news and views?

So what are you doing here?

[Grouse]

I don't know much about the pros and cons of either option. What I do know is the same people who are pushing to vote out on Facebook are all the same idiots who follow Farage and share Britain First posts

And like Trump ?

[Sawan Chan 7]

Anything that would help Scotland break away from Cameron and co and all their corruption.

[Grouse]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2016/05/28/wto-chiefs-ludicrous-assertion-on-brexit-tariffs-and-trade/#428608f68dab

Forbes opinion on ex wto boss's comment brexit would be a blow to UK.(not ex, you mean current World Trade Organization chief Roberto Azevedo)

All very confusing.and misleading.

"Thus, we cannot have the two claims being made here. Both that Britain will not be a WTO member and also that Britain will be bound by WTO rules. We will thus be entirely free to set whatever import duties we desire. And as the only rational trade policy is one of unilateral free trade those duties should be set at a level of zero. Which, as Patrick Minford keeps pointing out, will make the UK economy grow by 3% or so."

The UK has effectively been a member of the WTO since 1948, initially one of the founding countries in GATT(General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) which was replaced by the WTO in 1995. All EU member states and the EU in its own right are full members of the WTO. The problem is that all EU member states share the tariff profile of the EU so in the event of a Brexit, the UK would have to establish a new tariff profile in order to maintain its membership. Any new tariff profile would subject to WTO rules and you cannot be a member without a tariff profile. It would be virtually impossible for the UK to trade as a non WTO member, currently 162 members..

"At the heart of the system known as the multilateral trading system are the WTOs agreements, negotiated and signed by a large majority of the worlds trading nations, and ratified in their parliaments. These agreements are the legal ground-rules for international commerce. Essentially, they are contracts, guaranteeing member countries important trade rights. They also bind governments to keep their trade policies within agreed limits to everybodys benefit."

Thanks for the well reasoned response

The trouble is, there is so much biased half truths and lies spouted in the media it makes it difficult to decide where the truth if any lies in any given topic.

Very true, but one thing you can take as fact is that there is no tariff profile for the United Kingdom in the WTO database, only for the European Union and all the other member countries.

The European Union and the WTO
This page gathers key information on the European Unions participation in the WTO. The European Union (until 30 November 2009 known officially in the WTO as the European Communities for legal reasons) (more info) has been a WTO member since 1 January 1995. The 28 member States of the EU are also WTO members in their own right. The EU is a single customs union with a single trade policy and tariff. The European Commission the EUs executive arm speaks for all EU member States at almost all WTO meetings.
https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/countries_e/european_communities_e.htm

Even if what Robert Azevedo is stating is unbiast and correct (which I don't belive to be the case) that the UK would have to pay 9 billion per year in tariffs we would be no worse off than we are now should we leave the EU as we pay that much if not more to the EU already.

So you can't think of a single benefit we get from the EU except free trade? Not one? Nothing? Well I can't be bothered to start listing them for you. Just vote out. Please

[Grouse]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2016/05/28/wto-chiefs-ludicrous-assertion-on-brexit-tariffs-and-trade/#428608f68dab

Forbes opinion on ex wto boss's comment brexit would be a blow to UK.(not ex, you mean current World Trade Organization chief Roberto Azevedo)

All very confusing.and misleading.

"Thus, we cannot have the two claims being made here. Both that Britain will not be a WTO member and also that Britain will be bound by WTO rules. We will thus be entirely free to set whatever import duties we desire. And as the only rational trade policy is one of unilateral free trade those duties should be set at a level of zero. Which, as Patrick Minford keeps pointing out, will make the UK economy grow by 3% or so."

The UK has effectively been a member of the WTO since 1948, initially one of the founding countries in GATT(General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) which was replaced by the WTO in 1995. All EU member states and the EU in its own right are full members of the WTO. The problem is that all EU member states share the tariff profile of the EU so in the event of a Brexit, the UK would have to establish a new tariff profile in order to maintain its membership. Any new tariff profile would subject to WTO rules and you cannot be a member without a tariff profile. It would be virtually impossible for the UK to trade as a non WTO member, currently 162 members..

"At the heart of the system known as the multilateral trading system are the WTOs agreements, negotiated and signed by a large majority of the worlds trading nations, and ratified in their parliaments. These agreements are the legal ground-rules for international commerce. Essentially, they are contracts, guaranteeing member countries important trade rights. They also bind governments to keep their trade policies within agreed limits to everybodys benefit."

Thanks for the well reasoned response

The trouble is, there is so much biased half truths and lies spouted in the media it makes it difficult to decide where the truth if any lies in any given topic.

Very true, but one thing you can take as fact is that there is no tariff profile for the United Kingdom in the WTO database, only for the European Union and all the other member countries.

The European Union and the WTO
This page gathers key information on the European Unions participation in the WTO. The European Union (until 30 November 2009 known officially in the WTO as the European Communities for legal reasons) (more info) has been a WTO member since 1 January 1995. The 28 member States of the EU are also WTO members in their own right. The EU is a single customs union with a single trade policy and tariff. The European Commission the EUs executive arm speaks for all EU member States at almost all WTO meetings.
https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/countries_e/european_communities_e.htm

Even if what Robert Azevedo is stating is unbiast and correct (which I don't belive to be the case) that the UK would have to pay 9 billion per year in tariffs we would be no worse off than we are now should we leave the EU as we pay that much if not more to the EU already.

So you can't think of a single benefit we get from the EU except free trade? Not one? Nothing? Well I can't be bothered to start listing them for you. Just vote out. Please

[Caps]

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-boris-johnson-break-up-britain-independent-scotland-nicola-sturgeon-dismantle-commonwealth-a7056181.html

Sensible words from The Independent as you would expect.

Still voting out

And your point is?

You are not interested in news and views?

So what are you doing here?

My point is I read it and I am still voting out..

news and views are good

as much right as anyone

[Grouse]

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-boris-johnson-break-up-britain-independent-scotland-nicola-sturgeon-dismantle-commonwealth-a7056181.html

Sensible words from The Independent as you would expect.

Still voting out

And your point is?

You are not interested in news and views?

So what are you doing here?

My point is I read it and I am still voting out..

news and views are good

as much right as anyone

I don't think anyone is interested how anyone will vote.

However we, or at least I, am interested in views and opinions

Was there something in the article you disagreed with? Applauded? ?

[allanos]

"The more I hear the sovereignty argument from Leave campaigners, usually coupled with how undemocratic the EU is, the more I compare and contrast that with our own legislative system and realise that it is the UK that is hopelessly undemocratic.

How can it be considered representative of the people with our unelected queen as head of state and our unelected lords in the upper chamber?

You may consider the House of Commons to be democratic, but it isn't anything of the sort. Several governments over the last generation were voted in by less than 25 per cent of those eligible to vote (that is, the total number of people on the national electoral register). This weak system serves only the interests of the major political parties but does nothing to strengthen the fabric of our democracy.

How those who speak of “a profoundly undemocratic” EU can miss the irony of their comment has proven to be a source of constant amazement to me. "

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/letters/if-the-eu-is-undemocratic-its-time-to-look-again-at-the-british-parliament-a7056326.html

I respect your views but feel they are somewhat wide of the mark.

The United Kingdom's political system is a Constitutional Monarchy. Yes, the Queen is Head of State, but it is a titular position only.

The House of Lords sits to ensure there are certain checks and balances in the formation and passing of laws. It is not the final arbiter of such laws.

In a Democracy such as Britain's (and unlike, for example, Australia's) it is considered "democratic" if one does not even vote for a candidate come Election-time. A non-vote is just that; a decision not to vote. Consequently, 25% of eligible voters, or less even, can decide on the future direction of the country. However, the "people" get another "chance" 5 years later, if they wish to change their views. This system is not remotely like the present bureaucratic structure of the European Union, and it has served the United Kingdom well for generations. It is an almighty stretch to believe that the EU is in any way a democratically-run construct.

Incidentally, it is also possible that, owing to the composition and boundaries of the Constituencies, a particular political party may be voted into power by a minority of the eligible voters who cast their votes. When this fact was once put to the late Harold Wilson, his comment was, "don't be politically naïve!"

Unless something better comes along, which is not my view of the present make-up of the European Union, I shall be happy to cast my vote in the time-honoured way in a "sovereign" United Kingdom.

[Caps]

And your point is?

You are not interested in news and views?

So what are you doing here?

My point is I read it and I am still voting out..

news and views are good

as much right as anyone

I don't think anyone is interested how anyone will vote.

However we, or at least I, am interested in views and opinions

Was there something in the article you disagreed with? Applauded? ?

Nothing particular. Like others, I have my reasons, as I have told you before I read, I watch and ingest the info for both. There is good and bad points for both and there is also a lot of uncertainty for both...unless we all have crystal balls now

Edited May 31, 2016 by Caps