The EU Referendum is nearly upon us.........23rd June.

[Daisyonthegreen]

I have been invited by other posters to start a new EU Referendum Thread as the EU thread "In out shake it all about what to vote in the EU referendum "is now closed.
Anyhow this vote is is pretty crucial for the good of the country and your family.
I make no secret of the fact I feel to vote to Leave is the best option.
On the "In out shake it all about,what to vote in the EU Referendum " Thread I posted many links and gave views on why I feel that way.
I feel we would flourish free of the beaucratic ,undemocratic organisation it has turned into.
A Trading block initially started up with 9 countries in the 1970s has become out of control,mammoth and unwieldy and frankly rather dangerous.
We need to wrest back control of our own country,our borders and our ability to broker our own Trade deals which the EU insists on doing for us.
Plus our own Judicial decisions.
We on leaving would still Trade with the EU,they need us more than we need them actually but the beauty of it we could be free to broker our own deals with the rest of the world on our terms.
In short we would flourish.
We can love/ like Europe but not be in the EU.

found it! and well, rather depressingly Itinerary, looks like you are right... and even a tiny amount of money would make the difference!

Professor Cowley said: "The effects are pretty consistent. In every scenario in which people were told they were going to be worse off outside the EU, there was a majority vote to remain. On the other hand - if we tell voters that they're better off out, then out they will go. These swing voters are following the money - they won't vote for an outcome that might hurt financially."

The amount of money involved was found to affect the size of the majority to leave or remain. As the amount people would be worse off (if the UK votes to leave) rises, so too does the size of the vote to remain. Professor Cowley said: "Even a difference of £25 a year is enough to produce a decent majority in either direction. That means 50p a week could effectively alter the outcome of a major constitutional decision.

Interestingly, the neutral point is pro-Brexit:

The research found that the neutral point - where 'people would on average be no better or worse off' - also produced a majority in favour of leaving.

phys.org/news/2016-03-50p-week-uk-future-europe.html#jCp

So looks like whoever wins the economics argument in the eyes of the public, will win the referendum.

Thanks for the link Chalalala, that's very interesting!

Thank you for your post fourmummy, it articulately explains why people are ignoring these models.

Interesting Chalala. I am surprised that people are that driven by the money, especially when it is so unpredictable. Then IN will definitely win. OUT hasn't been able to argue very effectively about the money, imho.

The thing that niggles me about the money arguments is this: They are just dividing the total notional pie evenly among households when they give these predictions. But, we all know, that the pie is not divided evenly. So when the IMF and GoldmanSachs and George Osborne tell us it's the best thing, I wonder if it is really just the best thing for them, and the rest of us will continue to be exploited.

So looks like whoever wins the economics argument in the eyes of the public, will win the referendum. Not really as you'd need to examine other predictor variables (quality of life, schools, health provision, or whatever) to compare their effects. If the study quoted only examined the effect of economics on voting intention, then it'll explain the voting intention only in terms of economics!

The thing that niggles me about the money arguments is this: They are just dividing the total notional pie evenly among households when they give these predictions. But, we all know, that the pie is not divided evenly. So when the IMF and GoldmanSachs and George Osborne tell us it's the best thing, I wonder if it is really just the best thing for them, and the rest of us will continue to be exploited

Yes that's probably right, but not sure it's an argument either way. Whether the pie gets smaller or bigger, they'll always get the biggest juiciest slice (um mixing my culinary metaphors slightly here).

Or to put it another way... what is good for them is not necessarily good for us, but then what is bad for them is not necessarily good for us either... I think?

fourmummy yes you're right. "everything else being equal" doesn't really work in real life.

84% of motions put to the EU Parliament between 2009-2014 that were AGAINST British interests were passed!!!
We have no Influence in the EU.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/michael-gove-says-vote-to-remain-would-make-british-public-hostages-to-eu-a6990661.html

what is good for them is not necessarily good for us, but then what is bad for them is not necessarily good for us either... I think?

This is exactly what I want to figure out!

Do they want us to stay in because it is good for them, and they don't care if the regular person's wages continue to stagnate. Probably.

On the other hand, if we come out, and their wings are clipped, will wages go up for people who live off income (most of us)? And if wages go up, will they go up in real terms?

Lookingagain Tue 19-Apr-16 10:33:3

What a breath of fresh air this post is.

"bad cultural behaviours"
Behaviour toward woman by men from the East on new year day. Maybe you are the only woman who has not heard of the mass sexual attacks that happened in many, many cities of Europe.

Not double standards, Vegetable. it is you who is supporting the racism and intolerance of some of the men that Merkel invited. The rapes still go on - of children, girls and boys, women are interfered with and groped when they go about their daily business. THIS is normal in Middle East, but not in Europe.

I am foreigner but I am European with same sensibilities as persons in any modern country in Europe. Men from my country shake hands with women, boy children from my country listen to female teacher - no problem. But abnormal behaviour is being allowed, special treatment given to males from the East who think women are no good. You are supporting the backward behaviours and attitudes. If you are a woman you should be ashamed of yourself.

Not really as you'd need to examine other predictor variables (quality of life, schools, health provision, or whatever) to compare their effects

We are lower income at the moment, very low.

I am happy for it go even lower, because quality if life matters more to me. Its ok having a bit less if your generally happy, but when basic things become a huge struggle every day, you need more money to get out of it.

Quality of life.

Looking again .... So when the IMF and GoldmanSachs and George Osborne tell us it's the best thing, I wonder if it is really just the best thing for them, and the rest of us will continue to be exploited.

yes of course. Only leaders of the gang get the best rewards. The Eu is a gang disguised as a Friendly Mutual.

Pretty sure that if we leave the EU we still get to keep George Osborne and his merry gang of financiers...

Now would Brexit make them more, or less free to exploit the average worker, I'm not really sure. My hunch is that it wouldn't make a huge difference to the establishment's ability to divert wealth towards themselves, but that's just a hunch.

The Pro boys in every Eu nation have a vested interest in UK staying. What do you think turkey and albania will contribute, from what - baklava and leather exports? The Pro people will receive a good handshake if they succeed in keeping UK in Eu. This is payment for effort and result. Remember, Eu is a business, and they need UK to stay to offset the negative balance that Turkey and Albania will bring (and Greece too).

The Pro people will receive a good handshake if they succeed in keeping UK in Eu. This is payment for effort and result.

You have me curious - what "payment" do you think George Osborne will receive from the EU establishment if he manages to fend off Brexit?

(if I were him I'd ask for my personal Greek island!)

Pretty sure that if we leave the EU we still get to keep George Osborne and his merry gang of financiers... Yes, that's probably true, but we may have more chance of throwing the book at them than if we stay. The problem with large, unelected bodies is diffusion of responsibility. Who is actually responsible for any decision? Just on balance of probabilities, we have more chance of getting the government that suits us when we deal with smaller entities (that's not to say that we will; just that there's more chance of that happening). The organisation of the EU enables the voter to become even more disengaged from the political process than when dealing with national politics - the ordinary voter is even further from having a stake in decision making with the EU than they are with their own government's representatives, which, I suspect, leads to apathy and disinterest (and which, I also suspect, any governing body is very grateful for).

Pretty sure that if we leave the EU we still get to keep George Osborne and his merry gang of financiers...

Now would Brexit make them more, or less free to exploit the average worker, I'm not really sure. My hunch is that it wouldn't make a huge difference to the establishment's ability to divert wealth towards themselves, but that's just a hunch.

I don't really want to argue with that, as I think you are right. It just feels like the EU is another level of exploitation. Like we are being even more ruthlessly and efficiently milked by people who have no feelings of connection to us whatsoever. Just bald exploitation with no sense of common history or purpose at all.

The EU is always talking about solidarity, but Greece shows what empty words those are. I know Greece is not blameless, but it looks like a small weak country was made to suffer much more than necessary. They had to make them suffer lest the other PIGS would want relief too. They could have lowered interest rates more; they could have printed more money to help all those countries; but they did not. They knew there were trade imbalances and capital inflow imbalances creating huge debts and property bubbles. Spain asked for help with this before the crash; did they get any help, ha! They just kept exploiting them and ignored their pleas.

I think they would do it to us too.

Yes Lookingagain. Excellent post.

Absolutely agree that the treatment of Greece was disgraceful.

But in all fairness that was a lose/lose situation for the EU regarding the Brexit argument. If the EU had helped out Greece, we wouldn't have heard the end of how our taxes are paying off other countries' debts.

The organisation of the EU enables the voter to become even more disengaged from the political process than when dealing with national politics - the ordinary voter is even further from having a stake in decision making with the EU than they are with their own government's representatives

I'm not sure it's the organisation per se that allows this, I think it's our own perceptions as voters - we do elect the parliament directly, so how are we further? Unless it's a question of sheer size, but that's not quite right either - Americans seem to have no problem relating to their Congress. Of course they do elect a President directly. But if the EU suggested that, all the national countries would cry that their sovereignty was being overrun by a superstate. So again, the EU can't win...

But in all fairness that was a lose/lose situation for the EU regarding the Brexit argument. If the EU had helped out Greece, we wouldn't have heard the end of how our taxes are paying off other countries' debts.

But I wasn't suggesting that we should have made some sort of fiscal transfer to the PIGS (although I am not against it, I really haven't thought that one through), but I am suggesting that vested interests in the EU blocked a sensible and humane monetary policy to safeguard their own narrow interests in preference to the ordinary people trying to survive in these countries. That is serfs living to serve elites rather than governments serving their people.

Chalala What set me thinking along that path was reading some MEPs' descriptions about trying to find singular rules for 28 different countries administered in 24 different languages (I'll need to find the quote - that phrase has stuck with me) and how when there's a problem in one member state, the solution is to legislate in all 28, which pushes voters even further away from the political process (who is interested in Spanish law when Britain has its own legal issues?).

vested interests in the EU blocked a sensible and humane monetary policy to safeguard their own narrow interests

Oh I see. That's not what I took from the debate at the time. My understanding was that Germany had so much invested in the EU as an ideological project that it was willing to sacrifice Greece's economic future and all sane economic arguments, even go against the IMF's advice (gasp) in order to avoid a breakdown of the euro/Union.

So ironically the complete opposite to your financial interpretation! Admittedly I wasn't reading British news, may be why I got a different picture.

"but Greece shows what empty words those are"

Opinions differ.

Another opinion is that shovelling mountains of money into Greece to prop it up and stave off bankruptcy was a generous attempt to help tide them over. However the suggestion that they might one day have to pay some of it back, and should try to spend their money less quickly than it comes in, was not well received.

fourmummy I see how that would be an issue.

but the only way to improve this would be to make the 28 countries more similar in terms of their legislative/economic/whatever systems. Which is exactly what sovereign countries (especially Britain) don't want. And then they turn around and complain that the EU is unwieldy.

in the same way that many who complain that the EU is undemocratic, would actually be outraged if anyone suggested an EU government/president democratically elected by European universal suffrage.

so the EU is stuck between a rock and a hard place, really.