Rejected EU Remain posters revealed as ad agencies criticise the way the campaign was run - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Kentz;50629595]so basically its an argument that voting sucks?[/QUOTE] Nah voting kicks ass cause you get to have a say. But in a way the leave voters voted for the removal of a lot of people having a say while still being affected by decisions made by the EU.

[QUOTE=dcalde78;50629505]but the thing is, this time it is true. the younger generation by majority voted to stay - we're the ones this decision is going to affect most. we wanted to stay, but due to an aging population and a large number of xenophobic, racist, middle aged or older people outnumbered the younger vote. by the time that the long term effects of the british exit from the EU become apparent, majority of the older voters that took us out will be retired, or dead. we're going to have to deal with the issues this brings up, and we didn't want them.[/QUOTE] It's true that the older generation won't have to deal with the long-term effects of Brexit, but they certainly still have to put up with the short-term effects of Brexit, namely the economic shockwaves and uncertainty. There's little in the short term for them to benefit from, so what would they stand to gain from this theoretical fucking Britain over? Furthermore, why do you speak of the long-term effects of Brexit as a guaranteed negative? I genuinely don't understand where this idea that Britain exiting the EU being equivalent to a guaranteed descent into ruin is, and many of the problems that Britain's exit from the EU is going to bring up would still exist if Britain was inside the EU, with the only difference being that they would manifest differently.

[QUOTE=Chilblain;50644056]It's true that the older generation won't have to deal with the long-term effects of Brexit, but they certainly still have to put up with the short-term effects of Brexit, namely the economic shockwaves and uncertainty. There's little in the short term for them to benefit from, so what would they stand to gain from this theoretical fucking Britain over? Furthermore, why do you speak of the long-term effects of Brexit as a guaranteed negative? I genuinely don't understand where this idea that Britain exiting the EU being equivalent to a guaranteed descent into ruin is, and many of the problems that Britain's exit from the EU is going to bring up would still exist if Britain was inside the EU, with the only difference being that they would manifest differently.[/QUOTE] How can the UK leaving possibly have positive long-term effects? That's like saying breaking your own arm would be a good idea. Sure it may heal but that doesn't mean it's something you should do.

[QUOTE=Ardosos;50630233]Is that true though? I always thought you could put the pin back in a grenade as long as you didn't let go of the squeezy part. Videogames have mislead me.[/QUOTE] You can put the pin back in as long as the handle doesn't fly off. Modern grenades are more secure then that one in the picture.

[QUOTE=_Axel;50650564]How can the UK leaving possibly have positive long-term effects? That's like saying breaking your own arm would be a good idea. Sure it may heal but that doesn't mean it's something you should do.[/QUOTE] What about Brexit is like breaking your own arm? If the short-term effects are terrible, why would people vote for Brexit if there were no long-term gains to be made? It seems a bit weird to assume that half of the country voted to leave just to spite everyone. Britain voted to leave the EU to gain its own self-determination and now it's on the road to attaining the ability to decide its own future. That's hardly like breaking your own arm for no reason.

[QUOTE=Chilblain;50655067]What about Brexit is like breaking your own arm? If the short-term effects are terrible, why would people vote for Brexit if there were no long-term gains to be made? It seems a bit weird to assume that half of the country voted to leave just to spite everyone. Britain voted to leave the EU to gain its own self-determination and now it's on the road to attaining the ability to decide its own future. That's hardly like breaking your own arm for no reason.[/QUOTE] You're right, it's a bad analogy. A better analogy would be like having a small melanoma on your arm, so you cut the whole arm off to fix it.

[QUOTE=Headhumpy;50655074]You're right, it's a bad analogy. A better analogy would be like having a small melanoma on your arm, so you cut the whole arm off to fix it.[/QUOTE] To say that it's small isn't necessarily fact, different perspectives are going to view it differently. An office worker breaking a leg is an inconvenience, whereas a professional athlete breaking a leg could very well be much more of an issue. And I'm not so sure about leaving the EU being equivalent to cutting off an arm, would you mind if I asked what makes you say that?

[QUOTE=Chilblain;50655253]And I'm not so sure about leaving the EU being equivalent to cutting off an arm, would you mind if I asked what makes you say that?[/QUOTE] the economic damage and damage to free travel its caused is already affecting me fuck this whole "sovereignty" bullshit, I want to go throughout Europe with as much ease as I do in my hometown to live and work where I bloody well please

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;50655296]the economic damage and damage to free travel its caused is already affecting me fuck this whole "sovereignty" bullshit, I want to go throughout Europe with as much ease as I do in my hometown to live and work where I bloody well please[/QUOTE] The economic damage and damage to free travel is hardly permanent, stuff like that always happens during times of unrest, and there's not all that much saying that Britain can't recover and reform its ties other than the EU itself. It's fine that you value your travel through Europe, but that doesn't mean that the sovereignty offered by leaving the EU is invalid, and from what I can see it looks like it would be easier to regain freedom of movement through Europe after leaving than it would be to regain the right to self-determination after staying.

[QUOTE=Chilblain;50655335][B]The economic damage and damage to free travel is hardly permanent, stuff like that always happens during times of unrest, and there's not all that much saying that Britain can't recover and reform its ties other than the EU itself[/B]. It's fine that you value your travel through Europe, but that doesn't mean that the sovereignty offered by leaving the EU is invalid, and from what I can see it looks like it would be easier to regain freedom of movement through Europe after leaving than it would be to regain the right to self-determination after staying.[/QUOTE] AAAAAAa I hate this argument so much literally [I]no one[/I] is saying that we are economically doomed, the argument from the VERY START has been that we will be economically worse off for a long period of time so far, we have a method of leaving the EU (through article 50), so far, we don't have an agreed method of getting free travel in Europe, so your sovereignty argument doesn't make any sense because we've already achieved one of them but not the other and considering that freedom of movement was one of the things the leave campaigners DIDN'T WANT, the likelihood of getting it is slim (dependent on how willing they are to turn their back on their own principles, so probably likely actually)

[QUOTE=Chilblain;50655253]To say that it's small isn't necessarily fact, different perspectives are going to view it differently. An office worker breaking a leg is an inconvenience, whereas a professional athlete breaking a leg could very well be much more of an issue. And I'm not so sure about leaving the EU being equivalent to cutting off an arm, would you mind if I asked what makes you say that?[/QUOTE] Trade and business will be negatively affected. GBP has already dropped against many world currencies, and by a huge amount. While this makes exports more attractive, the UK is a net importer and this hurts UK businesses. Trade with the EU will be tricky once Article 50 is triggered, we very likely won't get the same deals as before and if we do, they will come with some requirement to follow EU rules and regulations. So we've done nothing but given ourselves less of a say in the rules and regulations we have to follow. When people say that leave voters have shot themselves in the foot, they mean it.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;50655358]AAAAAAa I hate this argument so much literally [I]no one[/I] is saying that we are economically doomed, the argument from the VERY START has been that we will be economically worse off for a long period of time so far, we have a method of leaving the EU (through article 50), so far, we don't have an agreed method of getting free travel in Europe, so your sovereignty argument doesn't make any sense because we've already achieved one of them but not the other and considering that freedom of movement was one of the things the leave campaigners DIDN'T WANT, the likelihood of getting it is slim (dependent on how willing they are to turn their back on their own principles, so probably likely actually)[/QUOTE] It's weird that you complain about my misrepresentation of the Remain arguement, but then go on to say that freedom of movement was something that leave campaigners "DIDN'T WANT". And the arguement that Britain would be economically worse off for a significant portion of time doesn't mean that Britain will be utterly left to the mercy of the world, which is the way that stuff like Project Fear decided to predict a post-Brexit Britain to be. Considering that with all the Brexit talk the EU has started to clamp down on nationalist thought with its statements against Britain, and its rather shady moves to cover up proposals such as the movement to create a European Army, the way I look at it it seems reasonable to assume that trying to leave the EU later down the line would be significantly more difficult than it is now. Desiring a different look at the irresponsible policies of the EU is hardly the same as closing down the borders, and IMO merging the two into a single category is just wrong. Is it really so wrong for people to take a look at the Refugee Crisis and the mistakes made in its wake and want to take a step back to figure things out?

[QUOTE=Chilblain;50655408]It's weird that you complain about my misrepresentation of the Remain arguement, but then go on to say that freedom of movement was something that leave campaigners "DIDN'T WANT". And the arguement that Britain would be economically worse off for a significant portion of time doesn't mean that Britain will be utterly left to the mercy of the world, which is the way that stuff like Project Fear decided to predict a post-Brexit Britain to be. Considering that with all the Brexit talk the EU has started to clamp down on nationalist thought with its statements against Britain, and its rather shady moves to cover up proposals such as the movement to create a European Army, the way I look at it it seems reasonable to assume that trying to leave the EU later down the line would be significantly more difficult than it is now. Desiring a different look at the irresponsible policies of the EU is hardly the same as closing down the borders, and IMO merging the two into a single category is just wrong. Is it really so wrong for people to take a look at the Refugee Crisis and the mistakes made in its wake and want to take a step back to figure things out?[/QUOTE] are you kidding me almost every figurehead in leave has said that immigration was a key talking point of the referendum, I don't know of a SINGLE leave voter who wasn't against the idea of free movement in Europe. [img]http://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2016/06/13/13/untitled.png[/img] [img]https://www.thestar.com/content/dam/thestar/news/world/2016/06/21/brexit-leave-campaigner-boris-johnson-rejects-xenophobic-ad/nigel-farage.jpg.size.custom.crop.1086x572.jpg[/img] "project fear" was a garbage pro-leave nickname given to the [I]EXPERTS WHO SAID THAT BRITAIN WOULD BE ECONOMICALLY WORSE OFF FOR THE MOVE[/I] - because if people believed the experts, then they wouldn't have voted leave, which is why there was an anti-intellectual sentiment in the leave campaign. Rather shady moves to cover up the EU army? You mean like openly discussing it? Your other argument is entirely slippery slope, considering that every treaty concerning the EU so far has been ratified by every member state, the idea that they could take it away without them ratifying it is just utterly unsubstantiated slippery slope fallacy. And yup, it is bad for people to look at the refugee crisis that didn't effect britain in any meaningful way and then vote leave on something that economically and socially damages britain

[QUOTE=Headhumpy;50655366]Trade and business will be negatively affected. GBP has already dropped against many world currencies, and by a huge amount. While this makes exports more attractive, the UK is a net importer and this hurts UK businesses. Trade with the EU will be tricky once Article 50 is triggered, we very likely won't get the same deals as before and if we do, they will come with some requirement to follow EU rules and regulations. So we've done nothing but given ourselves less of a say in the rules and regulations we have to follow. When people say that leave voters have shot themselves in the foot, they mean it.[/QUOTE] It's a given that trade and business would see a short-term negative effect from something as radical a change as Brexit, and I'm not denying that there certainly is a chance that Brexit could end badly for Britain, but it's not all doom and gloom as some people like to portray it. In the wake of the EU, many countries have expressed interest in forming new trade deals with Britain, and if Britain can handle itself well like its financial system, then it could very well come out as a net positive as well. The EU isn't the only trade parter available to Britain, they have other options. Yes, leave voters may have shot themselves in the foot, but it was to dislodge the creature gnawing on their leg. Only time will tell whether or not they made the right decision in deciding to leave.

[QUOTE=Chilblain;50655429]It's a given that trade and business would see a short-term negative effect from something as radical a change as Brexit, and I'm not denying that there certainly is a chance that Brexit could end badly for Britain, but it's not all doom and gloom as some people like to portray it. In the wake of the EU, many countries have expressed interest in forming new trade deals with Britain, and if Britain can handle itself well like its financial system, then it could very well come out as a net positive as well. The EU isn't the only trade parter available to Britain, they have other options. Yes, leave voters may have shot themselves in the foot, but it was to dislodge the creature gnawing on their leg. Only time will tell whether or not they made the right decision in deciding to leave.[/QUOTE] cool now find ANY economic study, or economic entity (IMF, OECD) that says that brexit could come out as a net positive because i'll happily throw in that post that has been going around SH containing the innumerable studies saying "it would be bad for the economy"

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;50655422]are you kidding me almost every figurehead in leave has said that immigration was a key talking point of the referendum, I don't know of a SINGLE leave voter who wasn't against the idea of free movement in Europe. "project fear" was a garbage pro-leave nickname given to the [I]EXPERTS WHO SAID THAT BRITAIN WOULD BE ECONOMICALLY WORSE OFF FOR THE MOVE[/I] - because if people believed the experts, then they wouldn't have voted leave, which is why there was an anti-intellectual sentiment in the leave campaign. Rather shady moves to cover up the EU army? You mean like openly discussing it? Your other argument is entirely slippery slope, considering that every treaty concerning the EU so far has been ratified by every member state, the idea that they could take it away without them ratifying it is just utterly unsubstantiated slippery slope fallacy. And yup, it is bad for people to look at the refugee crisis that didn't effect britain in any meaningful way and then vote leave on something that economically and socially damages britain[/QUOTE] Figureheads I wouldn't know about, so I'll give you that. But talking about how you don't know of any leave voters who weren't against the idea of free movement is just anecdotal evidence, I could talk about how every remain voter I know was all for the idea of just opening the floodgates and joining ISIS and it would still be just as worthless. Experts that said that Britain would be worse off in the short-term for the move, experts generally with a preconcieved investment in the EU? Saying that the Britain would suffer in the short-term is just stating the obvious, but Project Fear involved concepts like the complete failure of Britain and even Brexit potentially leading to the start of world war 3. Openly discussing it only after it was revealed to the public, you know, the thing that they had intended to not do until AFTER the referendum? The arguements for remaining in the EU are just as slippery slope as mine are, saying that leaving the EU marks the descent into a broken Britain that consists entirely of the british equivalent of southern US hicks screaming for the brown people to get off their land. So the refugee crisis hasn't affected Britain badly so far, so? There's been precedents set for what the irresponsibility of the governing class has done to other EU countries, and is it really that bad for people to look at that and say that they're concerned about it?

[QUOTE=Chilblain;50655453]Figureheads I wouldn't know about, so I'll give you that. But talking about how you don't know of any leave voters who weren't against the idea of free movement is just anecdotal evidence, I could talk about how every remain voter I know was all for the idea of just opening the floodgates and joining ISIS and it would still be just as worthless. Experts that said that Britain would be worse off in the short-term for the move, experts generally with a preconcieved investment in the EU? Saying that the Britain would suffer in the short-term is just stating the obvious, but Project Fear involved concepts like the complete failure of Britain and even Brexit potentially leading to the start of world war 3. Openly discussing it only after it was revealed to the public, you know, the thing that they had intended to not do until AFTER the referendum? The arguements for remaining in the EU are just as slippery slope as mine are, saying that leaving the EU marks the descent into a broken Britain that consists entirely of the british equivalent of southern US hicks screaming for the brown people to get off their land. So the refugee crisis hasn't affected Britain badly so far, so? There's been precedents set for what the irresponsibility of the governing class has done to other EU countries, and is it really that bad for people to look at that and say that they're concerned about it?[/QUOTE] wasn't the army idea floated by governments, not by the EU. (Germany and France?) After brexit it was publicly announced so i have no idea what you're talking about slippery slope fallacy is a fallacy when you don't have evidence that indicates it would happen - there is evidence that brexit will damage the economy provided by a shit ton of studies you don't have evidence, economic damage does but then again, you don't believe in experts because you think they're all biased presumably? also don't say the refugee crisis hasn't affected britain "badly", it hasn't effected us. i mean, you don't have a single shred of evidence that britain would economically benefit from this (because there isn't any), so you have to rely on trying to discredit the massive pile of evidence that remain had and your best shot at that is "they were pro-EU" jesus fucking christ

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;50655468]wasn't the army idea floated by governments, not by the EU. (Germany and France?) After brexit it was publicly announced so i have no idea what you're talking about slippery slope fallacy is a fallacy when you don't have evidence that indicates it would happen - there is evidence that brexit will damage the economy provided by a shit ton of studies you don't have evidence, economic damage does but then again, you don't believe in experts because you think they're all biased presumably? also don't say the refugee crisis hasn't affected britain "badly", it hasn't effected us.[/QUOTE] The fact that the idea was being floated at all is a fairly serious issue that the voters should deserve to know, and the fact that it was announced AFTER brexit is exactly what I was getting at: Hiding important information from the voter base until after a vote is incredibly scummy. I know the definition of slippery slope, thank you - And I'm not saying that there is no damage to be sustained from leaving the EU, but that the claims of guaranteed economic ruin are a bit exaggerated. I haven't seen your post floating around SH, would you care to share with the class? And I think you misread the part where I said that "There's been precedents set for what the irresponsibility of the governing class has done to other EU countries". I wasn't talking about Britain in particular having been damaged by the crisis, but that there's been incidents in other countries in the EU that have, and that it's entirely understandable that people would be concerned by that considering the EU's reach on subjects such as immigration.

[QUOTE=Chilblain;50655492]The fact that the idea was being floated at all is a fairly serious issue that the voters should deserve to know, and the fact that it was announced AFTER brexit is exactly what I was getting at: Hiding important information from the voter base until after a vote is incredibly scummy. I know the definition of slippery slope, thank you - And I'm not saying that there is no damage to be sustained from leaving the EU, but that the claims of guaranteed economic ruin are a bit exaggerated. I haven't seen your post floating around SH, would you care to share with the class? And I think you misread the part where I said that "There's been precedents set for what the irresponsibility of the governing class has done to other EU countries". I wasn't talking about Britain in particular having been damaged by the crisis, but that there's been incidents in other countries in the EU that have, and that it's entirely understandable that people would be concerned by that considering the EU's reach on subjects such as immigration.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=EcksDee;50593219][B]FUCKTARDEDLY MASSIVE POST COMING IN BUT IM MAD AS HELL[/B] Well no there's not that much shit atm because it's a non-binding referendum which hopefully won't matter if any of the UK's elected officials are worth even 2% of their salt. What I'm saying is that this is a perfect illustration of how democracy isn't a be-all-end-all solution to every political and legislative problem we have. Also "no actual proof" lmao [img]http://i.imgur.com/h5IFhyO.png[/img] [img]http://i.imgur.com/DhqbQNc.png[/img] [url]https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/517415/treasury_analysis_economic_impact_of_eu_membership_web.pdf[/url] [B]Oh what's that you don't like that 200 page report being from gov.uk? [/B] How about Centre for Economic Performance, London School of Economics and Political Science [img]http://i.imgur.com/zUQafh2.png[/img] [img]http://i.imgur.com/KEeQl8s.png[/img] [B]OH HERES ONE REALLY DAMNING THING[/B] [img]http://i.imgur.com/VErKy9i.png[/img] [img]http://i.imgur.com/0vUtflc.png[/img] [url]http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/EA022.pdf[/url] Oh you dont like schools of Polsci and econ? How about OECD [img]http://i.imgur.com/LoQMapO.png[/img] [img]http://i.imgur.com/s560k1L.png[/img] [img]http://i.imgur.com/IVM9j5e.png[/img] [img]http://i.imgur.com/0isXi4l.png[/img] [url]https://www.oecd.org/eco/The-Economic-consequences-of-Brexit-27-april-2016.pdf[/url] Oh sorry is that a biased source too Private enterprise is important to you right, how about Global Counsel [img]http://i.imgur.com/giiZqoG.png[/img] [B]The only people saying this retarded shit you're spouting are those who haven't fucking done any research whatsoever.[/B][/QUOTE] have fun

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;50655358]AAAAAAa I hate this argument so much literally [I]no one[/I] is saying that we are economically doomed, the argument from the VERY START has been that we will be economically worse off for a long period of time so far, we have a method of leaving the EU (through article 50), so far, we don't have an agreed method of getting free travel in Europe, so your sovereignty argument doesn't make any sense because we've already achieved one of them but not the other and considering that freedom of movement was one of the things the leave campaigners DIDN'T WANT, the likelihood of getting it is slim (dependent on how willing they are to turn their back on their own principles, so probably likely actually)[/QUOTE] People have been saying we are economically 'doomed' though. I assume you haven't been reading recent threads. [editline]6th July 2016[/editline] I don't know if the Italian banking crisis is good or bad timing for our renegotiations with the EU, should be interesting to see how they go.

[QUOTE=FlashMarsh;50655566]People have been saying we are economically 'doomed' though. I assume you haven't been reading recent threads. [editline]6th July 2016[/editline] I don't know if the Italian banking crisis is good or bad timing for our renegotiations with the EU, should be interesting to see how they go.[/QUOTE] sorry i should have clarified no one as meaning "no one in the government or of any import", rather than "no one on this internet forum" so i'll apologise for being wrong on that front

[QUOTE=wauterboi;50629382]Why? If you're upset with how your group is running, you can try to take charge and try to lead it out of the shit you think it's in. And anybody can be a leader - there can be multiple leaders.[/QUOTE] I didn't realise it was some sort of hippo, it looked like a man with his head down to me at first. This gave the image a different tone.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;50655497]have fun[/QUOTE] Thank you for taking the time to link me to these studies, sorry I've gone quiet as I've been taking the time to read them and others. In the meantime I'd like to offer these links as thanks for taking the time to find that post. [url]https://woodfordfunds.com/economic-impact-brexit-report/[/url] [url]http://www.lawyersforbritain.org/brexit-trade-treaties.shtml[/url]

[QUOTE=Chilblain;50655608]Thank you for taking the time to link me to these studies, sorry I've gone quiet as I've been taking the time to read them and others. In the meantime I'd like to offer these links as thanks for taking the time to find that post. [URL]https://woodfordfunds.com/economic-impact-brexit-report/[/URL] [URL]http://www.lawyersforbritain.org/brexit-trade-treaties.shtml[/URL][/QUOTE] I've read the woodford funds one before, I don't hold that much faith in it (then again I was remain so that might just be me) Take this paragraph for instance. [quote]However, these factors would be an inconvenience rather than a major barrier to trade. The important fact is that other countries, such as the United States, manage to export successfully to the European Union despite facing these barriers. What’s more, the single market does not appear to have given Britain that much of an advantage in exporting to the rest of the union over countries that are outside the single market in recent years. Between 1993 and 2011, the United Kingdom was only the 28th fastest growing exporter to the other 11 founding members of the single market.12 Similarly, it is easy to forget that the United Kingdom successfully sends half of its exports to countries that are not in the European Union despite, for example, incurring the costs of clearing customs to do so. Furthermore, those parts of the economy that do not export to the European Union (and make up the vast majority, 85%, of Britain’s GDP) would benefit from their freedom from European Union rules and regulations, with which they currently have to comply. With the single market as it stands, the United Kingdom needs to apply European Union regulations to the whole of the economy, even though only 14% of its output is exported to the European Union. So, for example, the National Health Service must comply with the Working Time Directive and retailers are affected by the Agency Workers’ Directive. Nevertheless, the benefits of getting rid of European Union regulations should not be overstated as Britain would probably want to keep many of them anyway.[/quote] First of all, as far as I can see a lot of the stats in that paragraph aren't referenced. Secondly, raising the fact that the United States successfully trades is a terrible comparison, as the USA has an economy [B]7 times larger than us[/B], and has political clout on the world stage far FAR greater than the UK. Not trading with the UK is absolutely NOT the same thing as not trading with the US. Completely different ballpark, and there's nothing that backs up that comparison. Raising the working time directive as a negative is pretty poor as well, considering it's a great piece of legislation for worker's rights. Bringing up the NHS with regard to this is pretty poor in current times as there is currently a large strike by younger doctors over poor working hours - not really selling the idea of losing those bits of legislation. [quote]There is a decent chance that the City would still prosper if the United Kingdom left the European Union. London’s pre-eminent position as a global financial centre predates the single market. The City possesses intrinsic advantages, including Britain’s legal system, the English language, a convenient time zone perfectly placed between the working hours of Asia and New York, openness to immigrants, a large pool of skilled labour and a critical mass of expertise in support services such as accounting and law. And even if exports to Europe did suffer, these losses could be offset over the long term by the greater opportunities to boost trade with non-European Union countries. Brexit would free the United Kingdom from the rules of the European Union’s Common Commercial Policy, which prevents it from negotiating bilateral trade deals with other countries. ... At the same time, though, some other European Union countries, such as Germany, do not seem to have been hindered greatly by their inability to strike bilateral deals. Germany’s exports of financial services have grown faster than the United States’ and at a much faster rate than those of Switzerland or Britain since 2001. But we do not know how German exports might have fared had it been able to negotiate its own deals and it is too soon to see the benefits of the Swiss-China deal. (See Figure 19.) Additionally, should Britain be successful in expanding financial services exports, it should be noted that this could shift Britain’s overall sectoral balance towards services further still.[/quote] The entire part on the financial aspect is really weirdly written, "there is a decent chance that the city can still prosper", listing a series of reasons while not actually looking into those reasons (especially considering that a lot of those reasons could be related to the EU membership - [I]openness to immigrants and large pool of skilled labour[/I]). I'll have another read of it, but the fact that it flies at odds to a lot of the other studies on this, and uses really strange language - giving reasons as to why there would be severe penalties but then following it with "does not spell disaster", with no reasons why it wouldn't. though i won't reject something without giving it a full read, so i'll have a look through again

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;50655682]I've read the woodford funds one before, I don't hold that much faith in it (then again I was remain so that might just be me) Take this paragraph for instance. First of all, as far as I can see a lot of the stats in that paragraph aren't referenced. Secondly, raising the fact that the United States successfully trades is a terrible comparison, as the USA has an economy [B]7 times larger than us[/B], and has political clout on the world stage far FAR greater than the UK. Not trading with the UK is absolutely NOT the same thing as not trading with the US. Completely different ballpark, and there's nothing that backs up that comparison. Raising the working time directive as a negative is pretty poor as well, considering it's a great piece of legislation for worker's rights. Bringing up the NHS with regard to this is pretty poor in current times as there is currently a large strike by younger doctors over poor working hours - not really selling the idea of losing those bits of legislation. The entire part on the financial aspect is really weirdly written, "there is a decent chance that the city can still prosper", listing a series of reasons while not actually looking into those reasons (especially considering that a lot of those reasons could be related to the EU membership - [I]openness to immigrants and large pool of skilled labour[/I]). I'll have another read of it, but the fact that it flies at odds to a lot of the other studies on this, and uses really strange language - giving reasons as to why there would be severe penalties but then following it with "does not spell disaster", with no reasons why it wouldn't. though i won't reject something without giving it a full read, so i'll have a look through again[/QUOTE] I will admit, there are certainly parts of the Woodford funds analysis that are questionable, but I feel like some of its considerations in terms of the general lowering of barriers on free trade and how that impacts Britain's potential future in trading with the EU and other nations is worth considering, and that alone is enough to consider addressing, in my opinion. I've also been taking the time to read through the gov.uk document that was linked earlier and while there are some things that I find questionable about it it does have many good points that I'm not sure how to address myself, since I am no expert on economics myself. Thank you for taking the time to have another look at it, and I urge you to not discount it primarily on the face that it flies at odds with a lot of other studies, considering the fact that popular opinion does not always give the correct answer, which is something that could be very well observed with Brexit itself considering the perils Britain still faces, and it does have a couple things that are worth mulling over, such as Britain slowly moving away from Europe as a a market. [quote]The third development is that Europe has become less important, as an export market, for the United Kingdom. The share of Britain’s exports of goods and services that go to the European Union has been on a downward trend over the past decade or two; the current 45% share is down from 55% in 1999. This is despite expanding membership of the European Union over the same period. (See Figure 10.)[/quote] I'm probably going to stay quiet for a bit due to my somewhat limited understanding of Britain's economic situation, but I would like to thank you for linking me to these documents, it's nice to have information to look at that doesn't conform to my own confirmation bias.

[QUOTE=Chilblain;50655749]I will admit, there are certainly parts of the Woodford funds analysis that are questionable, but I feel like some of its considerations in terms of the general lowering of barriers on free trade and how that impacts Britain's potential future in trading with the EU and other nations is worth considering, and that alone is enough to consider addressing, in my opinion. I've also been taking the time to read through the gov.uk document that was linked earlier and while there are some things that I find questionable about it it does have many good points that I'm not sure how to address myself, since I am no expert on economics myself. Thank you for taking the time to have another look at it, and I urge you to not discount it primarily on the face that it flies at odds with a lot of other studies, considering the fact that popular opinion does not always give the correct answer, which is something that could be very well observed with Brexit itself considering the perils Britain still faces, and it does have a couple things that are worth mulling over, such as Britain slowly moving away from Europe as a a market. I'm probably going to stay quiet for a bit due to my somewhat limited understanding of Britain's economic situation, but I would like to thank you for linking me to these documents, it's nice to have information to look at that doesn't conform to my own confirmation bias.[/QUOTE] at the end of the day, none of us are economic experts (well, i imagine someone on fp is) all we've got is what people are saying, and what we feel about it - it'll be a very long time before there is a full picture of what will happen - or more likely what has already happened so we can only sit and watch really

I really hate this "old people don't care about the effects that brexit will have because they will die soon" crap. Maybe some people care more about the future of the country and not for their personal self-interest like this guy here: [QUOTE=Sobotnik;50655296]the economic damage and damage to free travel its caused is already affecting me fuck this whole "sovereignty" bullshit, I want to go throughout Europe with as much ease as I do in my hometown to live and work where I bloody well please[/QUOTE] "fuck this whole "sovereignty" bullshit, I want to go throughout Europe with ease". Wow. Yeah man, who cares if your country is still called Britain or who runs it or if disappears from the map altogether. Whatever, I just want to go on vacation to Rome without paperwork. Amazing. Maybe some people thought about the future of the country they love and not about the amount of paperwork they or their children will have to endure to go on vacation to central europe or wherever. We will see if they were right or not, time will tell what's gonna happen to the EU in few decades, but seriously stop with this stupid argument that assumes everyone voted purely for their personal self-interest. I can understand the arguments like "the economic impact is going to be too great to be doing this" but this "fuck sovereignty I want to go on vacation to europe" is just baffling to me. [QUOTE=Headhumpy;50655366]Trade with the EU will be tricky once Article 50 is triggered, we very likely won't get the same deals as before and if we do, they will come with some requirement to follow EU rules and regulations. So we've done nothing but given ourselves less of a say in the rules and regulations we have to follow.[/QUOTE] Yes, Britain gave up their say in how the products will have to be made and labeled when [B]exported to the EU[/B]. But now they decide by themselves on [B]EVERYTHING ELSE[/B]. Stop spreading this lie that somehow British government has less control over laws in Britain now that it left the EU.

[QUOTE=Silly Sil;50655828]I really hate this "old people don't care about the effects that brexit will have because they will die soon" crap. Maybe some people care more about the future of the country and not for their personal self-interest like this guy here: "fuck this whole "sovereignty" bullshit, I want to go throughout Europe with ease". Wow. Yeah man, who cares if your country is still called Britain or who runs it or if disappears from the map altogether. Whatever, I just want to go on vacation to Rome without paperwork. Amazing. Maybe some people thought about the future of the country they love and not about the amount of paperwork they or their children will have to endure to go on vacation to central europe or wherever. We will see if they were right or not, time will tell what's gonna happen to the EU in few decades, but seriously stop with this stupid argument that assumes everyone voted purely for their personal self-interest. I can understand the arguments like "the economic impact is going to be too great to be doing this" but this "fuck sovereignty I want to go on vacation to europe" is just baffling to me. Yes, Britain gave up their say in how the products will have to be made and labeled when [B]exported to the EU[/B]. But now they decide by themselves on [B]EVERYTHING ELSE[/B]. Stop spreading this lie that somehow British government has less control over laws in Britain now that it left the EU.[/QUOTE] What exactly is this [B]EVERYTHING ELSE[/B] that you love to harp on? What has the UK gained control over that it didn't have before?

[QUOTE=Silly Sil;50655828]I really hate this "old people don't care about the effects that brexit will have because they will die soon" crap. Maybe some people care more about the future of the country and not for their personal self-interest like this guy here: "fuck this whole "sovereignty" bullshit, I want to go throughout Europe with ease". Wow. Yeah man, who cares if your country is still called Britain or who runs it or if disappears from the map altogether. Whatever, I just want to go on vacation to Rome without paperwork. Amazing. Maybe some people thought about the future of the country they love and not about the amount of paperwork they or their children will have to endure to go on vacation to central europe or wherever. We will see if they were right or not, time will tell what's gonna happen to the EU in few decades, but seriously stop with this stupid argument that assumes everyone voted purely for their personal self-interest.[/QUOTE] Yeah, fuck the greatest trade deal the UK has ever had. Fuck businesses that that do business with other EU countries, I mean, what do they even do? [QUOTE=Silly Sil;50655828] Yes, Britain gave up their say in how the products will have to be made and labeled when exported to the EU. But now they decide by themselves on EVERYTHING ELSE. Stop spreading this lie that somehow British government has less control over laws in Britain now that it left the EU. [/QUOTE] And fuck being able to Veto exactly that. And fuck actually having any influence.

[QUOTE=Headhumpy;50655896]What exactly is this [B]EVERYTHING ELSE[/B] that you love to harp on? What has the UK gained control over that it didn't have before?[/QUOTE] What do you mean? The laws made by the EU take priority over the laws present in member states. And the EU has the capability to control almost everything: education, industry, tourism, culture, administration. [editline]6th July 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=gokiyono;50655931]Yeah, fuck the greatest trade deal the UK has ever had. Fuck businesses that that do business with other EU countries, I mean, what do they even do?[/QUOTE] I don't know what you're trying to say here. Might want to tone down the passive aggressive sarcasm a bit. [QUOTE=gokiyono;50655931]And fuck being able to Veto exactly that. And fuck actually having any influence.[/QUOTE] Veto what? Regulations of ingredients and labels of goods exported to EU? How much control over that do you think you have when it comes to goods exported to the US? Or anywhere else for that matter.