Britain and the European Union

[dust]

I've decided not to give an answer on this occasion. I think you have set your sights on voting to remain and you will either get your way or you won't. If you get your way then it won't be long until it becomes clear exactly what has been given up, as all those things come home to bite.

 

Heh. You have indeed decided not to give a real answer. I clocked that pages ago.

 

Now, back away slowly...

[dust]

I asked, somewhat tongue-in-cheek, many pages ago for a "stunningly cogent" argument to leave. I'd be surprised, at this point, with any argument at all beyond "Ah but the crony system and the immigrants and it's just like the USSR... you'll see, young man, I know things.."

 

You stand on your soapboxes and perform little speeches about the European plutocracy and the loss of British Power to a crumbling political union, but to date I've seen little to back up your claims. No data that isn't easily refuted, not a scent on the wind of anything approaching a cogent argument.

 

In lieu of one, and in view of various good arguments I've heard from people to remain, yes, I will be voting to remain.

[Karl]

I asked, somewhat tongue-in-cheek, many pages ago for a "stunningly cogent" argument to leave. I'd be surprised, at this point, with any argument at all beyond "Ah but the crony system and the immigrants and it's just like the USSR... you'll see, young man, I know things.."

 

You stand on your soapboxes and perform little speeches about the European plutocracy and the loss of British Power to a crumbling political union, but to date I've seen little to back up your claims. No data that isn't easily refuted, not a scent on the wind of anything approaching a cogent argument.

 

In lieu of one, and in view of various good arguments I've heard from people to remain, yes, I will be voting to remain.

 

You were already so that's no surprise. You don't hold individual sovereignty as a value. Let's hope you don't witness what others have when they plumped for that option. For me, at my age it's possibly better to vote remain, but for the young :-/ you will have to live with the decision you made if it's to remain. Remember that you voted for the oligarchs and the Neo-aristocracy. Maybe you already sit amongst them ?

[Karl]

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/sir-james-dyson-so-if-we-leave-the-eu-no-one-will-trade-with-us/

 

 

how about James Dyson giving his reasons we should leave. Because we will be wealthier and have more job opportunities for the kind of work that doesn't involve young adults competing against baristas, waiters and sports direct clothing packers.

[joeblast]

I asked, somewhat tongue-in-cheek, many pages ago for a "stunningly cogent" argument to leave. I'd be surprised, at this point, with any argument at all beyond "Ah but the crony system and the immigrants and it's just like the USSR... you'll see, young man, I know things.."

 

You stand on your soapboxes and perform little speeches about the European plutocracy and the loss of British Power to a crumbling political union, but to date I've seen little to back up your claims. No data that isn't easily refuted, not a scent on the wind of anything approaching a cogent argument.

 

In lieu of one, and in view of various good arguments I've heard from people to remain, yes, I will be voting to remain.

little data!  look at the world around you, the direction it has changed, where it used to be, what the rule of law used to mean....if you cant see that....well, in what ways are you benefiting from the EU?  do you have some personal economic interest, or is all the subversion just not that big a deal to you, is sovereignty not that big a deal to you, is having a bunch of half wits in brussels dictate how things should go without you being able to sway it in any way shape or form - none of that is a big deal to you?

 

what's your age, just curious

[Apech]

You were already so that's no surprise. You don't hold individual sovereignty as a value. Let's hope you don't witness what others have when they plumped for that option. For me, at my age it's possibly better to vote remain, but for the young :-/ you will have to live with the decision you made if it's to remain. Remember that you voted for the oligarchs and the Neo-aristocracy. Maybe you already sit amongst them ?

 

 

That's close to ad hominem.  Your arguments are all appeal to emotion and dark threats of conspiracy.  No wonder you didn't convince.

[Apech]

little data!  look at the world around you, the direction it has changed, where it used to be, what the rule of law used to mean....if you cant see that....well, in what ways are you benefiting from the EU?  do you have some personal economic interest, or is all the subversion just not that big a deal to you, is sovereignty not that big a deal to you, is having a bunch of half wits in brussels dictate how things should go without you being able to sway it in any way shape or form - none of that is a big deal to you?

 

what's your age, just curious

 

 

Don't you live in Alaska - or have I misremembered?

[Karl]

That's close to ad hominem. Your arguments are all appeal to emotion and dark threats of conspiracy. No wonder you didn't convince.

They were a riposte in a similar tone to the one delivered. I'm sorry but I don't like people who complain that 'they haven't been presented with a good enough argument' because they are either unwilling, incapable or already decided. I'm fine presenting an argument to someone who has a genuinely open mind and wishes to debate, but someone who enters a debate armed with a club and knuckle dusters bores me.

 

I think you have a genuine case, I think you are wrong, but I accept that your decision is based on where you currently live and work. I don't think that's what SB is doing. He/ she is acting like a spoilt child fighting a parent over his right to do whatever he wants, because that's what he thinks is his right to rebel. I'm not going to convince someone who has that attitude and it usually ends in 'I told you so'. So let's start there. I already know where things are going. I already know we will end up in Shengen, we will end up swamped by immigrants, with the Euro as our currency and even more of our money going to bailouts and boondoggles. I know because Brussels told us so and they have demonstrated their intent with Greece and the number of unemployed youth that are running to Britain to get service jobs-otherwise the unemployment rate amongst continental youths would be even higher.

 

So, you know what, fuck 'em. When it all goes to hell I won't have even the tiniest bit of sympathy. I will sit on my pension nest egg and let them polish my shoes and make my morning coffee.

 

You are right, it is an appeal to emotion and an ad hominem, that sometimes is the only argument an irrational person can understand.

Edited June 11, 2016 by Karl

[dust]

The reward for getting it together is immense. It's the same as when we left Europe the first time after we broke from the RC church. We made rapid progress and ruled an enormous empire by trade and attrition. We could do so again. It isn't impossible, but it will be hard.

 

Eugh.

[dust]

Not an amazingly thorough article, but backed up with sources and quite well-reasoned in the points it does make:

 

 

https://www.facebook.com/nicholasjohncarter/posts/10153467946496736

 

Immigration has been in the news a lot lately, especially with the EU referendum coming up.

So let's use the tools and data of political science to understand the topic better.

 

Last year, 270,000 EU citizens immigrated to the UK, and 85,000 returned to the EU. So EU net migration was around 185,000 (1). Additionally, a similar number came from outside the EU, so 330,000 in total.

 

That was the highest ever level of EU migration – going all the way back to when we joined the EEC in 1975. Indeed during the 1980s the trend was the other way – British workers moved overseas, particularly to Germany, as their economy was doing better than ours at that time. You might remember the TV show ‘Auf Wiedersehen Pet’. Currently our economy is doing better than many European ones so more people are coming than going. But there's no reason to think that will always be the case.

 

The Leave campaign claim that EU migration is putting unsustainable pressure on our public services, worsening the housing crisis, putting pressure on the NHS, on schools and on our roads. Their latest TV broadcast for instance shows a sick older lady receiving NHS treatment much faster in an imaginary hospital if we leave the EU. Are they right?

 

Imagine that we left the EU and banned EU immigration completely. Nobody else allowed – no footballers, no entertainers, no chefs, no businessmen, no nurses, no cleaners, nobody. And we kept that door shut for ten years. And for comparison let’s say that we stayed in the EU and immigration continues at this year’s record level (the highest ever) for the next ten years. How would that impact our population and our public services?

 

In terms of population, we’d end up with 1.85m fewer people living in our country after the 10 years. That sounds like a lot of people, which it is. But we’re a big country – 64.6m in total at the moment (2). So even under these very extreme assumptions the difference is only 2.8%. Less than 1 in 35.

 

Would you notice the difference if there were 34 instead of 35 people in your doctors’ waiting room? If there were 34 instead of 35 cars ahead of you in the traffic jam? Would your child’s education suffer in a class of 35 instead of 34? I doubt it.

 

And don’t forget that we’re making crazily unrealistic assumptions about how much we could reduce immigration if we left the EU. Because even the most ardent Leave campaigners don’t say that we should stop immigration altogether. They usually talk of using a points system to reach the government’s net target of 100,000 per year. So the difference in population after 10 years wouldn’t be anything like as much as 1 in 35.

 

Let’s say we could hit the net target of 100,000 – half from the EU and half from non-EU countries for the sake of argument. In that case, the difference in population after 10 years would be 1.35m or 1 in 49.

 

And don’t forget that we’re also making another very aggressive assumption – that migration will continue at the same level as last year, our highest ever. It would be more realistic to take the average of the last five years migration (3). If we do that, then the difference in our population after ten years would be only 790,000 or 1 in 82.

 

1 in 82.

 

I can’t tell the difference between a crowd of 81 and 82 people (even when they were my own wedding guests!). Can you?

 

So here’s the thing: however you feel about EU immigration, even under extreme assumptions the impact on our overall population just isn’t very large.

 

Now at this point some of you might be thinking – “This can't be right - step outside and look with your own eyes! Britain is full of foreigners! The place I grew up is like another country! How can you claim that EU immigration is not significant?”.

 

I live in inner London so I can sense where you might be coming from. A few things to bear in mind:

 

1) The overwhelming majority of immigration to the UK over the last 40 years has been from outside the EU (3). However you feel about that, it has nothing to do with our EU membership;

2) Whether you like it or not, Britain has been a multicultural country for several generations at least. You can’t tell whether somebody is an immigrant just by looking at them (sorry if this is an obvious point). You might hazard a guess at their ethnicity or race but that’s a very different thing;

3) Historically, immigrants have clustered in particular areas of the country, so your neighbourhood may not be representative of the country at large;

4) British people from all backgrounds have become much more cosmopolitan in their tastes over the last 40 years. We drink in pubs much less, but enjoy wine at home or go to restaurants and cafes a lot more. Instead of just eating British food, we enjoy flavours from all over the world. So the retail and commercial landscape of our country has changed - to reflect our changing tastes, not just because of new arrivals.

 

“But wait! What when Turkey, Montenegro and Albania join the EU? We’ll be swamped!”

 

No we won’t.

 

Mainly because Turkey and Albania are nowhere near being eligible to join the EU, and Montenegro is tiny. Also don't forget there are 27 other countries in the EU to choose from if residents of those countries did fancy a change of scene.

 

And even if in the distant future many other countries did join and we did find ourselves swamped, Britain could leave. We’re free to leave the EU whenever we want. But if we leave and then want to rejoin, we’d need the consent of all 27 other member states. Better to stay and keep our options open than leave in fear of something that is very unlikely to happen.

 

And so far we’ve also not factored in the contribution that immigrants make to our country, and specifically our public finances. EU migrants contribute more in taxes than they use in public services, as they are much more likely to be of working age than the general population (4). So if we used that extra tax revenue to hire more doctors, build more schools, invest in transport and so on, we’d actually have better public services than we would without any EU immigration.

 

It takes time to hire and train teachers and doctors, build schools and roads, and so forth. So it’s true that a sudden influx of people into an area can put short-term pressure on services. But the fundamental reason for the issues we identified at the start – NHS pressure, oversubscribed schools, congested roads, the housing crisis – is not EU immigration.

 

We are now six years into a government austerity programme to attempt to balance the books. So it’s not surprising that our public services are feeling the pinch.

 

An ageing population and new advances in medicine put particular strain on the NHS.

For the last thirty years, we have failed by a wide margin to build enough houses in the UK. Interest rates have been at an ‘emergency’ rate of 0.5% for the last seven years. That is why house prices are so high.

 

And this story of decades of underinvestment is repeated for our roads and railways too.

All of these issues are home-grown. And all of those policy areas are entirely within the control of our government in Westminster. They have nothing to do with the EU and are not the fault of EU migrants.

 

Finally, there’s been plenty of academic research into this issue, including a summary paper just published by the London School of Economics (5).

 

The research shows, contrary to many tabloid headlines, that

 

1) Immigrants do not take a disproportionate share of jobs created by our economy;
2) There is no evidence of an overall negative impact of immigration on wages;
3) There is no evidence that EU migrants affect the labour market performance of native-born workers (i.e. make it harder for native-born workers to get promoted, get a pay rise, etc)

 

So it is clear from examining the evidence that fears of immigration have been blown out of all proportion by the Eurosceptic press and the Leave campaign.

 

But what about all that money we send the EU? Couldn't we use that to improve public services?

 

Yes, but it wouldn't go very far, and it would be outweighed by the economic damage from leaving.

 

Our net contribution to the EU was £8.5bn last year (6) which works out at 36 pence per person per day. That is a drop in the ocean compared to our annual NHS budget of £116.4bn (7).

 

And if you’re trying to work out the impact of leaving the EU on our public services, you can’t just look at our net contribution. You also need to consider the effect that leaving would have on the size of our economy, and hence the tax revenue the government can generate.

 

Seven highly respected independent economic organisations have tried to work this out (8). And all seven of them have reached the same conclusion: that the economic damage caused by Brexit would more than offset the saving from our EU contribution.

 

The best estimate suggests that the government would have between £20bn and £40bn less to spend on public services than if we remained in the EU (9). So our public services wouldn't be better if we left the EU - they would be much worse.

 

So if we left the EU to ‘take control of immigration’, and then reduced it as discussed above, we’d still have all the same problems we have today – the housing crisis, an overstretched NHS, oversubscribed schools, heavy traffic, etc.

 

But we’d also have two even more serious problems to add to the list: a recession and the unknown consequences of destabilising the very institution which has secured peace in Europe for the last 70 years.

 

People are sceptical of economists’ forecasts. But you don’t even need to estimate many of the economic problems that will arise from Brexit – you can see them already in the currency markets.

 

The pound suffered its biggest one day fall in seven years when Boris and other MPs joined the leave campaign (10). You can watch the impact of movements in the referendum opinion polls in the EUR/GBP exchange rate. A major bank recently warned that Brexit could wipe 20% off the value of the pound through devaluation (11).

 

Devaluation sounds like a dry and abstract concept. So let me explain what that means:

20% of your life savings wiped out overnight.

 

The numbers in your bank account will be the same, but what you can buy with it will be 20% less, since most things we buy these days come from overseas.

 

Only the other day the Financial Times reported that hedge funds are planning to run their own private exit polls on referendum day to speculate on the currency markets ahead of the official result (12).

 

Just as during the ERM crisis of 1992, the vultures are circling, waiting to feast on our self-inflicted wounds.

 

And here’s another very clear threat: to our jobs. Only last Friday, Jamie Dimon, CEO of JP Morgan, warned his staff in Bournemouth that one, two or even four thousand of them would be made redundant if we leave the EU (13). Imagine how his staff are feeling today. And as a manager, let me tell you: that’s not the kind of thing you tell your employees unless you’re deadly serious.

 

Even leading Leave campaigner Michael Gove admitted just a few days ago that jobs are at risk if we leave the EU (14). Multimillionaire UKIP donor Arron Banks described this economic damage as ‘a price worth paying’ (15).

 

Arron Banks, Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage might be rich enough to gamble their jobs on Brexit - but are you?

 

It is quite possible that some of your friends and family will lose their jobs as a direct result of Britain leaving the EU. Do you want to be responsible for that?

 

We took an evidence-based look at the immigration and EU issue above. But the Leave campaign and Eurosceptic press (Express, Sun and Mail in particular) choose to paint a very different picture. A picture which blows these statistics out of all proportion. 'Strangers in Our Own Country' 'Our borders are out of control!'. You know the stuff I mean. Pictures which invite us to eye our friends and neighbours with suspicion and even hostility. Editorial which pins the blame for every problem from housing to wages to traffic to NHS waiting times on immigrants.

 

And it's not even because they don't know any better. The leaders of the Leave campaign and the political editors of those newspapers are clever, well-educated people. They know the facts I set out above just as well as I do.

 

Yet instead of presenting a balanced view, they choose to deliberately whip up fear and suspicion of immigrants for their own political purposes.

 

Shame on them.

 

Why? Because appealing to people's basest prejudices sells newspapers and gathers votes. Just ask Donald Trump.

 

And what greater contrast could there be between the divisive rhetoric of the leave campaign and the noble vision of the EU's founding fathers.

 

Men who, amid the ashes of World War Two, set their national differences aside and dared - not just to dream but to build - a better Europe for us all.

 

A Europe in which war was “not only unthinkable … but materially impossible” (16).

 

Here’s Winston Churchill addressing the Congress of Europe in 1948:

 

“A high and a solemn responsibility rests upon us here ... If we allow ourselves to be rent and disordered by pettiness and small disputes, if we fail in clarity of view or courage in action, a priceless occasion may be cast away for ever. But if we all pull together and pool the luck and the comradeship - and we shall need all the comradeship and not a little luck … then all the little children who are now growing up in this tormented world may find themselves not the victors nor the vanquished in the fleeting triumphs of one country over another in the bloody turmoil of … war, but the heirs of all the treasures of the past and the masters of all the science, the abundance and the glories of the future.”

 

And - against all the odds - we did it.

 

We pooled the luck and the comradeship and achieved Churchill’s vision.

 

Those “little children” are now retired – the first generation in a thousand years to grow up without the horror of war in Europe.

 

Instead of building weapons, our scientists work together to solve the greatest problems of our age.

 

We enjoy a standard of living unimaginable to people in 1948.

 

All the cities, art, history, people, food and culture of this wonderful continent are open to us whenever we want to visit, to live or to work.

 

Hundreds of millions of European people who until only a few decades ago were ruled by dictators or communists now enjoy democracy, human rights, the rule of law and the abundance of the free market.

 

I think that’s worth 36 pence a day.

 

And yet here we stand, about to turn our backs on this great project, thanks to cynical newspaper owners and barefaced lies from the Leave campaign.

 

Forget what the Sun says.

 

Forget what’s good for Boris’ and Farage’s careers.

 

Listen to every current and former British Prime Minister (17). Every other major UK political party leader (18). To Barack Obama, to Hillary Clinton, to Angela Merkel and a host of other world leaders (19). To Stephen Hawking and 83% of scientists (20). To 40 religious leaders (21). To 300 leading historians (22). To the Trades Union Congress and our six largest trades unions (23). To 88% of economists (24). To the National Farmers Union (25). To the Chief Executive of NHS England (26), to the Royal College of Midwives (27) To British businesses of all sizes (28).

 

For there is an overwhelming consensus among experts of all kinds that Britain is stronger in Europe.

 

And what does the Leave campaign say to this?

 

“I think people in this country have had enough of experts” (Michael Gove, Friday 3rd June)

 

What an extraordinary response.

 

If you were sick, you’d want to see a doctor. If you had a plane to fly, you’d want a pilot. So when we have the most important political, economic and foreign policy decision of our lifetime to make I think we should listen to the people who are in the best position to evaluate what to do. And they’re all telling us the same thing – we’re much better off in Europe.

 

It might not be what Michael Gove wants to hear. But it sounds like the right answer to me.

So when you’re in the polling station on Thursday 23rd - with that stubby little pencil in your hand –Vote Remain.

 

Not in fear, but with pride – about what we, the people of Europe, have achieved together.

 

Not in ignorance, but with science firmly on our side.

 

And not alone, but with the greatest statesmen of the past three generations urging us on.

And then in years to come, when your children ask you how you voted in the referendum of 2016, you can look them in the eye and tell them you were on the right side of history.

 

Thank you for reading

 

(1) https://fullfact.org/immigration/eu-migration-and-uk/
(2) https://www.ons.gov.uk/…/populationandm…/populationestimates
(3) http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/statistics-net-migration-…/…
(4) http://www.economist.com/…/21631076-rather-lot-according-ne…
(5) http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/ea019.pdf
(6) https://fullfact.org/euro…/our-eu-membership-fee-55-million/
(7) http://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngla…/thenhs/about/Pages/overview.aspx
(8) http://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/publications/comms/r116.pdf
(9) http://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/publications/comms/r116.pdf
(10) https://next.ft.com/co…/7fa04d70-d911-11e5-a72f-1e7744c66818
(11) https://www.theguardian.com/…/brexit-could-wipe-20-percent-…
(12) https://next.ft.com/co…/7e26d896-241c-11e6-9d4d-c11776a5124d
(13) BBC Radio 4, 3rd June 2016; see also http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36450460
(14) http://www.thetimes.co.uk/…/i-can-t-guarantee-everyone-will…
(15) https://www.politicshome.com/…/arron-banks-%C2%A34300-loss-…
(16) http://www.robert-schuman.eu/en/declaration-of-9-may-1950
(17) David Cameron http://www.theguardian.com/…/david-cameron-launches-tory-ca… ; Gordon Brown http://www.theguardian.com/…/inspiring-view-britishness-def…; Tony Blair http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36408239; John Major http://www.telegraph.co.uk/…/John-Major-Voting-to-leave-wil…
(18) Jeremy Corbyn (Labour) http://labourlist.org/…/europe-needs-to-change-but-i-am-vo…/ Tim Farron (Lib Dem) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/…/Britain-impoverished-backwater… Caroline Lucas (Green) http://europe.newsweek.com/caroline-lucas-brexit-european-r… Nicola Sturgeon (SNP) http://www.thesun.co.uk/…/Nicola-Sturgeon-vows-to-back-argu…
(19) Barack Obama http://www.telegraph.co.uk/…/as-your-friend-let-me-tell-you… ; Hillary Clinton http://www.theguardian.com/…/hillary-clinton-britain-should… Angela Merkel http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36436726; Shinzo Abe http://www.telegraph.co.uk/…/japanese-prime-minister-shinz…/
(20) https://www.theguardian.com/…/stephen-hawking-donald-trump-… ; http://www.nature.com/…/scientists-say-no-to-uk-exit-from-e…
(21) http://www.theguardian.com/…/religious-leaders-oppose-brexit
(22) http://www.theguardian.com/…/vote-to-leave-eu-will-condemn-…
(23) http://uk.reuters.com/ar…/uk-britain-eu-unions-idUKKCN0V517D
(24) http://www.itv.com/…/almost-nine-in-10-economists-believe-…/
(25) http://www.theguardian.com/…/british-farmers-uk-eu-nfu-brex…
(26) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36353145
(27) https://www.rcm.org.uk/…/royal-college-of-midwives-supports…
(28) http://www.independent.co.uk/…/brexit-eu-referendum-what-wi…

 

[Taoist Texts]

 

 

Listen to every current and former British Prime Minister (17). Every other major UK political party leader (18). To Barack Obama, to Hillary Clinton, to Angela Merkel 

LOL

[Karl]

The peace and survival of everyone on earth is the stake:

 

https://youtu.be/rHH-Cv0xSpA

[Apech]

@dustybeijing,

 

Phew - thanks for that very detailed and referenced post.  A lot of good points there.

 

I think the recent 'crisis' with the influx of people from the middle east has confused the picture with regard to the free movement and labour within the EU - which is of course designed to allow people greater opportunities for work and businesses better opportunities to build a workforce.  Over a period of time this will show an ebb and flow according to the economic activity in different areas - much as would happen within a country where people move North to South or whatever to get a better job.  This kind of effect is very noticeable here - where many Portuguese go to France or Holland say to work or sometimes build a business and return 'rich' and invest locally.

 

There are issues around pressure on local services sometimes and with the effect of driving down pay - but I think that mainly this is the fault of both national and local politicians first denying the issue then blaming the 'other'.  If we stopped trying to live in the past and just addressed the problems in a rational and logical manner by looking ahead and doing a little planning then even these effects could be offset.  I am hoping a strong remain vote will make us wake up to reality and start to manage things properly.

 

Speaking of the past - and references to 'empire' and the rest - history teaches us that we largely (ignoring Elizabethan pirating exploits) gained a empire by winning the Seven Years War.  We won this war because we had a modern parliamentary system and defeated the French through superior administration and logistics.  The French being still stuck in a moribund aristocratic way of doing things.  This then allowed expansion through trade - which was actually a side effect of the industrial revolution (we needed raw materials and new markets) coupled with massive population explosion in western Europe in the late 18th and 19th centuries.  In other words empire arose because of macro social and technological changes.  It was only much later that we started preaching about superiority and 'spreading' civilisation as a kind justification after the fact.  And we behaved quite badly because of this sense of superiority - and this behaviour lingers on.

 

Any argument about Brexit which relies on the echoes of our great past and our inherent differences is really a fantasy because the causes and conditions of that past no longer apply.

[Apech]

No man is an island,

Entire of itself,

Every man is a piece of the continent,

A part of the main.

If a clod be washed away by the sea,

Europe is the less.

As well as if a promontory were.

As well as if a manor of thy friend's

Or of thine own were:

Any man's death diminishes me,

Because I am involved in mankind,

And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; 

It tolls for thee. 

 

John Donne

[Karl]

Anyone listened to that YouTube video I posted ?

 

Might well make you remainers reconsider how well the propaganda is working.

 

Still, I had a nice younger Labour chap with two small children in tow appear on my doorstep today seeking a leave poster.

[Karl]

No man is an island,

Entire of itself,

Every man is a piece of the continent,

A part of the main.

If a clod be washed away by the sea,

Europe is the less.

As well as if a promontory were.

As well as if a manor of thy friend's

Or of thine own were:

Any man's death diminishes me,

Because I am involved in mankind,

And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; 

It tolls for thee. 

 

John Donne

 

Would you like to reflect on what that poem means and its context ?

[Karl]

Eugh.

 

Do you know anything about British history ? How, as a trading nation we are ever reliant on our maritime exports which were constantly under attack-as were those of other peaceful trading countries. Britains navy secured the sea lanes by attrition. We destroyed pirates and brigands, we allowed trade to flourish across the globe and for all nations to grow wealthy.

 

[Apech]

Would you like to reflect on what that poem means and its context ?

 

Sure - already have.

[Karl]

Sure - already have.

 

So you are now voting to leave.

[Karl]

Not an amazingly thorough article, but backed up with sources and quite well-reasoned in the points it does make:

 

 

https://www.facebook.com/nicholasjohncarter/posts/10153467946496736

 

Immigration has been in the news a lot lately, especially with the EU referendum coming up.

So let's use the tools and data of political science to understand the topic better.

 

 

Last year, 270,000 EU citizens immigrated to the UK, and 85,000 returned to the EU. So EU net migration was around 185,000 (1). Additionally, a similar number came from outside the EU, so 330,000 in total.

 

That was the highest ever level of EU migration – going all the way back to when we joined the EEC in 1975. Indeed during the 1980s the trend was the other way – British workers moved overseas, particularly to Germany, as their economy was doing better than ours at that time. You might remember the TV show ‘Auf Wiedersehen Pet’. Currently our economy is doing better than many European ones so more people are coming than going. But there's no reason to think that will always be the case.

 

The Leave campaign claim that EU migration is putting unsustainable pressure on our public services, worsening the housing crisis, putting pressure on the NHS, on schools and on our roads. Their latest TV broadcast for instance shows a sick older lady receiving NHS treatment much faster in an imaginary hospital if we leave the EU. Are they right?

 

Imagine that we left the EU and banned EU immigration completely. Nobody else allowed – no footballers, no entertainers, no chefs, no businessmen, no nurses, no cleaners, nobody. And we kept that door shut for ten years. And for comparison let’s say that we stayed in the EU and immigration continues at this year’s record level (the highest ever) for the next ten years. How would that impact our population and our public services?

 

In terms of population, we’d end up with 1.85m fewer people living in our country after the 10 years. That sounds like a lot of people, which it is. But we’re a big country – 64.6m in total at the moment (2). So even under these very extreme assumptions the difference is only 2.8%. Less than 1 in 35.

 

Would you notice the difference if there were 34 instead of 35 people in your doctors’ waiting room? If there were 34 instead of 35 cars ahead of you in the traffic jam? Would your child’s education suffer in a class of 35 instead of 34? I doubt it.

 

And don’t forget that we’re making crazily unrealistic assumptions about how much we could reduce immigration if we left the EU. Because even the most ardent Leave campaigners don’t say that we should stop immigration altogether. They usually talk of using a points system to reach the government’s net target of 100,000 per year. So the difference in population after 10 years wouldn’t be anything like as much as 1 in 35.

 

Let’s say we could hit the net target of 100,000 – half from the EU and half from non-EU countries for the sake of argument. In that case, the difference in population after 10 years would be 1.35m or 1 in 49.

 

And don’t forget that we’re also making another very aggressive assumption – that migration will continue at the same level as last year, our highest ever. It would be more realistic to take the average of the last five years migration (3). If we do that, then the difference in our population after ten years would be only 790,000 or 1 in 82.

 

1 in 82.

 

I can’t tell the difference between a crowd of 81 and 82 people (even when they were my own wedding guests!). Can you?

 

So here’s the thing: however you feel about EU immigration, even under extreme assumptions the impact on our overall population just isn’t very large.

 

Now at this point some of you might be thinking – “This can't be right - step outside and look with your own eyes! Britain is full of foreigners! The place I grew up is like another country! How can you claim that EU immigration is not significant?”.

 

I live in inner London so I can sense where you might be coming from. A few things to bear in mind:

 

1) The overwhelming majority of immigration to the UK over the last 40 years has been from outside the EU (3). However you feel about that, it has nothing to do with our EU membership;

2) Whether you like it or not, Britain has been a multicultural country for several generations at least. You can’t tell whether somebody is an immigrant just by looking at them (sorry if this is an obvious point). You might hazard a guess at their ethnicity or race but that’s a very different thing;

3) Historically, immigrants have clustered in particular areas of the country, so your neighbourhood may not be representative of the country at large;

4) British people from all backgrounds have become much more cosmopolitan in their tastes over the last 40 years. We drink in pubs much less, but enjoy wine at home or go to restaurants and cafes a lot more. Instead of just eating British food, we enjoy flavours from all over the world. So the retail and commercial landscape of our country has changed - to reflect our changing tastes, not just because of new arrivals.

 

“But wait! What when Turkey, Montenegro and Albania join the EU? We’ll be swamped!”

 

No we won’t.

 

Mainly because Turkey and Albania are nowhere near being eligible to join the EU, and Montenegro is tiny. Also don't forget there are 27 other countries in the EU to choose from if residents of those countries did fancy a change of scene.

 

And even if in the distant future many other countries did join and we did find ourselves swamped, Britain could leave. We’re free to leave the EU whenever we want. But if we leave and then want to rejoin, we’d need the consent of all 27 other member states. Better to stay and keep our options open than leave in fear of something that is very unlikely to happen.

 

And so far we’ve also not factored in the contribution that immigrants make to our country, and specifically our public finances. EU migrants contribute more in taxes than they use in public services, as they are much more likely to be of working age than the general population (4). So if we used that extra tax revenue to hire more doctors, build more schools, invest in transport and so on, we’d actually have better public services than we would without any EU immigration.

 

It takes time to hire and train teachers and doctors, build schools and roads, and so forth. So it’s true that a sudden influx of people into an area can put short-term pressure on services. But the fundamental reason for the issues we identified at the start – NHS pressure, oversubscribed schools, congested roads, the housing crisis – is not EU immigration.

 

We are now six years into a government austerity programme to attempt to balance the books. So it’s not surprising that our public services are feeling the pinch.

 

An ageing population and new advances in medicine put particular strain on the NHS.

For the last thirty years, we have failed by a wide margin to build enough houses in the UK. Interest rates have been at an ‘emergency’ rate of 0.5% for the last seven years. That is why house prices are so high.

 

And this story of decades of underinvestment is repeated for our roads and railways too.

All of these issues are home-grown. And all of those policy areas are entirely within the control of our government in Westminster. They have nothing to do with the EU and are not the fault of EU migrants.

 

Finally, there’s been plenty of academic research into this issue, including a summary paper just published by the London School of Economics (5).

 

The research shows, contrary to many tabloid headlines, that

 

1) Immigrants do not take a disproportionate share of jobs created by our economy;

2) There is no evidence of an overall negative impact of immigration on wages;

3) There is no evidence that EU migrants affect the labour market performance of native-born workers (i.e. make it harder for native-born workers to get promoted, get a pay rise, etc)

 

So it is clear from examining the evidence that fears of immigration have been blown out of all proportion by the Eurosceptic press and the Leave campaign.

 

But what about all that money we send the EU? Couldn't we use that to improve public services?

 

Yes, but it wouldn't go very far, and it would be outweighed by the economic damage from leaving.

 

Our net contribution to the EU was £8.5bn last year (6) which works out at 36 pence per person per day. That is a drop in the ocean compared to our annual NHS budget of £116.4bn (7).

 

And if you’re trying to work out the impact of leaving the EU on our public services, you can’t just look at our net contribution. You also need to consider the effect that leaving would have on the size of our economy, and hence the tax revenue the government can generate.

 

Seven highly respected independent economic organisations have tried to work this out (8). And all seven of them have reached the same conclusion: that the economic damage caused by Brexit would more than offset the saving from our EU contribution.

 

The best estimate suggests that the government would have between £20bn and £40bn less to spend on public services than if we remained in the EU (9). So our public services wouldn't be better if we left the EU - they would be much worse.

 

So if we left the EU to ‘take control of immigration’, and then reduced it as discussed above, we’d still have all the same problems we have today – the housing crisis, an overstretched NHS, oversubscribed schools, heavy traffic, etc.

 

But we’d also have two even more serious problems to add to the list: a recession and the unknown consequences of destabilising the very institution which has secured peace in Europe for the last 70 years.

 

People are sceptical of economists’ forecasts. But you don’t even need to estimate many of the economic problems that will arise from Brexit – you can see them already in the currency markets.

 

The pound suffered its biggest one day fall in seven years when Boris and other MPs joined the leave campaign (10). You can watch the impact of movements in the referendum opinion polls in the EUR/GBP exchange rate. A major bank recently warned that Brexit could wipe 20% off the value of the pound through devaluation (11).

 

Devaluation sounds like a dry and abstract concept. So let me explain what that means:

20% of your life savings wiped out overnight.

 

The numbers in your bank account will be the same, but what you can buy with it will be 20% less, since most things we buy these days come from overseas.

 

Only the other day the Financial Times reported that hedge funds are planning to run their own private exit polls on referendum day to speculate on the currency markets ahead of the official result (12).

 

Just as during the ERM crisis of 1992, the vultures are circling, waiting to feast on our self-inflicted wounds.

 

And here’s another very clear threat: to our jobs. Only last Friday, Jamie Dimon, CEO of JP Morgan, warned his staff in Bournemouth that one, two or even four thousand of them would be made redundant if we leave the EU (13). Imagine how his staff are feeling today. And as a manager, let me tell you: that’s not the kind of thing you tell your employees unless you’re deadly serious.

 

Even leading Leave campaigner Michael Gove admitted just a few days ago that jobs are at risk if we leave the EU (14). Multimillionaire UKIP donor Arron Banks described this economic damage as ‘a price worth paying’ (15).

 

Arron Banks, Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage might be rich enough to gamble their jobs on Brexit - but are you?

 

It is quite possible that some of your friends and family will lose their jobs as a direct result of Britain leaving the EU. Do you want to be responsible for that?

 

We took an evidence-based look at the immigration and EU issue above. But the Leave campaign and Eurosceptic press (Express, Sun and Mail in particular) choose to paint a very different picture. A picture which blows these statistics out of all proportion. 'Strangers in Our Own Country' 'Our borders are out of control!'. You know the stuff I mean. Pictures which invite us to eye our friends and neighbours with suspicion and even hostility. Editorial which pins the blame for every problem from housing to wages to traffic to NHS waiting times on immigrants.

 

And it's not even because they don't know any better. The leaders of the Leave campaign and the political editors of those newspapers are clever, well-educated people. They know the facts I set out above just as well as I do.

 

Yet instead of presenting a balanced view, they choose to deliberately whip up fear and suspicion of immigrants for their own political purposes.

 

Shame on them.

 

Why? Because appealing to people's basest prejudices sells newspapers and gathers votes. Just ask Donald Trump.

 

And what greater contrast could there be between the divisive rhetoric of the leave campaign and the noble vision of the EU's founding fathers.

 

Men who, amid the ashes of World War Two, set their national differences aside and dared - not just to dream but to build - a better Europe for us all.

 

A Europe in which war was “not only unthinkable … but materially impossible” (16).

 

Here’s Winston Churchill addressing the Congress of Europe in 1948:

 

“A high and a solemn responsibility rests upon us here ... If we allow ourselves to be rent and disordered by pettiness and small disputes, if we fail in clarity of view or courage in action, a priceless occasion may be cast away for ever. But if we all pull together and pool the luck and the comradeship - and we shall need all the comradeship and not a little luck … then all the little children who are now growing up in this tormented world may find themselves not the victors nor the vanquished in the fleeting triumphs of one country over another in the bloody turmoil of … war, but the heirs of all the treasures of the past and the masters of all the science, the abundance and the glories of the future.”

 

And - against all the odds - we did it.

 

We pooled the luck and the comradeship and achieved Churchill’s vision.

 

Those “little children” are now retired – the first generation in a thousand years to grow up without the horror of war in Europe.

 

Instead of building weapons, our scientists work together to solve the greatest problems of our age.

 

We enjoy a standard of living unimaginable to people in 1948.

 

All the cities, art, history, people, food and culture of this wonderful continent are open to us whenever we want to visit, to live or to work.

 

Hundreds of millions of European people who until only a few decades ago were ruled by dictators or communists now enjoy democracy, human rights, the rule of law and the abundance of the free market.

 

I think that’s worth 36 pence a day.

 

And yet here we stand, about to turn our backs on this great project, thanks to cynical newspaper owners and barefaced lies from the Leave campaign.

 

Forget what the Sun says.

 

Forget what’s good for Boris’ and Farage’s careers.

 

Listen to every current and former British Prime Minister (17). Every other major UK political party leader (18). To Barack Obama, to Hillary Clinton, to Angela Merkel and a host of other world leaders (19). To Stephen Hawking and 83% of scientists (20). To 40 religious leaders (21). To 300 leading historians (22). To the Trades Union Congress and our six largest trades unions (23). To 88% of economists (24). To the National Farmers Union (25). To the Chief Executive of NHS England (26), to the Royal College of Midwives (27) To British businesses of all sizes (28).

 

For there is an overwhelming consensus among experts of all kinds that Britain is stronger in Europe.

 

And what does the Leave campaign say to this?

 

“I think people in this country have had enough of experts” (Michael Gove, Friday 3rd June)

 

What an extraordinary response.

 

If you were sick, you’d want to see a doctor. If you had a plane to fly, you’d want a pilot. So when we have the most important political, economic and foreign policy decision of our lifetime to make I think we should listen to the people who are in the best position to evaluate what to do. And they’re all telling us the same thing – we’re much better off in Europe.

 

It might not be what Michael Gove wants to hear. But it sounds like the right answer to me.

So when you’re in the polling station on Thursday 23rd - with that stubby little pencil in your hand –Vote Remain.

 

Not in fear, but with pride – about what we, the people of Europe, have achieved together.

 

Not in ignorance, but with science firmly on our side.

 

And not alone, but with the greatest statesmen of the past three generations urging us on.

And then in years to come, when your children ask you how you voted in the referendum of 2016, you can look them in the eye and tell them you were on the right side of history.

 

Thank you for reading

 

(1) https://fullfact.org/immigration/eu-migration-and-uk/

(2) https://www.ons.gov.uk/…/populationandm…/populationestimates

(3) http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/statistics-net-migration-…/…

(4) http://www.economist.com/…/21631076-rather-lot-according-ne…

(5) http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/ea019.pdf

(6) https://fullfact.org/euro…/our-eu-membership-fee-55-million/

(7) http://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngla…/thenhs/about/Pages/overview.aspx

(8) http://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/publications/comms/r116.pdf

(9) http://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/publications/comms/r116.pdf

(10) https://next.ft.com/co…/7fa04d70-d911-11e5-a72f-1e7744c66818

(11) https://www.theguardian.com/…/brexit-could-wipe-20-percent-…

(12) https://next.ft.com/co…/7e26d896-241c-11e6-9d4d-c11776a5124d

(13) BBC Radio 4, 3rd June 2016; see also http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36450460

(14) http://www.thetimes.co.uk/…/i-can-t-guarantee-everyone-will…

(15) https://www.politicshome.com/…/arron-banks-£4300-loss-…

(16) http://www.robert-schuman.eu/en/declaration-of-9-may-1950

(17) David Cameron http://www.theguardian.com/…/david-cameron-launches-tory-ca… ; Gordon Brown http://www.theguardian.com/…/inspiring-view-britishness-def…; Tony Blair http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36408239; John Major http://www.telegraph.co.uk/…/John-Major-Voting-to-leave-wil…

(18) Jeremy Corbyn (Labour) http://labourlist.org/…/europe-needs-to-change-but-i-am-vo…/ Tim Farron (Lib Dem) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/…/Britain-impoverished-backwater… Caroline Lucas (Green) http://europe.newsweek.com/caroline-lucas-brexit-european-r… Nicola Sturgeon (SNP) http://www.thesun.co.uk/…/Nicola-Sturgeon-vows-to-back-argu…

(19) Barack Obama http://www.telegraph.co.uk/…/as-your-friend-let-me-tell-you… ; Hillary Clinton http://www.theguardian.com/…/hillary-clinton-britain-should… Angela Merkel http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36436726; Shinzo Abe http://www.telegraph.co.uk/…/japanese-prime-minister-shinz…/

(20) https://www.theguardian.com/…/stephen-hawking-donald-trump-… ; http://www.nature.com/…/scientists-say-no-to-uk-exit-from-e…

(21) http://www.theguardian.com/…/religious-leaders-oppose-brexit

(22) http://www.theguardian.com/…/vote-to-leave-eu-will-condemn-…

(23) http://uk.reuters.com/ar…/uk-britain-eu-unions-idUKKCN0V517D

(24) http://www.itv.com/…/almost-nine-in-10-economists-believe-…/

(25) http://www.theguardian.com/…/british-farmers-uk-eu-nfu-brex…

(26) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36353145

(27) https://www.rcm.org.uk/…/royal-college-of-midwives-supports…

(28) http://www.independent.co.uk/…/brexit-eu-referendum-what-wi…

 

As far as it goes that's one leg of an argument but it omits the basic fact, that we cannot control immigration from the EU as long as we remain.

 

That's all that is required. Cameron has not controlled immigration from outside the EU, but he can be forced to do so.

 

People come to the UK because it's the UK. If we allow uncontrolled immigration we will face increasing strains on all our public services. It isn't just the numbers, it's the language and cultural barriers. If everyone who came to Britain was fully fluent in British language and culture, then there would be far fewer issues, but they aren't, they speak multiple languages and have great difficulty integrating. It's also true that immigrants often have larger families, so we get a gradual crowding of British people.

 

The problem with mass uncontrolled immigration is that it can turn Britiain into Bangladesh or Romania. The purpose of people coming here is that we aren't Bangladesh or Romania. The U.K. Government is desperate to import tax payers-as they see it and voters. They have run out of funds and are trying to hide their economic mismanagement from the public. Immigrants, at best, taking out hospitals/schools and roads are a net cost to the economy, but they boost apparent GDP and that's the fudge the treasury is applying. The truth is that productivity is falling as GDP is rising and the Government apparently has no answer to that conundrum, but they are lying, they know very well what's going on.

 

Every year the immigrant population is worth one city the size of Bristol. We would need to build a home every 4 minutes. Britain is one of the most crowded countries in Europe already. We have neither sufficient schools, hospitals, houses, roads, interpreters, social workers, or jobs to cope with this kind of flood.

 

Whilst we don't take action to curtail EU immigration, neither will we do so to curtail ex EU immigration. Get one and nail 2 birds with one stone.

 

 

[Apech]

So you are now voting to leave.

 

No.

[Taoist Texts]

Because I am involved in mankind,

And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; 

It tolls for thee. 

 

John Donne

 this poem was used for the commie propaganda before 

 

 

For Whom the Bell Tolls

Novel by Ernest Hemingway

 

 

For Whom the Bell Tolls is a novel by Ernest Hemingway published in 1940. It tells the story of Robert Jordan, a young American in the International Brigades attached to a republican guerrilla unit during the Spanish Civil War. Wikipedia

 

as a title for a book glorifying an attempt to enslave Spain by the global Bolshevism,  The brave Spaniards fought off the red plague that time, while the despicable author, who was an alco and a war criminal, blew out his own brains 21 years later.

 

Sometimes good wins in this world.

[Apech]

 this poem was used for the commie propaganda before 

 

 

For Whom the Bell Tolls

Novel by Ernest Hemingway

 

 

For Whom the Bell Tolls is a novel by Ernest Hemingway published in 1940. It tells the story of Robert Jordan, a young American in the International Brigades attached to a republican guerrilla unit during the Spanish Civil War. Wikipedia

 

as a title for a book glorifying an attempt to enslave Spain by the global Bolshevism,  The brave Spaniards fought off the red plague that time, while the despicable author, who was an alco and a war criminal, blew out his own brains 21 years later.

 

Sometimes good wins in this world.

 

Obviously you have not studied the Spanish Civil war in any depth.

 

I can recommend this short book if you wish to understand it's complexities https://www.amazon.com/Battle-Spain-Spanish-Civil-1936-1939/dp/014303765X/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1465745199&sr=1-2&keywords=spanish+civil+war

[Karl]

 

http://order-order.com/2016/06/12/leaked-cables-1-8-million-migrants-would-be-a-drop-in-the-ocean-compared-to-turkey/#disqus_thread

 

 

and it gets worse. Simply put, our Government is lying their arses off.

[Taoist Texts]

Obviously you have not studied the Spanish Civil war in any depth.

Obviously anybody who disagrees with the liberal propaganda must be an ignorant hick to you. But that's ok you are welcome to rationalize.

 

 

I can recommend this short book if you wish to understand it's complexities https://www.amazon.com/Battle-Spain-Spanish-Civil-1936-1939/dp/014303765X/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1465745199&sr=1-2&keywords=spanish+civil+war

however this made me curious...

 

560 pages is short for you?

 

Product Details

• Paperback: 560 pages