David Lott's good friend responds negatively to the "Leave" Argument.....
The
consequences for Britain, and for Europe, if Britain leaves the EU by Terence Field
The
referendum is bringing swings in the polls, initially for Remain, more recently
towards Brexit.
In the
first weeks, most major economic institutes, together with the IMF, the British
Treasury, the OECD and others all suggested that Brexit would result in a
significant reduction in the economic condition of the country, the details
differing dependent upon which institute reported, as they each have different
concerns. It is fair to say that there have been few, if any, economists and
economic institutes who have suggested other than a degradation of Britain's condition
consequent upon Brexit.
The Brexit
scheme damned all these observations as being ‘scaremongering’, and it is true
that they have been successful in ensuring that Brits in general do not take
these warnings as being of weight.
Recently,
the Brexit team has focused like laser light on the matter of migration into
the UK. They suggest Brexit can ensure greatly reduced ‘net’ migration into the
UK.
In
addition, they have pointed repeatedly to the effect EU migration has had on
‘depressing ‘ the labour rates of the low skilled, low paid.
This seems
to have real traction in Britain at present.
The polls
are closer; some show Brexit ahead, some show Brexit behind. I looked at the
‘poll of polls’ data today, and it showed 46% to remain, 43 % to Brexit, 12%
undecided. Clearly the undecided’s have reduced, and they have by a majority
moved into the Brexit ‘camp’.
The outcome
is uncertain. David Lott has written well on the subject, and, as I said
before, some excellent people are in the Brexit camp, but I consider that they
are mistaken.
These are
the reasons why. But before give my reasons, I would like to record my dismay
at the poor quality of information, argument, honest, and clear motives that
have rise arisen from this process.
I am no
populist; I like representative government, and I deplore direct participatory
processes. As do many. The reasons I take this view are a note all of its own;
maybe I will write on this later.
Anyway,
here are my arguments, some repeated, some not, for Remain in the EU.
For ease, I
put them in simple bullet-point order, in no particular sequence of
significance:
1 I reject the assertion that Britain has lost
its sovereignty (note this is hardly discussed in the referendum, ‘control’ is
the word used, and that is NOT the same thing). Britain shares – pools authority
with all 27 countries. The common event is common deliberation, common decision-making
and common acceptance of compromise.
It
is messy, unsexy, and is often accepted by national ministers who actively
participate and agree collectively, and then each minister returns to denounce
the process as being ‘ganged up on’. This has not happened, but the politicians
cannot admit to that; they risk their re-election otherwise.
The process
gives nobody everything they want. That is as it should be.
I LIKE THIS
FINE COMING TOGETHER TO SERVE COMMON OUTCOMES. IT IS CIVILISATION, NOT
CONFRONTATION BEFORE THE BARBARISM OF CONFLICT.
2 Migration. Recently there have been almost
equal numbers entering Britain from origins within and without the EU. From
within the EU many are free-transiting workers looking for, and finding work –
the ubiquitous Polish Barrista in a city centre.
Another
group – a large group - is the corporate
executive coming to either a European head office or similar, and often in the
City of London, or in such as EADS or Airbus. These people come as part of the
employers visa request. The same happens in the other direction.
Another
large group will be academics, writers and technical authors from all over
Europe acting in response to the progressive integration of design and
manufacturing processes across the EU. Such movements happen between all
member states.
A
distorting element has been the low incomes earned in the post-communist states and the magnet of the western states.
The UK is a big draw, and attracts the clever, the mobile, the multilingual; in
short they are not stupid people. And they out compete the bottom group of the indigenous labour market. A KEY BREXIT ARGUMENT HAS BEEN THE DESIRE TO PROTECT
THE LEAST EDUCATED, LEAST-SKILLED, LEAST POTENTIALLY PRODUCTIVE of the BRITISH
WORKFORCE.
The British Isles in the 1500s when the population may have been 3 million; today - 65 million.
There are
lots of these people, so from an electoral viewpoint this is potentially
successful. It seems to
me a worthless argument. As I have discussed above and do not propose to
repeat.
Of the
rest, huge numbers come from the Indian subcontinent, and come as family
migrants. That will not change by the introduction of a points system, unless
Britain wishes to comprehensively repudiate international law and agreements
the UK is a signatory to. To suggest it can be stopped is untrue.
The ARGUMENT
ABOUT TERRORISM FROM THE EU IS SO FLAWED AS TO BE LAUGHABLE AND IT IS SIMPY AND
PLAINLY UNTRUE. AS I HAVE DISCUSSED ABOVE, AND AGAIN DO NOT PROPOSE TO REPEAT.
MIGRATION
FOLLOWS ECONOMIC ACTIVITY AND EASY LABOUR LAWS. If Britain seriously
anticipates growing then it cannot avoid sucking in skilled Labour. To suggest
it can is a fantasy, as every worthwhile economist perfectly well knows – but
this is being sold as untrue to the unintelligent and uneducated, who exist in
very large numbers.
A ‘Points
system’ is proposed.
There are
vast numbers of highly skilled, highly people in a world bursting with people,
who could meet the needs of any ‘points’ system. The only way to avoid a mass
migration of such people would be to also include a capping system.
That has
NOT been discussed, or suggested. Because it would be opposed by employers and
other interested groups across the country.
Certainly a
stop to migration could be achieved, but the social consequences to existing
families, to employers, to the
The parish church in Long Hanford, not far from the burial plot of Prime Minister Winston Churchill in Oxfordshire. Woodstock and Oxford are close by. - GNH
I SUPPORT
FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT IN EUROPE, WITH SOCIAL PAYMENT CONTROLS. I REJOICE IN A
DISMANTLING OF THE BARS THE STATES ERECTED OVER 200 YEARS OF BLOODY WARS. BRAVO
FOR FREEDOM.
3 Brexit argues that Britain will ‘control
its affairs’ after leaving.
My
observations:
A IT does, voluntarily solve matters
collectively.
B It acts independently on many matters and
subsidiarity is real.
Not enough,
I agree, but that is a nuance argument.
C The real matters are technical and
environmental, and there, group agreement is vital and continuing. Boring for
the population to think about, but a core part of running companies, countries
and relationships.
D As for environmentalists, it is Europe that
has made some effort (utterly inadequate, but some effort) to reduce the horror
of the coming change to the climates of the world.
In every
such sphere, massive forces need to come together, battle out the arguments,
and either come to sane agreements, where we will benefit, or fail to do so,
where we will not.
Either way,
large scale co-ordinated function is the future here.
IN SHORT I
HAVE HEARD NOTHING FROM BREXITERS CONCERNING REAL ISSUES THEY WILL BE FREE TO
CHANGE POLICY ON AS A RESULT OF BREXIT WHAT ARE THAY???????????
4 Brexiters claim there is a democratic
deficit in Europe, opacity, corrupt practices, deliberate political action
against Britain’s interests.
It is ALL
true, and worse.
BUT LEAVING
WILL NOT CHANGE THAT AND WILL ALLOW IT TO GET WORSE AS WE WILL HAVE LEFT THE
BEAR PIT.
Nobody
believes the countries of Europe are reasonable, particularly ‘democratic’, or
well disposed to Britain.
IF YOU WANT
TO SEE THEIR REAL MALICE, THEN LEAVE!!!!!!
STAY IN ANDFIGHT TO CHANGE AND CONTROL THEIR WORST EXCESSES.
5 Brexiters
claim the utilities and services – housing, schools, health system, etc,
cannot cope.
I agree,
there is a crisis in the means to live well in Britain, but it stems from
CATASTROPHICALLY BAD LOCAL AND NATIONAL GOVERNMENT. I am not trying to win
popularity here, just tell it ‘as it is’.
Britain
builds almost no houses, and has not done so for quite some decades. It land
use policies are absurd, its planning mores are ridiculous. Its attitude to how to meet Georgian –era population densities – which it MUST meet, are little short of infantile and absurd.
The United Kingdom still has many thatched cottages, such as this one in Sherington, Buckinghamshire.- GNH
The British
NHS is, simply, a failed model that does NOT work. Nothing to do with the EU – rather
a direct result of absurd, lying, self-serving, mostly Labour politicians.
Interestingly, EU member states on the continent have MUCH superior healthcare
systems. As Mr Lott well knows.
Solution.
Replicate the best the continent offers. And stop running a soviet-style queuing
system. It is a crime.
OF ALL THE
ABSURD LIES COMING FROM THIS REFERENDUM IS THE ABSURD CLAIM THE NHS IS
THREATENED BY THE EU!
A nonsense
beyond ludicrous, designed to appeal to the truly unintelligent and unaware. Disgraceful nonsense at so many levels.
IN SHORT
THE FAILURES RESULT NOT FROM THE EU BUT FROM DREADFUL GOVERNMENTAL
MALADMINISTRATION AND AN EQUALLY BAD CIVIL SERVICE.
6 The
economic risks of brexit.
This is all
me, so feel free to comment. PIMOC, the worlds largest bond trader and adviser, has said the UK bond market rests
on a bed of ‘nitro glycerin’. NOBODY has referred to the issue for the UK of a
debt pile that will soon approach 1.8
trillion sterling. Everything
rests on confidence for the progress, over the next third of a century or more,
since low inflation will require that sort of timescale to reduce the debt to a
manageable level.
Right now the UK capitalises the interest burden!!!! If the
nation exercises Brexit, it will be reconsidered in base relief as an
independent, unsupported nation, alone, with a 5% of GDP trade deficit, massive
personal debt levels, the above identified immense state debt issuance, for the
first time in 200 years no real net overseas income earning assets, and a de-industrialised,
deskilled labour-force, flogging ‘services’ and really very little else. In
short, an exceedingly narrow specialised economic base, vast debt, massive
failure to close its trade imbalance.
I read
people say Britain has a ‘strong economy’ and can ‘go it alone.
Well, let
those people experience the day after Brexit, when the bond markets load a
significant risk and reassessment premium on UK bonds. Combine that with the
trade disruption from a continent who will act to buy ‘locally’ and exclude Britain
(and if you think that will not happen then you must be extremely naïve)
together with a collapsing currency with NO compensating export increase as we
have nothing to sell at a lower, higher or the same currency level (and if you
do not believe that look at the performance over the last thirty years).
I think the
Greek , Portuguese and Italian experiences could be our lives within months of
leaving. With LITTLE OR NO possibility of recovery.
Britain is
NOT strong and dynamic. I wish to God that it were; I bitterly regret the
incompetence that has stripped it of wealth, potential and vital output. But
that is DONE.
Once the wealth of England was based on sheep - food and clothing. Now the largest portion of the GDP comes from financial services; mainly from The City in London. - GNH
I am not
tying to sell palatable lies to get you to leave – or to stay. As many others,
very transparently, are. But leave
will breach the confidence dam that
holds the hell of collapse at bay. That is not stated by the institutes since
doing so would make it a self –fulfilling prophesy.
That is it.
The
dreadful referendum must run its course. David Lott is a ‘cavalier’; sunny and
optimistic. I am a ‘roundhead’; dour and NOT optimistic. I am 67. I
have rarely had cause to revise my views upwards to meet the reality.
The West is
experiencing impoverishment, and inequality, because of globalisation and Mr
Malthus. This spawns fascism and communism in Britain and Europe,
anti-Semitism, Trump and this damned referendum.
Finally, I
remember Britain before accession to the EEC. It was dirt poor, nasty,
polluted, and DESPERATE TO JOIN!!!!
Comments?
No comments:
Post a Comment