Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Where are the Brexiters' figures? watch

    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JordanL_)
    What does a leaflet campaign have to do with the utter lack of evidence for their statements? They could've been given £1billion to spend on a leaflet campaign but they'd still have no facts to put in their leaflets.
    "Remain" econometrics comes from the government itself, which has a rather larger budget than even 1bn GBP.

    However this sort of econometrics is ********.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    It's not about the numbers but principle, something the remainains sorely lack.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Maker)
    We haven't seen as much as a sheet of A4 from the leavers about what would happen to the UK economy if the UK leaves the EU, not one.

    They say we could be like Norway, Canada or Switzerland but they are all different. Leavers have been wanting to leave for years so they had plenty of time to do the number crunching to tell us what the likely outcome will be.

    The fact they have not produced any information that stands up to scrutiny can only mean one of two things.

    1. They haven't done a thing to prove their economic case and rely on emotional and meaningless phrases like sovereignty and migrants.

    2. They have done the number crunching and it is so dire they have buried it because the economy will nosedive when the UK leave the EU.

    I would like to know which one is the real reason.
    Ummm, the thing is that we are at least capable of saying we do not know what will happen, the in campaign on the other hand seem to have a crystal ball telling them exactly what will happen, claiming no positives to leaving and no negatives to staying, really says something, doesn't it?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    That's because the majority of the argument comes down to sovereignty and how EU law supersedes our own.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Ummm, the thing is that we are at least capable of saying we do not know what will happen, the in campaign on the other hand seem to have a crystal ball telling them exactly what will happen, claiming no positives to leaving and no negatives to staying, really says something, doesn't it?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    It should scream the government are lying to you if you aren't an idiot.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Ummm, the thing is that we are at least capable of saying we do not know what will happen, the in campaign on the other hand seem to have a crystal ball telling them exactly what will happen, claiming no positives to leaving and no negatives to staying, really says something, doesn't it?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Well, at least with the Remain Campaign, you can look at the reasoning and figures and argue with it.

    All " I don't know " means is that you cannot rebutt any of the Remain Campaign's points.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paul514)
    It should scream the government are lying to you if you aren't an idiot.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Or that you are the liar.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    Or that you are the liar.
    Well you could say that but I haven't made any claims it is the in campaign making the outrageous unfounded claims.

    People can see it too


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    Well, at least with the Remain Campaign, you can look at the reasoning and figures and argue with it.

    All " I don't know " means is that you cannot rebutt any of the Remain Campaign's points.
    Except we can, we don't know is honesty, a lot of what the government has put forwards can be combatted, for instance with the treasury report it's a cost benefit analysis that gave no costs to remain and no benefits to leaving using a questionable model given the situation at hand. When Osborne was challenged on the lack of negatives given for staying he basically said " there are some, but meh "

    As I said, at least on the out side we will openly say we aren't sure what will happen, something the remain campaign refuse to say even though they know it to be true. They couldn't even tell you the legislative agenda of the EU for the next year, let alone the next generation.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by balanced)
    That is based upon 3 million extra migrants, care to explain how that will happen when we leave?
    Easy enough: 200k of net migration already comes from outside the EU, the government foresees that the UK economy actually requires migration at that level. So, net migration probably will not change very much from that taking place now (ie net migration from outside the EU won't reduce and even though we won't be members we'll have similar levels of EU citizen migration - or we'll have additional migration from outside the EU).

    As I've pointed out previously this is one of the many false premises that the LEAVE campaign is predicated upon.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Except we can, we don't know is honesty, a lot of what the government has put forwards can be combatted, for instance with the treasury report it's a cost benefit analysis that gave no costs to remain and no benefits to leaving using a questionable model given the situation at hand. When Osborne was challenged on the lack of negatives given for staying he basically said " there are some, but meh "
    This is exactly what people are talking about.

    You say that there is a questionable model and you haven't even pointed out which part of the model is questionable.

    Show one model from any institution that shows Britain will benefit from Brexit or shows that the costs of remaining outweigh possible loss in trade.

    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    As I said, at least on the out side we will openly say we aren't sure what will happen, something the remain campaign refuse to say even though they know it to be true. They couldn't even tell you the legislative agenda of the EU for the next year, let alone the next generation.
    The legislative agenda has nothing to do with the 3 scenarios that were made. You haven't even proposed an alternative to any of the scenarios and said why they could be wrong.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paul514)
    Well you could say that but I haven't made any claims it is the in campaign making the outrageous unfounded claims.

    People can see it too


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I can see you are calling the people that made a 200 page report liars without any reasoning.
    Offline

    7
    (Original post by Maker)
    So you want people to vote on no evidence that leaving is better for them even if it means they might lose their jobs and have less money?
    There are too many conflicting and disparate interests across the EU to achieve any meaningful reform. (Witness the numerous bruising months Cameron took to achieve his trivial gains (assuming they would be approved by the European Parliament).)

    Effectively this referendum is a choice between: accepting what we have and the associated risks that entails; or turning our back on the EU in preference for greater autonomy and the associated risks that too entails.

    Neither choice is risk free.
    Offline

    7
    (Original post by Anna0987)
    1) we control our borders and have not signed up to the Schengen passport free zone
    2) there's a reason we have a strong economy, 44% of our exports go to the EU whereas only 16% of the EU's exports come to us
    3) leaving the EU means re-negotiating a trade agreement like Switzerland and Norway, and guess what price they pay for being part of the European Economic Area, they have to implement EU directives, Implement ECJ rulings and accept the free movement of people, without getting a say in any of the decision making process. Does that sound like a better option?
    4) it isn't such a bad thing that a lot of UK Law has derived from EU directives, would you be happy with the abolition of the Equality Act?
    Why would leaving the EU entail the abolition of the Equality Act ?

    This is a fundamentally flawed argument. It casually suggests that we are incapable of agreeing such measures for ourselves. As a sovereign nation, we have enacted various & sundry pieces of legislation in the preceding century prior to EU membership - that promoted equality, rights and so on.

    (Critically, the need to compromise in order to reach agreement at an EU level means not only that legislation takes longer to enact, but also that it is inevitably lowest common denominator - with, for example, much agricultural animal protection legislation being of a lower standard than we would enact for ourselves.)
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    I can see you are calling the people that made a 200 page report liars without any reasoning.
    I'm happy to go through it, I have already on two threads but remain supporters won't answer


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paul514)
    I'm happy to go through it, I have already on two threads but remain supporters won't answer


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    AKA I haven't read the report
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    AKA I haven't read the report
    To be fair, I'm sceptical! Any remainers have given its 200 pages of rather dense ******** economics

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pythian)
    There are too many conflicting and disparate interests across the EU to achieve any meaningful reform. (Witness the numerous bruising months Cameron took to achieve his trivial gains (assuming they would be approved by the European Parliament).)

    Effectively this referendum is a choice between: accepting what we have and the associated risks that entails; or turning our back on the EU in preference for greater autonomy and the associated risks that too entails.

    Neither choice is risk free.
    Well, I don't think he wanted reform of the EU. He just wanted something to shut the backbenchers up because he stupidly thought that he would get more support.

    The issue is that we won't get reform of the EU by being outside of it without any voting influence. If multiple countries such as Sweden and the Netherlands threatened to break away then it might make sense but that is not the case.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    Well, I don't think he wanted reform of the EU. He just wanted something to shut the backbenchers up because he stupidly thought that he would get more support.

    The issue is that we won't get reform of the EU by being outside of it without any voting influence. If multiple countries such as Sweden and the Netherlands threatened to break away then it might make sense but that is not the case.
    The idea we can Reform the EU is simply mad, we tried it with a serious threat of leaving (admittedly I think they kinda want us to leave) and it got nowhere, the German far right is rising, the Dutch are questioning, as are the Flemish.

    Cameron was mad to thinkbje could get his back benchers in line, and half the cabinet is only in because they expected remain to win. To get the back benches in lime he needed genuine reform, and he knew he couldn't get it.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    AKA I haven't read the report
    Aka I'm happy to discuss it if remain supporters will directly answer questions


    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.