Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    I don't agree.

    I think Remain's failure has been twofold.

    Firstly, we have never seen Goebbel's "big lie" in British politics before. British politicians have argued in a context of reasonably agreed fact. Tories say they are spending more on the NHS. Labour say it is isn't enough. Remain's scare stories are in the British tradition of "political lies" traditionally told by Labour and Conservatives. Leave is telling the big lie. The £350m a week sent to Brussels is a "big lie" because it ignores the £184m sent by Brussels to the UK each week and there is no rational reason it should be ignored. Remain have found no way to combat this.
    Perhaps that's because it's not a lie at all. As Grayling said on Question Time, calling it a net figure would be a lie and you don't call an employer a liar for offering a £30k salary when the money that will end up in an employee's bank account is much less after tax. I think you're making a meal of something that is part and parcel of how politicians choose to and always have interpreted and reported statistics and Remain have behaved in the same way.

    Secondly, none of the financial arguments are being made in a context ordinary people can understand. £350m is just an enormous number to most people. They are incapable of contextualising it. Is it six aircraft carriers or a small tank? Would it support the NHS for a year or for the afternoon? As soon as Leave over-promised the £350m there should have been posters and full page press ads with Boris standing wearing a dunce's cap standing a sum with £350 at the top, all the spending pledges below and a big figure for tax rises at the bottom.
    You don't need an economics degree to realise that hundreds of millions a week equals a lot of money that could be used on our own public services. That there will be significant amounts freed up to cushion us from any short and medium-term turbulence is integral to Leave's economic argument.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Norwegian model would cause the GDP to decrease by 1.9% but we would still have to conform to freedom of movement of labour and still pay membership dues.

    The Canadian model would cause our GDP to decrease by 5.5% as a member of the WTO only.

    The fact is 47% of our exports go to the EU, there are no economic benefits of leaving the EU and anyone saying so is lying.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fenice)
    Perhaps that's because it's not a lie at all. As Grayling said on Question Time, calling it a net figure would be a lie and you don't call an employer a liar for offering a £30k salary when the money that will end up in an employee's bank account is much less after tax. I think you're making a meal of something that is part and parcel of how politicians choose to and always have interpreted and reported statistics and Remain have behaved in the same way.
    All data has conventions and the convention with salaries is that they are quoted gross.

    The convention with accounting is that figures are quoted net of rebates and discounts. When Tesco did what Leave is doing, valuing stock at cost paid but ignoring discounts and rebates to be paid back, the Serious Fraud Office was called in.

    You don't need an economics degree to realise that hundreds of millions a week equals a lot of money that could be used on our own public services. That there will be significant amounts freed up to cushion us from any short and medium-term turbulence is integral to Leave's economic argument.

    But it can only be used once.

    Someone has calculated Leave making £119bn of annual spending pledges with £8.5Bn of annual contribution
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    All data has conventions and the convention with salaries is that they are quoted gross.

    The convention with accounting is that figures are quoted net of rebates and discounts. When Tesco did what Leave is doing, valuing stock at cost paid but ignoring discounts and rebates to be paid back, the Serious Fraud Office was called in.




    But it can only be used once.

    Someone has calculated Leave making £119bn of annual spending pledges with £8.5Bn of annual contribution
    Yep, the potential £8.5bn benefit has been spent many times over under Leave camp's toutings.

    Moreover.... today from the IMF.... that benefit is unlikely to even exist. See image Name:  15.PNG
Views: 51
Size:  13.6 KB
    Offline

    17
    physicsphysics91 Help Me... ODES_PDES Observatory

    and while we're at it can we please send these people for refresher courses too?

    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    I don't agree.

    I think Remain's failure has been twofold.

    Firstly, we have never seen Goebbel's "big lie" in British politics before. British politicians have argued in a context of reasonably agreed fact. Tories say they are spending more on the NHS. Labour say it is isn't enough. Remain's scare stories are in the British tradition of "political lies" traditionally told by Labour and Conservatives. Leave is telling the big lie. The £350m a week sent to Brussels is a "big lie" because it ignores the £184m sent by Brussels to the UK each week and there is no rational reason it should be ignored. Remain have found no way to combat this. We are going to see much worse in the next general election.
    I think comparing this to Goebbels is absurd and beneath you. Leave is not a political party, it is a coalition of wildly divergent interests. Leaving the EU really would free up money to be spent on something else and all of these interests are selling that fact by saying it could be spent on their interest. On net this is misleading but no one is being dishonest. You cannot say to NHS campaigners that it will not be spent on the NHS because it might be. You cannot say to defence campaigns that it will not be spent on defence because it might be. You can say that it can't be spent on both but Leave has not to my knowledge explicitly said that it will be.

    If you insist that Leave establishes one single policy - publishes a budget - then Leave will quite reasonably respond that it is not a political party, it is a coalition of people with very different ideological views, and agreeing on a budget is not and should not be a requirement of being a member of Leave.

    Secondly, none of the financial arguments are being made in a context ordinary people can understand. £350m is just an enormous number to most people. They are incapable of contextualising it. Is it six aircraft carriers or a small tank? Would it support the NHS for a year or for the afternoon? As soon as Leave over-promised the £350m there should have been posters and full page press ads with Boris standing wearing a dunce's cap standing a sum with £350 at the top, all the spending pledges below and a big figure for tax rises at the bottom.
    The problem is that this admits that you are getting 350m or whatever it is minus rebates. It rebuts a claim that is obviously wrong and that no one really made, but concedes the underlying point.

    It is the Trump tactic where you make a ridiculous-sounding claim that is strictly wrong but more like an exaggeration of a fact his opponents don't want to be widely known than a Goebbels "Big Lie". Everyone rushes to correct him and he quotes their corrections as admissions that he was right all along.
    Offline

    19
    (Original post by Proximo)
    Let's face it, most people despise David Cameron for some reason, including George Osborne and a few other notable Tory figures campaigning to remain. It's definitely not the arguments, in all the debates and interviews I've seen with Cameron, he has answered the questions perfectly, logically and they all make sense.

    The only reason why he never gets a round of applause or praise for his performances and only criticism, is well, because no one really likes him (exaggeration ofc).

    On the other you have Boris Johnson who is silver tongued and everyone loves him because he's funny, looks like a cuddly teddy bear etc...

    It's not the arguments making the remain campaign lose, it's the people running it - which is sad. What we should have done was have a popular figure like Richard Branson or Lord Sugar, people who the population actually like, to run the remain campaign.

    Btw, I don't really mind Osborne and Cameron - nice guys irl
    To be fair, the leave campaign has Farage whose independently is enough of a massive f*ckwit to balance it out
    Offline

    15
    Not everybody that votes brexit is racist, but everybody racist or holding a degree of prejudice to ethnic minorities is voting only one way. Unfortunately this sentiment is heightened by the threat of isis (exacerbated by fear of turkey's EU ascension) and the migration crisis.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    In answer to the OP i don't think that this is really true because polls do indicate that Remain are believed on the economy so Cameron has made his case and the public have indeed bought it. The problem for Remain is that Leave have managed the public that immigration is more important to them than a 0.5% rise in GDP and Remain have had no real answer. They have failed to combat the immigration argument by defending diversity, multiculturualism and it's noticeable effects on the economy and nor have they tackled the immigration argument by capitulating or pointing out that we can cause net immigration even in the EU.

    I'm for Leave but as somebody that supports EU immigration i've found the response from Remain dreadful to non-existant. They are too scared to defend it positively and they are too scared to tell the truth and say that Cameron et all.. have no intention of reducing immigration because of the benefits on taxes, the fertility rate (so taxes down the line) and anything else.

    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    I reckon if remain had the same scrutiny as leave even the bookies would be backing leave right now. Nobody asks remain what the risks of staying are; nobody asks remain what their vision of the EU in 5-10 years will be; they barely get asked about immigration; they don't have what they allegedly said 10 years ago used against them. I would love to see Corbyn try to take on Neil.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    In fairness, your assuming a debate of equals which a referendum is not. The onus of change is on Leave, the status quo can be defended at a general election.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Observatory)
    I think comparing this to Goebbels is absurd and beneath you.
    I am not making a point comparing leave to the Nazis here. I am making a point about a specific propaganda technique

    If you insist that Leave establishes one single policy - publishes a budget -
    That is a corner I am criticising Remain for not backing Leave into


    The problem is that this admits that you are getting 350m or whatever it is minus rebates. It rebuts a claim that is obviously wrong and that no one really made, but concedes the underlying point.

    It is the Trump tactic where you make a ridiculous-sounding claim that is strictly wrong but more like an exaggeration of a fact his opponents don't want to be widely known than a Goebbels "Big Lie". Everyone rushes to correct him and he quotes their corrections as admissions that he was right all along.
    That trap is easily avoided. The Trump tactic works if Remain say "its only £166m a week"

    The sum goes (apart from the EU-UK spending all the other numbers are made up because I can't be bothered to look them up)

    Leave claim........................... ...£350M

    minus

    EU commitments still met.........£184M
    Extra NHS spending.................£200M
    Extra Pensions........................ ....£60M

    etc etc


    equals
    Your taxes will rise by £10Bn


    Even Leave's own figures don't add up!
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nurne)
    Norwegian model would cause the GDP to decrease by 1.9% but we would still have to conform to freedom of movement of labour and still pay membership dues.

    The Canadian model would cause our GDP to decrease by 5.5% as a member of the WTO only.

    The fact is 47% of our exports go to the EU, there are no economic benefits of leaving the EU and anyone saying so is lying.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    According to? Oh yes, the treasury of a government that will go to any lengths to try to scare us into staying

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nurne)
    Norwegian model would cause the GDP to decrease by 1.9% but we would still have to conform to freedom of movement of labour and still pay membership dues.

    The Canadian model would cause our GDP to decrease by 5.5% as a member of the WTO only.

    The fact is 47% of our exports go to the EU, there are no economic benefits of leaving the EU and anyone saying so is lying.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Are these based from the treasury document a few weeks back or do you have a link to another paper making these claims?

    If it's the treasury document then the first figure is great since it's set against forecast growth in 2017 and 2018 of 4.2% (basically its forecasting the economy to still grow by over 1%). I've taken the Canadian claim as what i expect and actually growth of ~-0.8% in both years would make this the softest recession on record with a net increase in unemployment of only about 400,000 jobs. Long tun growth from 2019 to 2030 is all of 0.2% lower highlighting my belief that leaving the EU will make little difference in the long run because our success and failures are still mostly our own.

    No credible Leave supporter is arguing that there won't be negative consequences from 2017 to probably 2020, the assertion from people like me however is that it will be worth it. Not only that but if you ignore the hardcore skeptics and take a reasoned view then its clear that we'll capitulate sufficiently on immigration to secure access to the single market and get the Norway like model.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    I am not making a point comparing leave to the Nazis here. I am making a point about a specific propaganda technique

    That is a corner I am criticising Remain for not backing Leave into

    That trap is easily avoided. The Trump tactic works if Remain say "its only £166m a week"

    The sum goes (apart from the EU-UK spending all the other numbers are made up because I can't be bothered to look them up)

    Leave claim........................... ...£350M

    minus

    EU commitments still met.........£184M
    Extra NHS spending.................£200M
    Extra Pensions........................ ....£60M

    etc etc

    equals
    Your taxes will rise by £10Bn

    Even Leave's own figures don't add up!
    Given that the PM is a remain supporter, is it important that Leave have made erroneous spending commitments given that they have near zero ability to actually enforce them upon the government?

    *I must admit that before current polling movements i found it hard to see how Leave could win without the PM being on their side. If i was Cameron i'd simply say that i'd not spend it there and they have no power to force me to.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Given that the PM is a remain supporter, is it important that Leave have made erroneous spending commitments given that they have near zero ability to actually enforce them upon the government?

    *I must admit that before current polling movements i found it hard to see how Leave could win without the PM being on their side. If i was Cameron i'd simply say that i'd not spend it there and they have no power to force me to.
    You have to meet your opponent's case if that case has traction with the public and this has done so.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Personally I think that the biggest issue is that there isn't any real debate. Remain could easily blow leaves campaign out of the water in terms of sovereignty and immigration if they wanted but they keep drumming on about the economy because that's where they have the biggest lead.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Given that the PM is a remain supporter, is it important that Leave have made erroneous spending commitments given that they have near zero ability to actually enforce them upon the government?

    *I must admit that before current polling movements i found it hard to see how Leave could win without the PM being on their side. If i was Cameron i'd simply say that i'd not spend it there and they have no power to force me to.
    Purdah is all it takes to win, outside purdah the government can make sure all the media listen to is what they have to say, during it leave could take control.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    Personally I think that the biggest issue is that there isn't any real debate. Remain could easily blow leaves campaign out of the water in terms of sovereignty and immigration if they wanted but they keep drumming on about the economy because that's where they have the biggest lead.
    Yet another reason why referenda are awful ideas.

    I'd much rather have party politics and representative democracy decide this issue. If the public want out then elect a Euro-skeptic Tory to leader and then to government at which point remove us.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Yet another reason why referenda are awful ideas.

    I'd much rather have party politics and representative democracy decide this issue. If the public want out then elect a Euro-skeptic Tory to leader and then to government at which point remove us.
    I'm begining to swing to your way of thinking actually.
    I used to be all for lots of refendums (al la Switzerland) but unfortunately most of the public are stupid, easily swayed and vote for stupid, un-sound reasons. I'm probably not entirely against referendums though but I'd perhaps like to see a supermajority to overrule the status quo.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by queen-bee)
    Or Gordon brown
    I don't mind Gordon, he was never supposed to be PM and he did a pretty good job.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Proximo)
    Let's face it, most people despise David Cameron for some reason, including George Osborne and a few other notable Tory figures campaigning to remain. It's definitely not the arguments, in all the debates and interviews I've seen with Cameron, he has answered the questions perfectly, logically and they all make sense.

    The only reason why he never gets a round of applause or praise for his performances and only criticism, is well, because no one really likes him (exaggeration ofc).

    On the other you have Boris Johnson who is silver tongued and everyone loves him because he's funny, looks like a cuddly teddy bear etc...

    It's not the arguments making the remain campaign lose, it's the people running it - which is sad. What we should have done was have a popular figure like Richard Branson or Lord Sugar, people who the population actually like, to run the remain campaign.

    Btw, I don't really mind Osborne and Cameron - nice guys irl
    Cameron and Osborne nice guys irl? You on meth?

    Dodgy Dave and Panama Osborne change policies to help the rich at the expense of the poor and needy.
    Typical conservative ideology tbf.

    Cut disability benefit so they can make up the difference in tax cuts for the rich which has gone down from 50% to 40%.

    People are voting leave because they're frustrated and are venting in the wrong way...same reason they voted for conservative instead of Labour. If we leave we'll be f**ked.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Are unpaid trial work shifts fair?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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

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