The result of the EU referendum:

[jeremyp]

All of Daveys "credible sources" support the view we'll be richer than we are now if we leave.

"We'll be richer" is shorthand for "on average, we'll be richer". It doesn't mean that some people won't lose their jobs.

Throughout the whole BHS debacle, our economy has been growing (aka we are getting richer) but that doesn't alter the fact that many people in BHS are suddenly much poorer.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

All of Daveys "credible sources" support the view we'll be richer than we are now if we leave.

See past the spin, propaganda and scare stories.

And what is past the Bremain calculations? The Brexit sums full of contradictions. The Brexit government.......What will that be like.

Spell out what we will have. A state to patch up those heroes who lost homes and jobs for the sake of Britain.........or a globalist, wage reducing hyperthatcherism where control of migrants turns out to mean merely selecting where they come from and how cheaply they are paying them.

[jakswan]

"We'll be richer" is shorthand for "on average, we'll be richer". It doesn't mean that some people won't lose their jobs.

Throughout the whole BHS debacle, our economy has been growing (aka we are getting richer) but that doesn't alter the fact that many people in BHS are suddenly much poorer.

True if we remain or leave.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The Bremainers are obsessed with money, more important things in life than money.

But Jak.....it is the Brexitters who have that figure written on the side of their bus....

Given that Brexiteers think money important, can you tell us how the money will be spent in the event of Brexit?

[jeremyp]

Apologies if this has been posted before but it's a thought provoking article.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/may/28/eu-referendum-brexiters-vote-leave

[jeremyp]

True if we remain or leave.

Fewer people will be reduced to poverty if we remain. That's a good thing.

[jeremyp]

But Jak.....it is the Brexitters who have that figure written on the side of their bus....

Given that Brexiteers think money important, can you tell us how the money will be spent in the event of Brexit?

a figure that is a proven lie to boot.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Gove slams government for immigration record.

This would be the same government he has been a senior minister in for six years.

[jeremyp]

Gove slams government for immigration record.

This would be the same government he has been a senior minister in for six years.

And it's the British government, not the EU.

[jakswan]

Fewer people will be reduced to poverty if we remain. That's a good thing.

Not necessarily big business are desperate for us to remain, they could get richer whilst individuals get poorer. 

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Not necessarily big business are desperate for us to remain, they could get richer whilst individuals get poorer.

OK let's have the figures on how the brexit government of Gove and Johnson intend to reduce spending cuts and put the onus back on balancing spending cuts and tax increases.

[jakswan]

OK let's have the figures on how the brexit government of Gove and Johnson intend to reduce spending cuts and put the onus back on balancing spending cuts and tax increases.

Dunno ask them, you do know this isn't a general election right?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Dunno ask them, you do know this isn't a general election right?

Johnson on TV saying the money will go to farmers.
Hasn't it been tentatively promised to science research and the health service.

[L.A.]

Johnson on TV saying the money will go to farmers.
Hasn't it been tentatively promised to science research and the health service.

He's a politician.

[ProfessorDavey]

Johnson on TV saying the money will go to farmers.
Hasn't it been tentatively promised to science research and the health service.

But doesn't it already go to the farmers and also to scientific research - so isn't he simply saying that money that used to go to those people, will still go to those people. In which case where does all this 'take back control' stuff come from if you are simply going to do exactly what you used to do.

Actually the scientific research is a really bad example for the Brexiters, as the quality of the UK science base means we get back considerably more than we put in as the science grants are awarded on the basis of quality. So if we left we'd either need to put more funding into science in order to fund the same amount of research or we'd have to cut funding. But even if the UK chose to fund at the same levels scientist wouldn't be happy as science is collaborative and scientist are really keen on the ability within the EU to apply for grants with the top scientist across the continent. Sure we'd like something more global still (but there is very little) but currently the EU funding approach is a flagship for supporting multinational collaboration.

[jeremyp]

Not necessarily big business are desperate for us to remain, they could get richer whilst individuals get poorer.

Don't talk bollocks.

[Rhiannon]

Not necessarily big business are desperate for us to remain, they could get richer whilst individuals get poorer.

No, big business need solvent, well off and wealthy individuals to buy their goods and services. The more people with income to spend the happier they are.

[jakswan]

But doesn't it already go to the farmers and also to scientific research - so isn't he simply saying that money that used to go to those people, will still go to those people. In which case where does all this 'take back control' stuff come from if you are simply going to do exactly what you used to do.

Actually the scientific research is a really bad example for the Brexiters, as the quality of the UK science base means we get back considerably more than we put in as the science grants are awarded on the basis of quality. So if we left we'd either need to put more funding into science in order to fund the same amount of research or we'd have to cut funding. But even if the UK chose to fund at the same levels scientist wouldn't be happy as science is collaborative and scientist are really keen on the ability within the EU to apply for grants with the top scientist across the continent. Sure we'd like something more global still (but there is very little) but currently the EU funding approach is a flagship for supporting multinational collaboration.

We would have an extra £175 million a week, extra, more, greater, larger.

[jakswan]

No, big business need solvent, well off and wealthy individuals to buy their goods and services. The more people with income to spend the happier they are.

Thanks Rhi at least a coherent point rather than Jeremys Vladish type drivel. The ultimate driver of any business is its shareholders and any big business is a slave to profit,  it will pay as little as it can.

If you think more GDP equates to everyone getting richer suggest you visit the USA.

[Rhiannon]

Thanks Rhi at least a coherent point rather than Jeremys Vladish type drivel. The ultimate driver of any business is its shareholders and any big business is a slave to profit,  it will pay as little as it can.

But its shareholders only get a dividend if there is a profit and without that the value plummets. All big businesses rely on enough people using their services or purchasing their goods and that requires solvency at the very least.

[ProfessorDavey]

But its shareholders only get a dividend if there is a profit and without that the value plummets. All big businesses rely on enough people using their services or purchasing their goods and that requires solvency at the very least.

And companies pay tax on their profits, and shareholder pay tax on the dividends they receive from that profit.

[jakswan]

But its shareholders only get a dividend if there is a profit and without that the value plummets. All big businesses rely on enough people using their services or purchasing their goods and that requires solvency at the very least.

Again USA you can find one of largest GDPs in the world yet see some of the worst poverty.

[jakswan]

And companies pay tax on their profits, and shareholder pay tax on the dividends they receive from that profit.

Well unless the EU orders the government to pay it back.

Inland Revenue faces paying out tens of billions in tax refunds
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4c3fcd5a-4287-11e5-9abe-5b335da3a90e.html#axzz4AF0MhB6W

[ProfessorDavey]

Well unless the EU orders the government to pay it back.

Inland Revenue faces paying out tens of billions in tax refunds
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4c3fcd5a-4287-11e5-9abe-5b335da3a90e.html#axzz4AF0MhB6W

Oh dear once again placing blame at the door of the EU when it should lie much closer to home.

This (I think - its behind the paywall) is about how interest is paid when there has been either overpaid or underpaid tax. Various companies have taken HMRC to court on this on the basis that they believe it should be based on compound interest not simple interest. This is working its way through the UK courts.

It has been heard in the UK High Court - the government lost (nothing to do with the EU).
So the government took it to the UK Court of Appeal - the government lost (again nothing to do with the EU)
The government are seeking to take this to the UK Supreme Court - they might win, but if they don't while we remain in the EU there is a final stage, the European Court of Justice which could bail us out (and would likely do so - see below). If we had left the EU and the Supreme Court ruled against then that would be that, no-where else to go.

But back to the European Court of Justice - actually back in 2012 they ruled that there is no EU law right to compound interest and they kicked it to the UK to sort out.

So in fact it is the UK courts which are ruling in favour of Littlewoods and others getting compound interest and costing the HMRC billions, while the EU have already ruled that they have no right to compound interest.

But then when did a Brexiter ever actually bother with the facts rather than their prejudice that every problem is due to the EU.

[jeremyp]

Thanks Rhi at least a coherent point rather than Jeremys Vladish type drivel.

No, your point was the Vladish type drivel (except Vlad has been relatively sane on this thread by comparison to the nonsense you have been coming up with). The country will be richer if we stay in the EU. You can't refute it so you make up a hypothetical "evil big business" instead. Sorry, but you are really stretching on this one.

The ultimate driver of any business is its shareholders and any big business is a slave to profit,  it will pay as little as it can.

Has it ever occurred to you to ask who the shareholders are? A vast quantity of shares in large companies are owned by other companies who invest money on behalf of ordinary people. If you have a pension, an ISA, a unit trust, a savings account or any one of a number of other financial products, I guarantee you are indirectly one of the shareholders to which big business is a slave.

If you think more GDP equates to everyone getting richer suggest you visit the USA.

Nobody has claimed that

If you think the only acceptable outcome is everybody getting richer, you might as well piss in a volcano. The best we can hope for is to maximise the number of people getting richer or the average wealth of each person. We can't prevent some people from getting poorer but, the richer the rest of us are, the more money there is available to support the unfortunate ones.