4 ms·

They're mad now. But a second referendum would force the situation to be analysed a lot more carefully. And that situation would not be a strong argument for l

They're mad now. But a second referendum would force the situation to be analysed a lot more carefully. And that situation would not be a strong argument for leaving, no matter how much the Scots might like the idea of the EU.

ck425 10y ago
You presume the referendum will be based on sound analysis. If there's one thing the EUref has shown it's that you don't need sound analysis. It also depends heavily on how the UK does in the coming year. The UK needs to be economically and politically powerful enough that it's not worth giving up for self determination. It doesn't need to be a better deal, it has to be better enough to defeat romantic notions of independence.
- sievebrain 10y ago
  There you go: assuming the analysis of leave voters was not sound. Many voters made a very straightforward analysis: "the EU means I compete against an essentially infinite supply of labour, I can't do that, therefore we should get out of the EU so we can restrict immigration again". You may not agree with this reasoning or you may feel the various other benefits of the EU outweigh them in your personal circumstances, but it's not an illogical analysis: they think leaving will make them economically better off and there are millions of such voters. It's actually quite difficult to mount a robust economic argument against this idea: you have to argue that the EU will erect such serious trade barriers that all the jobs disappear. But a lot of these people are working in local service industries anyway, they aren't selling to the EU, so you end up arguing a very indirect path to them personally suffering which basically rests on "the EU will be such bastards that the entire UK economy collapses", which then stirs up patriotic sentiments very strongly (reminds people of the war). And you rapidly end up in economic wonk territory because the details of the damage depend so much on details of the final deal, etc. The public, quite rightly, does not trust economists due to their track record of getting the big things wrong. The economic rationale for Scotland leaving the UK and joining the EU is much less clear. The big one is public spending. The Scots may not like it but their country is subsidised by the UK to a huge degree. The spending deficit alone is the same size as ALL Scottish NHS spending. The economic argument from "lose the subsidies from the English, public services are cut because oil is cheap" is very direct and much more easily understood. Scotland does not have a problem with massive immigration. People like the idea of the EU but what specific economic problem would it solve for them?
  - _Understated_ 10y ago
    > The Scots may not like it but their country is subsidised by the UK to a huge degree. ^This! I am a Scot, living in Scotland and I voted out (and against independence) but a great many of my peers over the years wanted independence "because Westminster/England". It was the most childish of reasons. The economic argument wasn't there the last time and it absolutely isn't there this time but last time it wasn't pressed much... this time it will be but once the Indy Propaganda machine gets going then all bets are off.
  - ck425 10y ago
    I was referencing the anti-expert rhetoric that was popular among the leave campaign. I'm sure many leave voters had their reasons but there was also a significant anti-expert segment. Do you have current statistics on the Scottish spending deficit? Last time I looked there was one but it was far from huge, especially when you account for defence and administration savings from being a small country. The arguments for the EU aren't purely economic.

ck425 10y ago

You presume the referendum will be based on sound analysis. If there's one thing the EUref has shown it's that you don't need sound analysis. It also depends heavily on how the UK does in the coming year. The UK needs to be economically and politically powerful enough that it's not worth giving up for self determination. It doesn't need to be a better deal, it has to be better enough to defeat romantic notions of independence.

sievebrain 10y ago
There you go: assuming the analysis of leave voters was not sound. Many voters made a very straightforward analysis: "the EU means I compete against an essentially infinite supply of labour, I can't do that, therefore we should get out of the EU so we can restrict immigration again". You may not agree with this reasoning or you may feel the various other benefits of the EU outweigh them in your personal circumstances, but it's not an illogical analysis: they think leaving will make them economically better off and there are millions of such voters. It's actually quite difficult to mount a robust economic argument against this idea: you have to argue that the EU will erect such serious trade barriers that all the jobs disappear. But a lot of these people are working in local service industries anyway, they aren't selling to the EU, so you end up arguing a very indirect path to them personally suffering which basically rests on "the EU will be such bastards that the entire UK economy collapses", which then stirs up patriotic sentiments very strongly (reminds people of the war). And you rapidly end up in economic wonk territory because the details of the damage depend so much on details of the final deal, etc. The public, quite rightly, does not trust economists due to their track record of getting the big things wrong. The economic rationale for Scotland leaving the UK and joining the EU is much less clear. The big one is public spending. The Scots may not like it but their country is subsidised by the UK to a huge degree. The spending deficit alone is the same size as ALL Scottish NHS spending. The economic argument from "lose the subsidies from the English, public services are cut because oil is cheap" is very direct and much more easily understood. Scotland does not have a problem with massive immigration. People like the idea of the EU but what specific economic problem would it solve for them?
- _Understated_ 10y ago
  > The Scots may not like it but their country is subsidised by the UK to a huge degree. ^This! I am a Scot, living in Scotland and I voted out (and against independence) but a great many of my peers over the years wanted independence "because Westminster/England". It was the most childish of reasons. The economic argument wasn't there the last time and it absolutely isn't there this time but last time it wasn't pressed much... this time it will be but once the Indy Propaganda machine gets going then all bets are off.
- ck425 10y ago
  I was referencing the anti-expert rhetoric that was popular among the leave campaign. I'm sure many leave voters had their reasons but there was also a significant anti-expert segment. Do you have current statistics on the Scottish spending deficit? Last time I looked there was one but it was far from huge, especially when you account for defence and administration savings from being a small country. The arguments for the EU aren't purely economic.