8 ms·

I think everyone in any position of power understands that they must remain in the single market - now the only question is how to position / sell this to the e

I think everyone in any position of power understands that they must remain in the single market - now the only question is how to position / sell this to the electorate.

TheOtherHobbes 10y ago
I don't think May and the Cabinet do. All the noises seem to suggest the real priority is xenophobia - i.e. immigration. ...Which is a purely political strategy to capture the continued support of leave voters - exactly the people whose lives will be destroyed when trade dries up. The problem is that the typical leave voter understands immigration because they have direct personal experience of immigrants. But leave voters don't understand the intricacies of trade deals, or the incredible damage poor trading conditions can do to an economy. May does, which is why she has been warning of "tough times ahead." If she was interested in continuing trade on realistic terms she wouldn't be saying that. My suspicion at this point is that the Tory party is willing to sacrifice the economic future of the UK in order to remain in power.
- dogma1138 10y ago
  The typical leave voter lives in the areas with least immigration. The areas with any substantial immigration either from the EU or elsewhere voted remain.
  - barrkel 10y ago
    The places with the least immigration are usually the poorest places most fearful of immigrants taking their jobs (specifically, lowering their wages - and they're probably right) and least optimistic about the future. They are usually remnants of the industrial revolution getting marginalized by globalization (mostly China).
  - biofox 10y ago
    The sight of a few immigrants in an otherwise white British community is probably more shocking for the locals than it would be in a metropolitan area with a large immigrant population.
    - timthorn 10y ago
      The majority of immigrants from the EU are also white.
  - TheOtherHobbes 10y ago
    Aside from London, which is a special case, that's not particularly true. Remain won in the very big cities with urban cosmopolitan populations and in a few university towns, but lost almost everywhere else. There are two main groups of leavers, with some overlap - the working classes with limited education and low prospects, and the petit bourgeois, who are relatively poorly educated and uncurious but can be reasonably well off. The first group has direct experience of poor working conditions, and often lives in an area with immigration. They'll have seen wages being kept down first hand. This vote was enough to swing it for Leave in many working class areas. The second group may not have direct experience, but is easily persuaded by xenophobia and jingoism. They're often older and are nostalgic for an England that never really existed. They tend conservative - and Conservative. They like simple explanations to complicated problems, and they're easy marks for the British press - the real source of many of the UK's problems - which has been stoking their prejudices for decades with a constant stream of anti-EU scare stories. This pattern isn't unique to the UK, but so far the UK is the only country to stress test it.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - ZenoArrow 10y ago
      > "There are two main groups of leavers, with some overlap - the working classes with limited education and low prospects, and the petit bourgeois, who are relatively poorly educated and uncurious but can be reasonably well off." I fit into neither group, and nor do the other people I know who voted to leave. > "the British press - the real source of many of the UK's problems - which has been stoking their prejudices for decades" I couldn't agree with you more on this point. However, I suspect this had a role in your earlier summation of the two groups of Leave voters. You really should take what you read/view/hear in British mainstream news outlets with a huge pinch of salt, even when it lines up with your own opinions. To give you one example of a group you overlooked, I'd suggest taking a look at the Left Leave website: http://www.leftleave.org/ http://www.leftleave.org/
- clappski 10y ago
  As far as I was aware it was the areas that the least amount of immigrants that wanted to vote for leave, but at this point it's moot. And I wouldn't say that fears over immigration are xenophobic, I think that the referendum came at a terrible time when Europe as a whole is facing a big refugee (economic or not) problem that they still can't decide how to solve.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - mpweiher 10y ago
    >areas that [have] the least amount of immigrants that wanted to vote for leave Ironic, isn't it? But absolutely typical. In Germany as well, the areas with highest anti-immigrant sentiments (and voting etc.) are the ones with the least amount of actual immigrants. Which kind of makes sense when you think about it...
    - sbmassey 10y ago
      I don't see why it is ironic, really: areas of low immigration can see what happens to areas of high immigration, so will vote against it, whereas for areas with high immigration it is too late
      - genofon 10y ago
        except that immigrants were not allow to vote for Brexit.
    - Scarblac 10y ago
      The people complaining are the people in areas with high unemployment. Migrants don't go there, they come to where the jobs are.
- vixen99 10y ago
  Not all serious economists (who we can assume voted Leave) agree that Brexit is going to be economically harmful to the UK. Not all serious economic analyses suggest that Brexit will leave the UK permanently and materially poorer. The argument can be taken up with the following who we can assume voted (if they are or would be UK citizens) to leave the EU, and some of whom might well have some understanding of the intricacies of trade deals. Roger Bootle, Managing Director of Capital Economics, and Gerard Lyons, Economic advisor to the Mayor of London and former Chief Economist of Standard Chartered Bank. Ruth Lea, Warwick Lightfoot, Neil MacKinnon, Ryan Bourne, Head of Public Policy, Institute of Economic Affairs, Keith Boyfield, Executive Director, Keith Boyfield Associates, Professor Tim Congdon, Founder, International Monetary Research Ltd, Sean Corrigan, Hinde Capital, Mike Denham, Research Fellow, The TaxPayers’ Alliance, Bryan Gould, Former Labour Shadow Cabinet member & former vice-Chancellor, University of Waikato, Dr David Green, Chief Executive, CIVITAS, Dr Graham Gudgin, University of Cambridge, Dr. Oliver Hartwich, Executive Director, The New Zealand Initiative,Damon de Laszlo, Chairman, Economic Research Council, Graeme Leach, Former Chief Economist, Institute of Directors, Andrew Lilico, Chairman, Economists for Britain, Neil MacKinnon, Global Macro Strategist, VTB Capital,Dr Eileen Marshall, IEA Advisory Council, Professor Kent Matthews, Associate Dean for Engagement & Professor of Money and Banking, Cardiff University, Michael Petley, Chief Investment Officer, ECU Group, John Mills, Chairman and Founder of JML,Professor Patrick Minford, Professor of Economics, Cardiff Business School, Iain Murray, Vice President for Strategy, Competitive Enterprise Institute (Washington DC),David Myddelton, Professor D.R. Myddelton, Emeritus Professor of Finance and Accounting, Cranfield School of Management.Ross Parker, Brian Reading, former economics adviser to Edward Heath, Professor Colin Robinson, Advisory Council Institute of Economic Affairs & Emeritus Professor, Surrey University, Matthew Sinclair, Senior Consultant, Europe Economics, Professor Phil Whyman, Professor of Economics, Business, Economics and International Business, University of Central Lancashire,Dr Geoffrey Wyatt, Heriot-Watt University https://forbritain.org/economists/supporters/ https://forbritain.org/economists/supporters/
- davidf18 10y ago
  The issue with immigration is not xenophobia but economic as Economist Branko Milanovic (and perhaps others) have been pointing out since 2012. Milanovic's now famous "Elephant Curve" shows that the working or middle class in developed countries have seen no wage growth in 20 years. Part of that effect is from exporting jobs to China, Mexico (for US), Eastern Europe (for Europe) and part of that is from importing unskilled/low skilled labor. 20 years ago Britain had 900,000 immigrants. Today they have 3.3 million. The British government promised to limit EU immigration to 100,000 last year but broke their promise: it exceeded 300,000. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-27/get-ready-to-see-this-globalization-elephant-chart-over-and-over-again http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-27/get-ready-... These low-skilled immigrants compete for jobs in the UK and lower wage growth. Not those of professionals but of the working class/middle class. In the US, in 1970 we had 9.6 million immigrants (less than 5% of the population) and 2013 41.3 million (about 14% of the population). That does not include the 11 million immigrants in the US illegally. http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/09/28/chapter-5-u-s-foreign-born-population-trends/ http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/09/28/chapter-5-u-s-foreign-... As in the case of Britain, the working class in the US is suffering from the mostly low-educated immigrants that compete for jobs and drive down wage rates. The 11 million immigrants in the country illegally take jobs with illegal working conditions and illegally low wages since they can't complain. So, the issue is economic and not xenophobic. The real issue of BrExit and the rise of Trump is because the political and media elites in both countries (and this includes the Democrats as well as Republicans) have ignored the economic concerns of the working class.
  - rwmj 10y ago
    If it wasn't freedom of movement, it would be technological change (how many people will self-driving lorries put out of work?). The real problem is no one has thought about the long term where a lot of people either won't be able to work or won't need to work. In the UK we still have politicians who genuinely think a less than minimum wage job packing training shoes in a warehouse is morally better than someone being unemployed.
  - yummyfajitas 10y ago
    In the US the reason the middle class has had no wage growth is NOT because immigrants have hindered wage growth. The reason is simply because immigrants lower the averages simply by being included in statistics. In the US, most people with American parents have higher income than their parents did (in their 30's). This is true for all quintiles except maybe the top 20%. http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/legacy/uploadedfiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/reports/economic_mobility/pursuingamericandreampdf.pdf http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/legacy/uploadedfiles/wwwpew... Figure 1 http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication-pdfs/2000871-What-Would-Substantially-Increased-Mobility-from-Poverty-Look-Like.pdf http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publicatio... Figure 5 Yet when we look at cross sectional statistics (rather than longitudinal ones), income (though not compensation) has remained flat. The way to square these two facts together is that George Jr. has a higher income at 30 than George Sr. did, but the average of George Jr. and Jose Jr. has lower income at 30 than George Sr. did. Jose Sr. is excluded from the cross-sectional statistics since he lived in Mexico in his 30's.
danieldk 10y ago
The problem is that it is not in the EU's best interest to give the UK the best possible deal, especially with many populist parties ready to request an exit if the UK deal works out well. The whole process will be immensely complicated: the deal should be bad enough for the UK to instil fear for an exit, but good enough to avoid an economic collapse.
- tajen 10y ago
  > instill fear Is that how Europe is governed? I think any country should be allowed to leave without condescending comments by anyone. I prefer staying in Europe, but if the majority of my fellows prefer the opposite, then it's democracy. Who are we to judge they are "stupid", "country-side, or "senile", like I've read all across newspapers, or even fascists, like I've heard too? If Europe relies on hating the people who have a different opinion, twisting their vote to say it meant something else, and govern them with "fear" and "bad deal" (your words), then... ...then this is not the Europe I want to be part of.
  - rbanffy 10y ago
    I wouldn't mind if it's their informed opinion. What we see in this case is that they were sold a lie, one that'll eventually collapse into an ugly, harsh truth. The best deal possible is a Norway-like arrangement, which would be unacceptable to nationalists.
    - karma_vaccum123 10y ago
      Your comment basically confirms, on a more subtle level, what the GP post is saying. You have no factual basis for claiming these people are asserting false facts or voting based on false facts. Brexit is a vote on what the future should look like, and no one has a factual basis to predict the future. tl;dr people you disagree with aren't fraudulent by default
      - aaronbrethorst 10y ago
        Demonstrably untrue: http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/uk_576d0aa3e4b08d2c5638fc17 http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/uk_576d0aa3e4b08d2c5638fc17 And in Trump's case (describing immigrants as "rapists" and "murderers") it is also demonstrably false http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-mythical-connection-between-immigrants-and-crime-1436916798 http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-mythical-connection-between-...
T-A 10y ago
Doesn't look that way, unless it's a really reckless negotiating tactic: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-03/may-s-brexit-red-lines-prompt-warning-from-european-commission http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-03/may-s-brex...
timthorn 10y ago
No, there's a reasoned argument against the need to remain in the single market that has traction amongst politicians: http://www.conservativehome.com/thecolumnists/2016/09/daniel-hannan-repeat-after-me-single-market-membership-and-single-market-access-are-not-the-same-thing.html http://www.conservativehome.com/thecolumnists/2016/09/daniel...

I think everyone in any position of power understands that they must remain in the single market - now the only question is how to position / sell this to the electorate.

TheOtherHobbes 10y ago

I don't think May and the Cabinet do. All the noises seem to suggest the real priority is xenophobia - i.e. immigration. ...Which is a purely political strategy to capture the continued support of leave voters - exactly the people whose lives will be destroyed when trade dries up. The problem is that the typical leave voter understands immigration because they have direct personal experience of immigrants. But leave voters don't understand the intricacies of trade deals, or the incredible damage poor trading conditions can do to an economy. May does, which is why she has been warning of "tough times ahead." If she was interested in continuing trade on realistic terms she wouldn't be saying that. My suspicion at this point is that the Tory party is willing to sacrifice the economic future of the UK in order to remain in power.

dogma1138 10y ago
The typical leave voter lives in the areas with least immigration. The areas with any substantial immigration either from the EU or elsewhere voted remain.
- barrkel 10y ago
  The places with the least immigration are usually the poorest places most fearful of immigrants taking their jobs (specifically, lowering their wages - and they're probably right) and least optimistic about the future. They are usually remnants of the industrial revolution getting marginalized by globalization (mostly China).
- biofox 10y ago
  The sight of a few immigrants in an otherwise white British community is probably more shocking for the locals than it would be in a metropolitan area with a large immigrant population.
  - timthorn 10y ago
    The majority of immigrants from the EU are also white.
- TheOtherHobbes 10y ago
  Aside from London, which is a special case, that's not particularly true. Remain won in the very big cities with urban cosmopolitan populations and in a few university towns, but lost almost everywhere else. There are two main groups of leavers, with some overlap - the working classes with limited education and low prospects, and the petit bourgeois, who are relatively poorly educated and uncurious but can be reasonably well off. The first group has direct experience of poor working conditions, and often lives in an area with immigration. They'll have seen wages being kept down first hand. This vote was enough to swing it for Leave in many working class areas. The second group may not have direct experience, but is easily persuaded by xenophobia and jingoism. They're often older and are nostalgic for an England that never really existed. They tend conservative - and Conservative. They like simple explanations to complicated problems, and they're easy marks for the British press - the real source of many of the UK's problems - which has been stoking their prejudices for decades with a constant stream of anti-EU scare stories. This pattern isn't unique to the UK, but so far the UK is the only country to stress test it.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - ZenoArrow 10y ago
    > "There are two main groups of leavers, with some overlap - the working classes with limited education and low prospects, and the petit bourgeois, who are relatively poorly educated and uncurious but can be reasonably well off." I fit into neither group, and nor do the other people I know who voted to leave. > "the British press - the real source of many of the UK's problems - which has been stoking their prejudices for decades" I couldn't agree with you more on this point. However, I suspect this had a role in your earlier summation of the two groups of Leave voters. You really should take what you read/view/hear in British mainstream news outlets with a huge pinch of salt, even when it lines up with your own opinions. To give you one example of a group you overlooked, I'd suggest taking a look at the Left Leave website: http://www.leftleave.org/ http://www.leftleave.org/
clappski 10y ago
As far as I was aware it was the areas that the least amount of immigrants that wanted to vote for leave, but at this point it's moot. And I wouldn't say that fears over immigration are xenophobic, I think that the referendum came at a terrible time when Europe as a whole is facing a big refugee (economic or not) problem that they still can't decide how to solve.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- mpweiher 10y ago
  >areas that [have] the least amount of immigrants that wanted to vote for leave Ironic, isn't it? But absolutely typical. In Germany as well, the areas with highest anti-immigrant sentiments (and voting etc.) are the ones with the least amount of actual immigrants. Which kind of makes sense when you think about it...
  - sbmassey 10y ago
    I don't see why it is ironic, really: areas of low immigration can see what happens to areas of high immigration, so will vote against it, whereas for areas with high immigration it is too late
    - genofon 10y ago
      except that immigrants were not allow to vote for Brexit.
  - Scarblac 10y ago
    The people complaining are the people in areas with high unemployment. Migrants don't go there, they come to where the jobs are.
vixen99 10y ago
Not all serious economists (who we can assume voted Leave) agree that Brexit is going to be economically harmful to the UK. Not all serious economic analyses suggest that Brexit will leave the UK permanently and materially poorer. The argument can be taken up with the following who we can assume voted (if they are or would be UK citizens) to leave the EU, and some of whom might well have some understanding of the intricacies of trade deals. Roger Bootle, Managing Director of Capital Economics, and Gerard Lyons, Economic advisor to the Mayor of London and former Chief Economist of Standard Chartered Bank. Ruth Lea, Warwick Lightfoot, Neil MacKinnon, Ryan Bourne, Head of Public Policy, Institute of Economic Affairs, Keith Boyfield, Executive Director, Keith Boyfield Associates, Professor Tim Congdon, Founder, International Monetary Research Ltd, Sean Corrigan, Hinde Capital, Mike Denham, Research Fellow, The TaxPayers’ Alliance, Bryan Gould, Former Labour Shadow Cabinet member & former vice-Chancellor, University of Waikato, Dr David Green, Chief Executive, CIVITAS, Dr Graham Gudgin, University of Cambridge, Dr. Oliver Hartwich, Executive Director, The New Zealand Initiative,Damon de Laszlo, Chairman, Economic Research Council, Graeme Leach, Former Chief Economist, Institute of Directors, Andrew Lilico, Chairman, Economists for Britain, Neil MacKinnon, Global Macro Strategist, VTB Capital,Dr Eileen Marshall, IEA Advisory Council, Professor Kent Matthews, Associate Dean for Engagement & Professor of Money and Banking, Cardiff University, Michael Petley, Chief Investment Officer, ECU Group, John Mills, Chairman and Founder of JML,Professor Patrick Minford, Professor of Economics, Cardiff Business School, Iain Murray, Vice President for Strategy, Competitive Enterprise Institute (Washington DC),David Myddelton, Professor D.R. Myddelton, Emeritus Professor of Finance and Accounting, Cranfield School of Management.Ross Parker, Brian Reading, former economics adviser to Edward Heath, Professor Colin Robinson, Advisory Council Institute of Economic Affairs & Emeritus Professor, Surrey University, Matthew Sinclair, Senior Consultant, Europe Economics, Professor Phil Whyman, Professor of Economics, Business, Economics and International Business, University of Central Lancashire,Dr Geoffrey Wyatt, Heriot-Watt University https://forbritain.org/economists/supporters/ https://forbritain.org/economists/supporters/
davidf18 10y ago
The issue with immigration is not xenophobia but economic as Economist Branko Milanovic (and perhaps others) have been pointing out since 2012. Milanovic's now famous "Elephant Curve" shows that the working or middle class in developed countries have seen no wage growth in 20 years. Part of that effect is from exporting jobs to China, Mexico (for US), Eastern Europe (for Europe) and part of that is from importing unskilled/low skilled labor. 20 years ago Britain had 900,000 immigrants. Today they have 3.3 million. The British government promised to limit EU immigration to 100,000 last year but broke their promise: it exceeded 300,000. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-27/get-ready-to-see-this-globalization-elephant-chart-over-and-over-again http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-27/get-ready-... These low-skilled immigrants compete for jobs in the UK and lower wage growth. Not those of professionals but of the working class/middle class. In the US, in 1970 we had 9.6 million immigrants (less than 5% of the population) and 2013 41.3 million (about 14% of the population). That does not include the 11 million immigrants in the US illegally. http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/09/28/chapter-5-u-s-foreign-born-population-trends/ http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/09/28/chapter-5-u-s-foreign-... As in the case of Britain, the working class in the US is suffering from the mostly low-educated immigrants that compete for jobs and drive down wage rates. The 11 million immigrants in the country illegally take jobs with illegal working conditions and illegally low wages since they can't complain. So, the issue is economic and not xenophobic. The real issue of BrExit and the rise of Trump is because the political and media elites in both countries (and this includes the Democrats as well as Republicans) have ignored the economic concerns of the working class.
- rwmj 10y ago
  If it wasn't freedom of movement, it would be technological change (how many people will self-driving lorries put out of work?). The real problem is no one has thought about the long term where a lot of people either won't be able to work or won't need to work. In the UK we still have politicians who genuinely think a less than minimum wage job packing training shoes in a warehouse is morally better than someone being unemployed.
- yummyfajitas 10y ago
  In the US the reason the middle class has had no wage growth is NOT because immigrants have hindered wage growth. The reason is simply because immigrants lower the averages simply by being included in statistics. In the US, most people with American parents have higher income than their parents did (in their 30's). This is true for all quintiles except maybe the top 20%. http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/legacy/uploadedfiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/reports/economic_mobility/pursuingamericandreampdf.pdf http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/legacy/uploadedfiles/wwwpew... Figure 1 http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication-pdfs/2000871-What-Would-Substantially-Increased-Mobility-from-Poverty-Look-Like.pdf http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publicatio... Figure 5 Yet when we look at cross sectional statistics (rather than longitudinal ones), income (though not compensation) has remained flat. The way to square these two facts together is that George Jr. has a higher income at 30 than George Sr. did, but the average of George Jr. and Jose Jr. has lower income at 30 than George Sr. did. Jose Sr. is excluded from the cross-sectional statistics since he lived in Mexico in his 30's.

danieldk 10y ago

The problem is that it is not in the EU's best interest to give the UK the best possible deal, especially with many populist parties ready to request an exit if the UK deal works out well. The whole process will be immensely complicated: the deal should be bad enough for the UK to instil fear for an exit, but good enough to avoid an economic collapse.

tajen 10y ago
> instill fear Is that how Europe is governed? I think any country should be allowed to leave without condescending comments by anyone. I prefer staying in Europe, but if the majority of my fellows prefer the opposite, then it's democracy. Who are we to judge they are "stupid", "country-side, or "senile", like I've read all across newspapers, or even fascists, like I've heard too? If Europe relies on hating the people who have a different opinion, twisting their vote to say it meant something else, and govern them with "fear" and "bad deal" (your words), then... ...then this is not the Europe I want to be part of.
- rbanffy 10y ago
  I wouldn't mind if it's their informed opinion. What we see in this case is that they were sold a lie, one that'll eventually collapse into an ugly, harsh truth. The best deal possible is a Norway-like arrangement, which would be unacceptable to nationalists.
  - karma_vaccum123 10y ago
    Your comment basically confirms, on a more subtle level, what the GP post is saying. You have no factual basis for claiming these people are asserting false facts or voting based on false facts. Brexit is a vote on what the future should look like, and no one has a factual basis to predict the future. tl;dr people you disagree with aren't fraudulent by default
    - aaronbrethorst 10y ago
      Demonstrably untrue: http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/uk_576d0aa3e4b08d2c5638fc17 http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/uk_576d0aa3e4b08d2c5638fc17 And in Trump's case (describing immigrants as "rapists" and "murderers") it is also demonstrably false http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-mythical-connection-between-immigrants-and-crime-1436916798 http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-mythical-connection-between-...

T-A 10y ago

Doesn't look that way, unless it's a really reckless negotiating tactic: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-03/may-s-brexit-red-lines-prompt-warning-from-european-commission http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-03/may-s-brex...

timthorn 10y ago

No, there's a reasoned argument against the need to remain in the single market that has traction amongst politicians: http://www.conservativehome.com/thecolumnists/2016/09/daniel-hannan-repeat-after-me-single-market-membership-and-single-market-access-are-not-the-same-thing.html http://www.conservativehome.com/thecolumnists/2016/09/daniel...