One for Tekkytyke and others:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...-right-live-in-spain-spanish-pm-mariano-rajoy

Scaremongering ?

 

Of course, why wouldn't they? That should swing some self-serving little Englanders.

 

Does anybody seriously think that any country in the EU will throw out any Brits who are financially sound and spend in there respective communities.

Same as last week when Cameron said folks hols MAY cost more... Do you think that Country's like Spain and Greece will put at risk one of there main sources of income.

It is exactly scaremongering

And another thing..if anyone says something MAY happen... just add the words or MAY NOT cos it can just as easy apply

 

I don't see why not. The anti-immigration crowd in this country don't seem to care about the economic contribution of migrants, why do you imagine it would be any different elsewhere?

 

The quality of debate in the EU Referendum from all points of view is particularly poor. The Remain side seem obsessed with economic forecasting which may or may not happen whilst the leave team have quickly fallen on the anti immigration borderline racist outpourings. Hopefully Corbyn can focus the debate on workers rights and put some actual information into the debate. The civil war in the Tory party is vaguely amusing but having looked back to the measured informed debates of the early 70 the state of British politics saddens me.

 

Those points are not really scary.... because in truth things aren't as black and white as you have presented them.
1)

 

What will happen to those Brits If Catalonia breaks from Spain. Catalonia would not get immediate EU membership, so there could be problems there. I owned property and worked in France before we entered the EU, there was little problem in getting my Residence Permit, and I was able to purchase the house and a car virtually immediately. In point of fact since we joined the EU British people I have talked to have had far more problem purchasing.

 

1. The EU will want us leaving to be a failure to discourage others from leaving
2. We have 50% of our trade with the EU - but the EU only has 10% of its trade with us - who suffers most if trade is more difficult?
3. Any trade deal with the EU will require us to accept the free movement of people - Norway and Switzerland already have this - there is no realistic possibility the EU will give us a deal without this condition ( this solves the expat problem above of course) - this means one of the main arguments for leaving doesnt actually work if we dont accept movement of people and EU working practices we will find it much harder to trade with Europe
4. We dont have trade deals with the rest of the world - this will take a long time to agree and our negotiating power is much weaker on our own

Tell me that those points are not really scary and I will say you dont understand the real danger[/QUOTE]

Those points are not really scary.... because in truth things aren't as black and white as you have presented them.
1) If it is true the EU would wish us to fail to discourage the others...that probably says more about the current state of the EU and it's authoritative nature....very worrying if it is prepared to over ride the will of dissatisfied people's. I doubt the Germans would be too keen on seeing the destruction of their second biggest car export market.
2) We have between 42 and 50% with Europe. ..depending on which figures you read..so you could say at least 50% is with elsewhere. That though is a percentage and not hard cash...in cash terms Europe benefits by 50 billion plus as a surplus....again not a reason to hope for failure...unless you're the most ardent of Eurocrats.
3) To suggest we would be forced to accept the Norway deal is incorrect , the EU trades all over the world and doesn't insist on free movement.
4) Trade deals don't necessarily need to take a long time between individual countries according to a retired IMF senior official...the only reason trade deals take a long time with the EU is because there are so many states with their own vested interests to be taken into account.

 

I don't doubt what you say about your own experience. However, you say purchasing property has become harder since the U.K. joined the EU, which was in 1973. This implies you acquired your property more than 43 years ago. This may be the case. I live in France in a house I own. I can tell you I had no difficulty whatsoever in choosing the house, acquiring mortgage finance (from a French bank, Crédit Mutuel) and completing the deal. I have not heard any of my work colleagues (which number many Brits) having any difficulty buying their houses in France
either.

 

Europes ****ed.
Itll either start falling apart this summer if we vote to leave or within the next ten year's when more money has been pissed down the drain itll eventually eat its self.

 

Absoultely scaremongering!..

EU membership has little to do with encumbent residents with existing residency / paid up property and who pay taxes etc. Much of it is covered under international law. Many UK people reside in countries that are nothing do with the EU and there is virtually no way that EU countries (I live in Italy by the way not Spain) would throw out tax paying foreigners. Besides, to live here permanently you must have residence status and whilst that does not mean citizenship it does afford levels of protection (ironically through EU legislation) in its own right. In any case applying for citizenship would be an option. So, NO, the odds on being thrown out are so small as to be not worthy of mention.

Just another lie from the Remain camp. I am voting out anyway.

 

Re: Absoultely scaremongering!..

So do you get a vote even though you live in Italy?

 

Re: Absoultely scaremongering!..

Yes, I know it's Italy Tekkytyke, it was an ex-pats question, and a genuine enquiry as to your thoughts.

In terms of australia, Ade, my sister who has left and taken dual- citizenship there has a vote (she is voting 'out', sadly which I find ironic!) . Also commonwealth voters living in England get to vote. I hear Australians here are more in favour of 'out' due to the perceived bias towards EU in terms of visa restrictions etc?

 

I think there is a real question as to how countries may choose to view immigrants of non-working age and the challenges they present to health and social care systems

 

Sod pensioners wi loads of mula.
Theres also the question over the challenges faced by countries where there are a lot of migrants of working age cause the housing and health care systems...

 

Re: Absoultely scaremongering!..

 

I think this is based on a scenario where the value of the pound decreases. Exporters of course benefit from this, we are however net importers typically to the tune of ~£10-15b per month.

 

Bloody hell! We agree on something!!

Once had this discussion on the way somewhere in the car with some Barnsley born mates, one of them having been in quite a senior role at the BoE (used to get the strop when we referred to where he lived as Tunbridge Wells without adding the 'Royal'!!)

Anyway, he agreed with my points that, unlike share trading, there is no 'rhyme nor reason' to the fluctuations in FX rates as most traders follow the 'herding instinct' and it is hard to predict trends based on logic and other economic factors. I know this as I change sterling to Euros 2-3 times of year when the rates are favourable and there is often no correlation to other economic conditions and the value of sterling.

The other point he conceded was that as a nation who are currently net importers, and exactly the point you made , there is no advantage in a weak pound as imports cost more. In addition, many of our exporters rely on imports of raw materials to produce goods and although they export 'added value' the increased cost of those materials impact on either profitability and/or competitive pricing of the finished goods. Energy prices, notwithstanding crude price fluctuations also impact transportation costs.

Therefore unless a country is a net exporter there is no logical justification for keeping a currency low, something that seems to escape many of the current group of, so called, economic advisers to the Government.