EU referendum opinion poll.

[Bellend Sebastian]

Alright lovers.

 

Here's a report commissioned by Woodford Investment Management (Neil Woodford of star fund manager fame).  A supposedly impartial take on the economic implications of Brexit, which may be of interest to people who are fed up with all the noise and want to digest something a bit more considered.

 

https://woodfordfunds.com/economic-impact-brexit-report/

[DJ Barry Hammond]

Alright lovers.

Here's a report commissioned by Woodford Investment Management (Neil Woodford of star fund manager fame). A supposedly impartial take on the economic implications of Brexit, which may be of interest to people who are fed up with all the noise and want to digest something a bit more considered.

https://woodfordfunds.com/economic-impact-brexit-report/

I'm not sure how impartial this really is. It was produced by Capital Economics who suggest they are an independent research company... But their Executive Chairman, Roger Bootle writes a column in the Daily Telegraph and published a book last year providing his views on why the EU isn't working... so this report was never going to be anything but eurosceptic.

And sadly, this is going to be the problem with pretty much any publication... Those with the ability to produce such reports and the like would have already hold a position - and with things being so subjective to interpretation (it's so difficult to have hard facts on anything), reports will be tailored to read well to that established opinion.

[Carl the Llama]

It seems to contradict itself on what leaving the EU would mean for regulation in the UK, using significantly lower regulation as a counterpoint to a negative impact they're trying to explain away before later arguing there wouldn't be much reduction in regulation and even going so far as to say we may impose more of it in some areas. Plus it seems rather reticent to expand on how it could negatively impact the public purse, listing a fair few reasons why Brexit may not save us billions but not seeming to countenance the potential for a negative net effect on public finances once the dust has settled.  Likewise it seems to disregard negative commercial impacts out of hand rather than giving them due weight in their analysis.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

Carl - this is because...

http://www.miriamjoywrites.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/nobody-knows.png

(not even the Queen) the impacts (either way), it's all guesswork.

[Carl the Llama]

Carl - this is because...

http://www.miriamjoywrites.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/nobody-knows.png

(not even the Queen) the impacts (either way), it's all guesswork.

Agreed, but normally when you don't have a clue you tend not to put together a glossy file reportedly providing impartial analysis of the costs and benefits of leaving the EU despite a very clear editorial stance of providing more weight to one side than another.  It's akin to Bill O'Reilly's laughable use of the phrase "no spin zone" on his show.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

Agreed, but normally when you don't have a clue you tend not to put together a glossy file reportedly providing impartial analysis of the costs and benefits of leaving the EU despite a very clear editorial stance of providing more weight to one side than another. It's akin to Bill O'Reilly's laughable use of the phrase "no spin zone" on his show.

The reports are largely irrelevant and I imagine all sides know that - because hardly any swing voter will read them.

They're simply created to spurn a headline from that report... and so long as there's no glaring holes the pages and pages of guff is just there to suggest substance.

Equally, all campaign managers of any political movement know that these days investigative political journalism is at its lowest point - no one does it anymore and when the odd person does, no-one cares.

With 24 hour news, all reporters have time for is to feed the required sound bite to the masses... And that's it. The times I've seen a press conference and seen the under arm full toss bowling of questions being put forward by the gathered journalists makes me furious!

But then this treatment by the press makes sense - the political parties control access, control who asks questions, so if you get too difficult you don't get a pass / a question - your frozen out.

So where can people go for the information they need - the fringe websites / sources - well they're ok, but which one of the thousands do you choose? And a big problem with these - they tend to be started by people with an existing agenda (as shown by some links that had been posted on here written by American far right white supremacists).

It's all bloody frustrating, because if a big enough movement did real balanced news journalism, asking hard questions I reckon it would sell - it would be so unique in this day and age and having that big presence would put pressure on the political streams to take note, but alas I don't see this happening any day soon.

The closest I've seen is what Russell Brand was doing... but he is a little polarising and didn't quite have the weight / stamina that was needed.

I also wonder now if Ed Milliband would have been a lot better received had the Labour machine had left him alone rather than try and get him to be something he was not. It would have allowed Ed to play his eccentricities as a strength rather than open them up as a weakness - but woooooo there, gone way off topic now!

[Buce]

Not technically on topic, but it seems the most relevant thread, considering they are trying to use the migrant crisis to speed-up EU membership:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/14/erdogan-key-turkey-future-dependable-eu-partner-refugees

[bovril]

Turkey isn't going to join the EU any time soon.

[Jon the Hat]

Turkey isn't going to join the EU any time soon.

 

Erdogan isn't that stupid.  The fact that he can manipulate the EU at will and demand billions already makes him feel like a megastar.