Are the referenced quotes you mention the ones from Boris et al you posted earlier? Forgive me if I take what that useless excuse for a parliamentarian says with a pinch of NaCl.

If you are referring to a different quote, I apologise. I stand what I said about Boris though.

For the record I want brexit to go well and accept that is the path we are following. I just wish someone with a bit of common (sense and decency) was leading us down it.

Give me the hard economic data that supports us being better off as a country shackled to the EU. For eternity. No? You can't gaze into the future either? Gosh! So you're just going on conjecture are you? "But muh expurts!!" Ah yes. The IMF. The CBI. The Economist. Bloomberg. Siemens. Toyota. PWC. The EU Commission itself. All (and many, many more) have now U-turned, or indeed simply spoken out, having previously been gagged by Cameron during the election (as per Tony Abbott). As I linked to earlier, the Treasury's sexed-up Brexitgeddon referendum scaremongering unraveled and did not stand up to scrutiny then (see the link I provided to my own post back then), nor now.

Will we be better off in the future, having left the EU? Yes. I think we will. My assessment is not borne out of economic tealeaf-reading, nor can yours be of remaining in the EU. But I don't see our membership of an EU superstate as the future direction for this country. This was (according to the most comprehensive exit poll conducted at the time) the #1 reason for voting to leave (sorry to burst your bubble). I read enough economic projections on both sides to judge that, longer-term, it's better we left. I based that on the methodology and assumptions that went into the models used to derive their findings. This is how I work in my day-job, and I came to the conclusion that the near-term uncertainty was a worthwhile factor in securing the many benefits of leaving the EU. Sorry, but not sorry you don't feel the same way. My decision came from a position of research into the subject. Yours demonstrably appears not to have been.

Oh, and a little factoid for you: we do not have "free trade" with the EU. It costs us to trade with them. A lot. As you seem to desperately re-fight the referendum, perhaps you should actually educate yourself about the issues. You never know, you might change your mind. While you're there, go take a look at Canada's deal with the EU, and ask yourself why we were paying a fortune to "free" (sic) trade in the single market, when Canadian access, is (sector-dependent) 94-100% tariff free. For free.

Now. This really is my last reply to you. I'll do my best to skim past your contributions in future. They don't really advance the discussion.

And you still haven't said why or how, or explained your methodology. I've just read paragraphs or more meaningless rhetoric and sound bites. It sums my point up. It's what you all do, other than when you decide to actually bring facts to the table such as the following -

"Sir, Boris Johnson recently asserted that the “EU is a graveyard of low growth”. This claim merits proper examination to determine, precisely, how the UK, US, Germany and France have done since 1973, the year in which the UK joined the EU. Per capita GDP of the UK economy grew by 103%, exceeding the 97% growth of the US. Within the EU, the UK edged out Germany (99%) and clobbered France (74%).

The UK’s growth has exceeded the US while tracking it, even since the crisis of 2008. This makes it hard to argue that the EU is dragging the UK down. Alternatively, compare this to the UK’s performance during the “glory days” of the Empire from 1872 to 1914. Back then Britain’s per capita growth was only 0.9% per year, in contrast to its robust 2.1% since joining the EU.

An important bonus is that the benefits of growth in Britain have been divided much more fairly than in the US. Statistics compiled by the Institute for New Economic Thinking show that Since 1974, median income in the UK grew by 79%, in contrast to 16% for the US. Thus, Britain has had the best of both worlds while a member of the EU -- not just strong growth, but more equal growth.

As the UK economy has grown, it has become more dependent on trade. Since 1973 the ratio of trade to economic output increased from 48% to 67%. At present 45% of the UK’s exports go to other EU member countries. In response to the concern that the EU might impose high tariffs or punitive measures if the UK leaves, some Brexiteers have said that we can “just trade with Australia and Canada”. These two countries, however, only account for a meagre 2.9% of British exports.

History is clear: things have gone very well for Britain as a member of the EU."

But hey what does Boris "have your cake and eat it" Johnson know about anything?

Edited by Mstrobez (28 Jun 2017 1.07am)

We're the Arthur over ere!

When Britain joined in 1973, the states that now make up the EU accounted for 36% of the world economy. Last year, it was 17%. The EU has been outperformed by the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. It’s not hard to see why - Brussels is more concerned with keeping the Euro together as a means to political integration than in the welfare of the poor buggers who have to use it. Why should we allow our geographical position to override ties of language and law, custom and kinship around the world? Why restrict ourselves to the world’s slowest-growing continent?

Edited by hedgehog50 (28 Jun 2017 7.59am)

We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell]

Predictably, you try to divert away from the points I was making.

We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell]

I think it will be clear within 12 months. If the Tories are still clinging to power propped up by the DUP it won't be a success. They will create lasting damage to our nation and our economy.

Edited by CambridgeEagle (28 Jun 2017 9.13am)