Chromatious

Can you put an argument forward that we would be more independent by voting to stay in?

My understanding from the above is:

• some other regulations that have nothing to do with the EU will be in place.

• we may wish to abide by select rules should both sides (EU v UK) would want to - e.g. EU free trade.

The point is, 'independence' is really a misnomer in the 21st century, unless you are advocating complete isolationism.

This is absurd, and major hyperbole. You can be independent without being isolated from the rest of the world. You can democratically chose to leave a union. This does not eliminate the concept of independence.

Even if he's specialised, it was 7 years ago that he finished this degree. For someone who is actively posting, it's disconcerting that he's unwilling to answer these questions.

Or that he is actually the person whose degree we are seeing?

Your first link in no way implies no negation room. It is litered with "could", "uncertainty" and in does highlight a valid argument for ensuring free-trade agreements persist.

“As with Switzerland, the EU’s inclination to co-operate could worsen, if the UK chose to significantly restrict labour migration from the EU,” the report adds.

This seems makes the EU seem like they are spiteful if they don't get their way. Perhaps a further argument to get out of it?

With reference to your second source, it is again full of speculation in terms of having easy access to the goods market, and difficult access to the trade market. (And then a load of what-if's should the UK leave and then want to re-join).

Ultimately, though, while a high transaction cost is undeniable, the big question is if there is a point – and if so when – at which the high one-off cost of Brexit would be outweighed by the long-term benefits of more economic and political independence over areas such as financial regulation, agricultural policy or criminal justice.

And this quote is basically a huge "well this may or may not be a good idea - it may actually work out better!".

In summary: I don't see how your links are contributing to your point, which I disagree with. There is no clear line of no negotiation. In fact, there may well be grounds that some countries would want to ensure free-trade given the economic capabilities of the UK.

Question: Can you give me any source which categorically says there will be no negotiation regarding free-trade agreements should the UK leave, as this is what you have claimed in your above replies.

[Edit: accidentally pressed enter mid-reply!]

You are making huge statements and assumptions here!

We therefore would pretty much 100% have to agree a free trade deal with the EU.

.

That won't be up for negotiation - Norway, Switzerland already use this model so it's well established.

For someone claiming to be an expert in this field, you seem to be mistaking your opinion with facts.

The political dynamics and economic consequences of trade between EU countries & Norway / Switzerland, and then between EU counteries & the UK may well be different, and may well set up a line of negotiation. Just because one country did something many years ago, does not mean a different country must do the same.

Having a quick search on-line, it seems that this was entirely in response to the migration issue they voted against.

I know it's an area of contention at the moment, but my understanding of the flow of money between the UK and the EU at the moment is that we have a net loss? If that's the case and the EU decide to stop all funding for any research, then wouldn't we have more money to put into it ourselves?

I'm trying to learn all the different aspects involved here, so sorry if I'm missing something!