So who wants to remain in the EU?
Discussion
rs1952 said:
don4l said:
rs1952 said:
don4l said:
Thank you for replying to my post. I do appreciate the attention, even when you are telling me that you are ignoring me. I love irony.
I was replying to tangerine sedge, not you. If you want to read my reply on an open discussion forum then you are of course quite at liberty to do so
rs1952 also said:
Don, here's a tip - you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar
^shrug^Looks to be addressing him personally to me.
In my view and experience of working in several countries in Europe - we should definately stay in and not leave.
I believe this because:
1 - whilst many bemoan a perceived lack of influence in Europe, we are still at the table and can influence - we are a major player in Europe despite not making the song and dance of control like DE and FR
2 - we can't afford to have our trade with the EU harmed - it is very important to us all & our economy
3 - we can't afford to take the risk of losing the influence in 1 as players like DE/FR (for example) simply do not care about 2 for the UK.
We simply cannot afford to relinquish our place to influence the direction of Europe.
The risks are huge, and the so called benefits of leaving the EU and unproven and very likely to be dwarfed by the impacts of the high probability risks that almost certainly will turn into issues in some form.
You could draw parallels to ditching trident. The costs are tiny in the scheme of things over 40+ years. Can you afford to take the risk of not having it? Not in my opinion. Same as not bothering with home insurance. Who does that? Only an reckless person making irrational ill informed decisions, it could be argued.
Leaving the EU would be a reckless ill-informed decision - in my view.
(PS I love the French and especially the Germans. But it is only realistic to realise their governments will tend to look after themselves in the EU, and being in the club will always be a compromise between partners).
I believe this because:
1 - whilst many bemoan a perceived lack of influence in Europe, we are still at the table and can influence - we are a major player in Europe despite not making the song and dance of control like DE and FR
2 - we can't afford to have our trade with the EU harmed - it is very important to us all & our economy
3 - we can't afford to take the risk of losing the influence in 1 as players like DE/FR (for example) simply do not care about 2 for the UK.
We simply cannot afford to relinquish our place to influence the direction of Europe.
The risks are huge, and the so called benefits of leaving the EU and unproven and very likely to be dwarfed by the impacts of the high probability risks that almost certainly will turn into issues in some form.
You could draw parallels to ditching trident. The costs are tiny in the scheme of things over 40+ years. Can you afford to take the risk of not having it? Not in my opinion. Same as not bothering with home insurance. Who does that? Only an reckless person making irrational ill informed decisions, it could be argued.
Leaving the EU would be a reckless ill-informed decision - in my view.
(PS I love the French and especially the Germans. But it is only realistic to realise their governments will tend to look after themselves in the EU, and being in the club will always be a compromise between partners).
danllama said:
grumbledoak said:
Can I have a list of what we get for this £33M a day, please?
NO you CAN'T because the EU doesn't even know itself!If that along with the shambolic handling of the immigrant crisis is not enough to LEAVE, I don't know what is!
S2art/Superlightr/Robertj21a, thanks for the replies I wondered if I'd get flamed for my view on this thread but to be frank I've lost faith in the political class (no matter what their nationality)
I always vote regardless (Tory) but I'm just not convinced that anything would be better or hugely worse for that matter if we left, but the uncertainty will come and for what tangible benefit?
I don't buy in to the pro European argument that we'll lose all our trade (it's a nonsense to suggest that) but it won't stop the opportunists taking advantage of the situation in the markets and messing things up for a while (for a quick buck) and I've yet to hear an argument about how things will meaningfully change for the better and what I mean by that is to me! (selfish perhaps but we all should look after number 1 first)
I always vote regardless (Tory) but I'm just not convinced that anything would be better or hugely worse for that matter if we left, but the uncertainty will come and for what tangible benefit?
I don't buy in to the pro European argument that we'll lose all our trade (it's a nonsense to suggest that) but it won't stop the opportunists taking advantage of the situation in the markets and messing things up for a while (for a quick buck) and I've yet to hear an argument about how things will meaningfully change for the better and what I mean by that is to me! (selfish perhaps but we all should look after number 1 first)
Wills2 said:
S2art/Superlightr/Robertj21a, thanks for the replies I wondered if I'd get flamed for my view on this thread but to be frank I've lost faith in the political class (no matter what their nationality)
I always vote regardless (Tory) but I'm just not convinced that anything would be better or hugely worse for that matter if we left, but the uncertainty will come and for what tangible benefit?
I don't buy in to the pro European argument that we'll lose all our trade (it's a nonsense to suggest that) but it won't stop the opportunists taking advantage of the situation in the markets and messing things up for a while (for a quick buck) and I've yet to hear an argument about how things will meaningfully change for the better and what I mean by that is to me! (selfish perhaps but we all should look after number 1 first)
At the moment the EU is responsible for all trade deals. Problem is most of said deals are bad for us as they do not include trade in services, the main part of our economy. Basically the EU is bad for the UK in terms of our ability to trade globally. Even the proposed TTIP deal with the USA is deficient in this respect. (70% of our economy is now in services, only a small fraction of Germany's is).I always vote regardless (Tory) but I'm just not convinced that anything would be better or hugely worse for that matter if we left, but the uncertainty will come and for what tangible benefit?
I don't buy in to the pro European argument that we'll lose all our trade (it's a nonsense to suggest that) but it won't stop the opportunists taking advantage of the situation in the markets and messing things up for a while (for a quick buck) and I've yet to hear an argument about how things will meaningfully change for the better and what I mean by that is to me! (selfish perhaps but we all should look after number 1 first)
So, out we can improve our global trade (the bit thats growing faster than our trade to the EU), strike deals with China, the USA etc etc that enables us to export our services better ). This is what Osborne et al is trying to do with China, but the EU gets in the way.
You can look after number one better out than in.
s2art said:
Wills2 said:
S2art/Superlightr/Robertj21a, thanks for the replies I wondered if I'd get flamed for my view on this thread but to be frank I've lost faith in the political class (no matter what their nationality)
I always vote regardless (Tory) but I'm just not convinced that anything would be better or hugely worse for that matter if we left, but the uncertainty will come and for what tangible benefit?
I don't buy in to the pro European argument that we'll lose all our trade (it's a nonsense to suggest that) but it won't stop the opportunists taking advantage of the situation in the markets and messing things up for a while (for a quick buck) and I've yet to hear an argument about how things will meaningfully change for the better and what I mean by that is to me! (selfish perhaps but we all should look after number 1 first)
At the moment the EU is responsible for all trade deals. Problem is most of said deals are bad for us as they do not include trade in services, the main part of our economy. Basically the EU is bad for the UK in terms of our ability to trade globally. Even the proposed TTIP deal with the USA is deficient in this respect. (70% of our economy is now in services, only a small fraction of Germany's is).I always vote regardless (Tory) but I'm just not convinced that anything would be better or hugely worse for that matter if we left, but the uncertainty will come and for what tangible benefit?
I don't buy in to the pro European argument that we'll lose all our trade (it's a nonsense to suggest that) but it won't stop the opportunists taking advantage of the situation in the markets and messing things up for a while (for a quick buck) and I've yet to hear an argument about how things will meaningfully change for the better and what I mean by that is to me! (selfish perhaps but we all should look after number 1 first)
So, out we can improve our global trade (the bit thats growing faster than our trade to the EU), strike deals with China, the USA etc etc that enables us to export our services better ). This is what Osborne et al is trying to do with China, but the EU gets in the way.
You can look after number one better out than in.
As for EU getting in way of Osbourne trade deals - where has he said that? Are you saying Osbourne wants out of the EU? His statements suggest the exact opposite, no?
///ajd said:
s2art said:
Wills2 said:
S2art/Superlightr/Robertj21a, thanks for the replies I wondered if I'd get flamed for my view on this thread but to be frank I've lost faith in the political class (no matter what their nationality)
I always vote regardless (Tory) but I'm just not convinced that anything would be better or hugely worse for that matter if we left, but the uncertainty will come and for what tangible benefit?
I don't buy in to the pro European argument that we'll lose all our trade (it's a nonsense to suggest that) but it won't stop the opportunists taking advantage of the situation in the markets and messing things up for a while (for a quick buck) and I've yet to hear an argument about how things will meaningfully change for the better and what I mean by that is to me! (selfish perhaps but we all should look after number 1 first)
At the moment the EU is responsible for all trade deals. Problem is most of said deals are bad for us as they do not include trade in services, the main part of our economy. Basically the EU is bad for the UK in terms of our ability to trade globally. Even the proposed TTIP deal with the USA is deficient in this respect. (70% of our economy is now in services, only a small fraction of Germany's is).I always vote regardless (Tory) but I'm just not convinced that anything would be better or hugely worse for that matter if we left, but the uncertainty will come and for what tangible benefit?
I don't buy in to the pro European argument that we'll lose all our trade (it's a nonsense to suggest that) but it won't stop the opportunists taking advantage of the situation in the markets and messing things up for a while (for a quick buck) and I've yet to hear an argument about how things will meaningfully change for the better and what I mean by that is to me! (selfish perhaps but we all should look after number 1 first)
So, out we can improve our global trade (the bit thats growing faster than our trade to the EU), strike deals with China, the USA etc etc that enables us to export our services better ). This is what Osborne et al is trying to do with China, but the EU gets in the way.
You can look after number one better out than in.
As for EU getting in way of Osbourne trade deals - where has he said that? Are you saying Osbourne wants out of the EU? His statements suggest the exact opposite, no?
The UK cannot make a trade deal with China, (one that certainly would contain financial services) only the EU can make a deal and it wont be one which will suit the UK. Osborne is reduced to trying things like linking the Stock Exchange with the Chinese equivalent.
s2art said:
///ajd said:
s2art said:
Wills2 said:
S2art/Superlightr/Robertj21a, thanks for the replies I wondered if I'd get flamed for my view on this thread but to be frank I've lost faith in the political class (no matter what their nationality)
I always vote regardless (Tory) but I'm just not convinced that anything would be better or hugely worse for that matter if we left, but the uncertainty will come and for what tangible benefit?
I don't buy in to the pro European argument that we'll lose all our trade (it's a nonsense to suggest that) but it won't stop the opportunists taking advantage of the situation in the markets and messing things up for a while (for a quick buck) and I've yet to hear an argument about how things will meaningfully change for the better and what I mean by that is to me! (selfish perhaps but we all should look after number 1 first)
At the moment the EU is responsible for all trade deals. Problem is most of said deals are bad for us as they do not include trade in services, the main part of our economy. Basically the EU is bad for the UK in terms of our ability to trade globally. Even the proposed TTIP deal with the USA is deficient in this respect. (70% of our economy is now in services, only a small fraction of Germany's is).I always vote regardless (Tory) but I'm just not convinced that anything would be better or hugely worse for that matter if we left, but the uncertainty will come and for what tangible benefit?
I don't buy in to the pro European argument that we'll lose all our trade (it's a nonsense to suggest that) but it won't stop the opportunists taking advantage of the situation in the markets and messing things up for a while (for a quick buck) and I've yet to hear an argument about how things will meaningfully change for the better and what I mean by that is to me! (selfish perhaps but we all should look after number 1 first)
So, out we can improve our global trade (the bit thats growing faster than our trade to the EU), strike deals with China, the USA etc etc that enables us to export our services better ). This is what Osborne et al is trying to do with China, but the EU gets in the way.
You can look after number one better out than in.
As for EU getting in way of Osbourne trade deals - where has he said that? Are you saying Osbourne wants out of the EU? His statements suggest the exact opposite, no?
The UK cannot make a trade deal with China, (one that certainly would contain financial services) only the EU can make a deal and it wont be one which will suit the UK. Osborne is reduced to trying things like linking the Stock Exchange with the Chinese equivalent.
First point, I would worry about what the EU would do to our services industry if we left - as I understand it we have managed to stop EU measures that could be detrimental to our service sector. I recall us pushing back on banking reforms that would affect UK more than any other EU member. Now I realise you can say - yes but if we left those laws would not apply to us - BUT the risk is those laws may affect our ability to trade our services into the EU.
As an example (not realistic, but to show the point) - we leave, the EU introduces caps on banker salaries (that UK won't /can't comply with) - suddenly UK banks ability to comply with EU law in doubt, and hence possibly access to EU market. If we were in the EU, we could veto such a cap all day long. Now there are holes in this example, in reality it maybe much more subtle, but the risk seems very real to me. You have to ask - if the UK left, would FR/DE introduce laws in the EU that penalised sectors outside the EU to the benefit of their own? Having dealt with DE & FR, in my view this is not only a risk, but a certainty.
Second point, is this really the case? How are we constrained with doing business outside the EU? Do EU laws constrain what we do with e.g. china? Does EU legislation really interfere with e.g. France selling Rafales to India? Can you give an example where an EU regulation affects our trade with china?
If we remain in the EU, we won't be able to govern ourselves anymore, and as an indication of the EU's general intransigence and inbuilt wish never to budge:
"...We might throw out your deal, MEPs warn: European Parliament threatens to block Britain's plans as they accuse Cameron of 'testing the patience' of EU colleagues..."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3433531/Pr...
(Keep trying to get our way Cameron, they might want us to leave... )
"...We might throw out your deal, MEPs warn: European Parliament threatens to block Britain's plans as they accuse Cameron of 'testing the patience' of EU colleagues..."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3433531/Pr...
(Keep trying to get our way Cameron, they might want us to leave...
)
///ajd said:
Ah, I see your points.
First point, I would worry about what the EU would do to our services industry if we left - as I understand it we have managed to stop EU measures that could be detrimental to our service sector. I recall us pushing back on banking reforms that would affect UK more than any other EU member. Now I realise you can say - yes but if we left those laws would not apply to us - BUT the risk is those laws may affect our ability to trade our services into the EU.
As an example (not realistic, but to show the point) - we leave, the EU introduces caps on banker salaries (that UK won't /can't comply with) - suddenly UK banks ability to comply with EU law in doubt, and hence possibly access to EU market. If we were in the EU, we could veto such a cap all day long. Now there are holes in this example, in reality it maybe much more subtle, but the risk seems very real to me. You have to ask - if the UK left, would FR/DE introduce laws in the EU that penalised sectors outside the EU to the benefit of their own? Having dealt with DE & FR, in my view this is not only a risk, but a certainty.
Second point, is this really the case? How are we constrained with doing business outside the EU? Do EU laws constrain what we do with e.g. china? Does EU legislation really interfere with e.g. France selling Rafales to India? Can you give an example where an EU regulation affects our trade with china?
First point, I would worry about what the EU would do to our services industry if we left - as I understand it we have managed to stop EU measures that could be detrimental to our service sector. I recall us pushing back on banking reforms that would affect UK more than any other EU member. Now I realise you can say - yes but if we left those laws would not apply to us - BUT the risk is those laws may affect our ability to trade our services into the EU.
As an example (not realistic, but to show the point) - we leave, the EU introduces caps on banker salaries (that UK won't /can't comply with) - suddenly UK banks ability to comply with EU law in doubt, and hence possibly access to EU market. If we were in the EU, we could veto such a cap all day long. Now there are holes in this example, in reality it maybe much more subtle, but the risk seems very real to me. You have to ask - if the UK left, would FR/DE introduce laws in the EU that penalised sectors outside the EU to the benefit of their own? Having dealt with DE & FR, in my view this is not only a risk, but a certainty.
Second point, is this really the case? How are we constrained with doing business outside the EU? Do EU laws constrain what we do with e.g. china? Does EU legislation really interfere with e.g. France selling Rafales to India? Can you give an example where an EU regulation affects our trade with china?
Of course, there is the risk of the Germans and, especially, the French being vindictive were we to spoil their party. They've already hinted at as much.
For me that's a chance worth taking rather than capitulate to what is basically blackmail. We're likely to be 'punished' as some have called simply for questioning the grand plan as we have.
Are you saying we should stay in rather than upset the Germans and French? Really?
///ajd said:
Ah, I see your points.
First point, I would worry about what the EU would do to our services industry if we left - as I understand it we have managed to stop EU measures that could be detrimental to our service sector. I recall us pushing back on banking reforms that would affect UK more than any other EU member. Now I realise you can say - yes but if we left those laws would not apply to us - BUT the risk is those laws may affect our ability to trade our services into the EU.
As an example (not realistic, but to show the point) - we leave, the EU introduces caps on banker salaries (that UK won't /can't comply with) - suddenly UK banks ability to comply with EU law in doubt, and hence possibly access to EU market. If we were in the EU, we could veto such a cap all day long. Now there are holes in this example, in reality it maybe much more subtle, but the risk seems very real to me. You have to ask - if the UK left, would FR/DE introduce laws in the EU that penalised sectors outside the EU to the benefit of their own? Having dealt with DE & FR, in my view this is not only a risk, but a certainty.
Second point, is this really the case? How are we constrained with doing business outside the EU? Do EU laws constrain what we do with e.g. china? Does EU legislation really interfere with e.g. France selling Rafales to India? Can you give an example where an EU regulation affects our trade with china?
Dear God!First point, I would worry about what the EU would do to our services industry if we left - as I understand it we have managed to stop EU measures that could be detrimental to our service sector. I recall us pushing back on banking reforms that would affect UK more than any other EU member. Now I realise you can say - yes but if we left those laws would not apply to us - BUT the risk is those laws may affect our ability to trade our services into the EU.
As an example (not realistic, but to show the point) - we leave, the EU introduces caps on banker salaries (that UK won't /can't comply with) - suddenly UK banks ability to comply with EU law in doubt, and hence possibly access to EU market. If we were in the EU, we could veto such a cap all day long. Now there are holes in this example, in reality it maybe much more subtle, but the risk seems very real to me. You have to ask - if the UK left, would FR/DE introduce laws in the EU that penalised sectors outside the EU to the benefit of their own? Having dealt with DE & FR, in my view this is not only a risk, but a certainty.
Second point, is this really the case? How are we constrained with doing business outside the EU? Do EU laws constrain what we do with e.g. china? Does EU legislation really interfere with e.g. France selling Rafales to India? Can you give an example where an EU regulation affects our trade with china?
People criticise me for using the term "bedwetters".
ajd, don't you think that the French would find it easier to just drop a few nuclear bombs on London?
The idea that Europe would initiate a trade war with Britain is utterly laughable. The rest of Europe are nett beneficiaries of trade with the UK.
REALIST123 said:
///ajd said:
Ah, I see your points.
First point, I would worry about what the EU would do to our services industry if we left - as I understand it we have managed to stop EU measures that could be detrimental to our service sector. I recall us pushing back on banking reforms that would affect UK more than any other EU member. Now I realise you can say - yes but if we left those laws would not apply to us - BUT the risk is those laws may affect our ability to trade our services into the EU.
As an example (not realistic, but to show the point) - we leave, the EU introduces caps on banker salaries (that UK won't /can't comply with) - suddenly UK banks ability to comply with EU law in doubt, and hence possibly access to EU market. If we were in the EU, we could veto such a cap all day long. Now there are holes in this example, in reality it maybe much more subtle, but the risk seems very real to me. You have to ask - if the UK left, would FR/DE introduce laws in the EU that penalised sectors outside the EU to the benefit of their own? Having dealt with DE & FR, in my view this is not only a risk, but a certainty.
Second point, is this really the case? How are we constrained with doing business outside the EU? Do EU laws constrain what we do with e.g. china? Does EU legislation really interfere with e.g. France selling Rafales to India? Can you give an example where an EU regulation affects our trade with china?
First point, I would worry about what the EU would do to our services industry if we left - as I understand it we have managed to stop EU measures that could be detrimental to our service sector. I recall us pushing back on banking reforms that would affect UK more than any other EU member. Now I realise you can say - yes but if we left those laws would not apply to us - BUT the risk is those laws may affect our ability to trade our services into the EU.
As an example (not realistic, but to show the point) - we leave, the EU introduces caps on banker salaries (that UK won't /can't comply with) - suddenly UK banks ability to comply with EU law in doubt, and hence possibly access to EU market. If we were in the EU, we could veto such a cap all day long. Now there are holes in this example, in reality it maybe much more subtle, but the risk seems very real to me. You have to ask - if the UK left, would FR/DE introduce laws in the EU that penalised sectors outside the EU to the benefit of their own? Having dealt with DE & FR, in my view this is not only a risk, but a certainty.
Second point, is this really the case? How are we constrained with doing business outside the EU? Do EU laws constrain what we do with e.g. china? Does EU legislation really interfere with e.g. France selling Rafales to India? Can you give an example where an EU regulation affects our trade with china?
Of course, there is the risk of the Germans and, especially, the French being vindictive were we to spoil their party. They've already hinted at as much.
For me that's a chance worth taking rather than capitulate to what is basically blackmail. We're likely to be 'punished' as some have called simply for questioning the grand plan as we have.
Are you saying we should stay in rather than upset the Germans and French? Really?
We should stay in to keep the FR and DE in check. Don't let the feckers loose in the EU to run riot.
That DailyFail link above does annoy me however - what the feck is the EU president think he's doing saying "UK leave if you want to". You are supposed to represent the UK as well you jumped up little twunt!
It is precisely why we should stay in - the UK needs to say clearly to people like Shultz - er, sorry old bean, we are in Europe, we're a net contributor, we want our fair share, we'll decide whether we stay or go, we control YOU, not the other way around. Random "psuedo-leaders" like you who have no real mandate over sovereign states, and you should try not to forget it.
Shultz should be reprimanded for that. I sound anti-EU now, but I'm not - the EU should work for us! Part of the issue is we have put UKIP idiots into MEP posts who are useless at effectively protecting the UK position - they are a protest party of irrlevence. We should be a leading voice in the EU, not a bunch of whinging t
ts. You can imagine how some MEPs might view our UKIP MEPs that same way the SNP natts are viewed in westminster - chippy nomarks with nothing constructive to say. We're not helping ourselves, but BREXIT is not the answer.I think long term we'll be perfectly fine should there be an exit.
I also think we'd have to become far stronger if we remain, we'd need to be calling the shots or at least have a much stronger arm than we do now.
However, we need to leave. I can't understand why we'd want to be in a club where we seem to be openly disliked, taken advantage of and with blatant manipulation of legislation to diminish our power and wealth.
Why would anyone want to stay in this situation?
I also think we'd have to become far stronger if we remain, we'd need to be calling the shots or at least have a much stronger arm than we do now.
However, we need to leave. I can't understand why we'd want to be in a club where we seem to be openly disliked, taken advantage of and with blatant manipulation of legislation to diminish our power and wealth.
Why would anyone want to stay in this situation?
Mothersruin said:
I think long term we'll be perfectly fine should there be an exit.
I also think we'd have to become far stronger if we remain, we'd need to be calling the shots or at least have a much stronger arm than we do now.
However, we need to leave. I can't understand why we'd want to be in a club where we seem to be openly disliked, taken advantage of and with blatant manipulation of legislation to diminish our power and wealth.
Why would anyone want to stay in this situation?
It's a bizarre thought.I also think we'd have to become far stronger if we remain, we'd need to be calling the shots or at least have a much stronger arm than we do now.
However, we need to leave. I can't understand why we'd want to be in a club where we seem to be openly disliked, taken advantage of and with blatant manipulation of legislation to diminish our power and wealth.
Why would anyone want to stay in this situation?
danllama said:
grumbledoak said:
Can I have a list of what we get for this £33M a day, please?
NO you CAN'T because the EU doesn't even know itself!If that along with the shambolic handling of the immigrant crisis is not enough to LEAVE, I don't know what is!
Wills2 said:
I'm going to vote to stay in the EU....
I do think the current renegotiation around welfare changes etc is a good thing and I'd like to see reform across the board and a fairer settlement for the UK but within the EU.
The welfare changes (that haven't been finally agreed yet) are almost not worth talking about, and in any case, are the microscopic tip of a fI do think the current renegotiation around welfare changes etc is a good thing and I'd like to see reform across the board and a fairer settlement for the UK but within the EU.
king humongous ugly great iceberg that we have no control over. We have about as much control over the direction of decisions made in the European Parliament as somebody on an actual iceberg using a cocktail stick as a rudder.Get out now while we have the chance. And while we're at it, f
k of the European Court of Terrorists Rights and legislate for a British Bill of Rights that works along the lines of common sense, not get out of jail free cards like 'the right to a family life'.///ajd said:
No, quite the opposite.
We should stay in to keep the FR and DE in check. Don't let the feckers loose in the EU to run riot.
That DailyFail link above does annoy me however - what the feck is the EU president think he's doing saying "UK leave if you want to". You are supposed to represent the UK as well you jumped up little twunt!
It is precisely why we should stay in - the UK needs to say clearly to people like Shultz - er, sorry old bean, we are in Europe, we're a net contributor, we want our fair share, we'll decide whether we stay or go, we control YOU, not the other way around. Random "psuedo-leaders" like you who have no real mandate over sovereign states, and you should try not to forget it.
Shultz should be reprimanded for that. I sound anti-EU now, but I'm not - the EU should work for us! Part of the issue is we have put UKIP idiots into MEP posts who are useless at effectively protecting the UK position - they are a protest party of irrlevence. We should be a leading voice in the EU, not a bunch of whinging tts. You can imagine how some MEPs might view our UKIP MEPs that same way the SNP natts are viewed in westminster - chippy nomarks with nothing constructive to say. We're not helping ourselves, but BREXIT is not the answer.
Good post. I'm leaning towards staying in, reasoning along the lines of:We should stay in to keep the FR and DE in check. Don't let the feckers loose in the EU to run riot.
That DailyFail link above does annoy me however - what the feck is the EU president think he's doing saying "UK leave if you want to". You are supposed to represent the UK as well you jumped up little twunt!
It is precisely why we should stay in - the UK needs to say clearly to people like Shultz - er, sorry old bean, we are in Europe, we're a net contributor, we want our fair share, we'll decide whether we stay or go, we control YOU, not the other way around. Random "psuedo-leaders" like you who have no real mandate over sovereign states, and you should try not to forget it.
Shultz should be reprimanded for that. I sound anti-EU now, but I'm not - the EU should work for us! Part of the issue is we have put UKIP idiots into MEP posts who are useless at effectively protecting the UK position - they are a protest party of irrlevence. We should be a leading voice in the EU, not a bunch of whinging t
ts. You can imagine how some MEPs might view our UKIP MEPs that same way the SNP natts are viewed in westminster - chippy nomarks with nothing constructive to say. We're not helping ourselves, but BREXIT is not the answer.1) at an over arching level, I think countries and peoples coming ever closer together is a good thing. I've lived in Britain my whole life, speak with our funny accent etc etc but have very mixed European roots. I feel British but I also feel European and the 2 are completely compatible for me, and by and large another country having a say in what happens here doesn't bother me that much (mostly, there are exceptions) as we get to have an effect in their affairs in the same way
2) as I posted in another thread, I think there's a very good chance that the EU itself has prevented and will prevent future conflicts between European states, given our continent's very violent history, any way to Mminimise that risk works for me
3) at a personal level, I don't seem to feel this constant malevolent presence of the EU cocking my life up that some people appear to. I like that I can go anywhere in Europe to work and live, my gf and I actively want to do that this year or next. I don't feel that there are bazillions of immigrants ruining my services, and if we can stop the freeloaders claiming (as is the current plan I believe), I'm happy with that
4) this is a very selfish one: if it did all "go wrong" and I didn't want to live in th uk anymore, it's not a problem. I can think of several countries in Europe I could/would semi or even fully retire to already (I'm 34) if we made some not particularly major lifestyle changes
5) I don't buy the land of milk and honey outside the EU argument. If the economics of it was that clear cut, there wouldn't be any need to even discuss it. So I suspect it is not clear cut at all in reality, and even if the economics in principle stack up, there are probably political considerations that could screw it all.
6) in the same vein, out protagonists are at pains to point out that when we leave its not like there's going to be massive change over night, everything will broadly carry on. I WANT there to be massive change if we leave. I want it to be big tangible in my every day life, I want to feel the improvement and know where it came from. If not, why put ourselves through it.
7) the polls say that apparently, it's generally the case that the less educated/qualified demographics (and by that extension one can generally say it's on average the less sharp people, although it's clearly not set it stone) are the ones that want to leave. Now, clearly there are going to be some smart people who want to leave as well (hopefully we have them here in PH), but if on average it's people who are less bright and prob less able to analyse the pros and cons voting to leave, doesn't that really make a strong argument that we shouldn't. If a smart person and a less smart person tell you different things, who's opinion are you going to go with?
8) I think the anti democracy argument is not very strong. People seem to confuse not being democratic with not getting the result we want. Firstly, we can remove our commissioner by voting, you just have to vote for a gov here who would replace him if they were in power. Secondly, commissioners only come up with laws, the EU parliament MEPs have to vote them through, and we can all vote for our MEPs. Finally, given that about 1/3 of people can't be arsed to vote in our GEs, it's a little rich for any of them to complain about lack of democratic accountability.
9) finally, the EU is not doing well in many ways, but frankly, it's doing okay for me. If we stay in now, we can always leave later if it becomes completely untenable. Whereas if we leave now and things don't go so well for us and we end up needing the EU, they might not let us back in or screw us over if they do (I'm thinking if that hypothetical article in the economist from a few years ago which did a "what if" scenario of Scotland leaving the UK, then tanking and asking to be let back in)
Now, after all of that, I'm not saying that I'm not pro leave in certain areas, as I am genuinely not a certain stay vote, but above generally covers my pro stay feelings. Pointing out why I might want to leave would just result in an echo chamber scenario here, so I won't.
Edited for speelung
Edited by Mario149 on Saturday 6th February 12:42
All very good points there.
I'd argue that the economic case either way is very weak - the difference it will make seems to be within the margin of error if you take all of the economists views in the round. That more or less means that in general we can ignore economics in the argument. For some people it will be an issue though; some people will benefit from being outside the EU, and some will be penalised by it.
The democratic situation is what I really take issue with. The European parliament is rubbish, let's face it. it has no powers to introduce legislation, which means that the most it can do is tell the commission it doesn't like something. And then, in the normal EU way, the commission changes the wording a bit and sends it back - making it clear that the parliament is supposed to pass this, and will eventually.
As we know, the commission has done that to countries as well, when they didn't like the results of referendums. The attitude is that the people are secondary to "the project", and I really don't want any part of that.
I'd argue that the economic case either way is very weak - the difference it will make seems to be within the margin of error if you take all of the economists views in the round. That more or less means that in general we can ignore economics in the argument. For some people it will be an issue though; some people will benefit from being outside the EU, and some will be penalised by it.
The democratic situation is what I really take issue with. The European parliament is rubbish, let's face it. it has no powers to introduce legislation, which means that the most it can do is tell the commission it doesn't like something. And then, in the normal EU way, the commission changes the wording a bit and sends it back - making it clear that the parliament is supposed to pass this, and will eventually.
As we know, the commission has done that to countries as well, when they didn't like the results of referendums. The attitude is that the people are secondary to "the project", and I really don't want any part of that.
I call "cobblers" on point 2).
Even Germany was feeling a bit less bloodthirsty after their last two attempts to rule Europe, half of us have "the bomb", and in any case the EU is largely run by Germany for the benefit of Germany. That is why we haven't had another war. Though the EU has come close to causing one with Russia, and Ukraine is in civil war as a direct result.
Even Germany was feeling a bit less bloodthirsty after their last two attempts to rule Europe, half of us have "the bomb", and in any case the EU is largely run by Germany for the benefit of Germany. That is why we haven't had another war. Though the EU has come close to causing one with Russia, and Ukraine is in civil war as a direct result.
Mario149 said:
8) I think the anti democracy argument is not very strong. People seem to confuse not being democratic with not getting the result we want. Firstly, we can remove our commissioner by voting, you just have to vote for a gov here who would replace him if they were in power. Secondly, commissioners only come up with laws, the EU parliament MEPs have to vote them through, and we can all vote for our MEPs. Finally, given that about 1/3 of people can't be added to vote in our GEs, it's a little rich for any of them to complain about lack of democratic accountability.
This is where a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Democratically elected MEPs can only vote on laws proposed by unelected Commissioners. They cannot propose new laws. MEPs can propose changes to current or new legislation but those proposals only become law if the Commissioners agree. Many of the technical decisions of new legislation are decided by unelected civil servants.It's about as democratic as Dad asking the kids whether they want to go to Butlins on holiday, having already booked it...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff