The 'No to the EU' campaign Vol 2
Discussion
John145 said:
///ajd said:
FiF said:
And of course that question includes the criteria of "leaves the single market" which as often mentioned rigs the table in the direction of getting the answer you want. Thus it's not as meaningful and killer argument that people think it is. Sorry.
Right.....So we're definately staying in the single market are we?
This is NOT what the official leave campaign is saying at all - nor will it change the four freedoms in any way.
So, no change to immigration, in the single market, less influence but maybe pay a bit less. That's Norway.
Its either that or you are proposing some cake and eat it Norway option, for free, with no immigration, cos we're Great Britain. The Davies QT flag waving rule britannia proposal.
No one would design a new car and say OK we're making a new car, it's going to be a Vauxhall Corsa.
It's stupid and insulting to the electorate for the remain side to accept that the conversation is more complicated than simply who will you copy.
It is not just a matter of copying, but really understanding why e.g. norway and switzerland have the deals they do.
Switzerland would like to move away from the freedoms but they can't. Would the EU block us the same way as them? Of course they would.
It is stupid and insulting to sweep away these issues and promise cake and eat it brexit outcomes that will not happen.
And then the ultimate flag waving appeal - of course we can we're GB!! Whilst forgetting that most of the leave campaign is about what little influence poor downtrodden GB has in the EU. Which is it? Stupid and insulting - indeed it is!
Edited by ///ajd on Sunday 29th May 10:13
///ajd said:
FiF said:
And of course that question includes the criteria of "leaves the single market" which as often mentioned rigs the table in the direction of getting the answer you want. Thus it's not as meaningful and killer argument that people think it is. Sorry.
Right.....So we're definately staying in the single market are we?
This is NOT what the official leave campaign is saying at all - nor will it change the four freedoms in any way.
So, no change to immigration, in the single market, less influence but maybe pay a bit less. That's Norway.
Its either that or you are proposing some cake and eat it Norway option, for free, with no immigration, cos we're Great Britain. The Davies QT flag waving rule britannia proposal.
FiF said:
///ajd said:
FiF said:
And of course that question includes the criteria of "leaves the single market" which as often mentioned rigs the table in the direction of getting the answer you want. Thus it's not as meaningful and killer argument that people think it is. Sorry.
Right.....So we're definately staying in the single market are we?
This is NOT what the official leave campaign is saying at all - nor will it change the four freedoms in any way.
So, no change to immigration, in the single market, less influence but maybe pay a bit less. That's Norway.
Its either that or you are proposing some cake and eat it Norway option, for free, with no immigration, cos we're Great Britain. The Davies QT flag waving rule britannia proposal.
It's called attrition looping and it's easy to be drawn in.
///ajd said:
Ah, stupid and insulting?
It is not just a matter of copying, but really understanding why e.g. norway and switzerland have the deals they do.
Switzerland would like to move away from the freedoms but they can't. Would the EU block us the same way as them? Of course they would.
It is stupid and insulting to sweep away these issues and promise cake and eat it brexit outcomes that will not happen.
And then the ultimate flag waving appeal - of course we can we're GB!! Whilst forgetting that most of the leave campaign is about what little influence poor downtrodden GB has in the EU. Which is it? Stupid and insulting - indeed it is!
Bull - the remain camp want to dumb it down to who will we be like? It is not just a matter of copying, but really understanding why e.g. norway and switzerland have the deals they do.
Switzerland would like to move away from the freedoms but they can't. Would the EU block us the same way as them? Of course they would.
It is stupid and insulting to sweep away these issues and promise cake and eat it brexit outcomes that will not happen.
And then the ultimate flag waving appeal - of course we can we're GB!! Whilst forgetting that most of the leave campaign is about what little influence poor downtrodden GB has in the EU. Which is it? Stupid and insulting - indeed it is!
Edited by ///ajd on Sunday 29th May 10:13
The simple fact is we will be unique. We will be Great Britain and our relationship with the world will be the making of our elected government, not what is handed down to us from unelected bureaucrats.
It is not the leave campaign's decision. The government should provide 2 options and what we are voting for. Just as a general election they should present 2 manifestos of what leave and remain really mean.
All we've heard is its a leap into the dark (because we are too lazy to propose an alternative so you the electorate can make an informed decision).
It's weak biased and pitiful.
The leave campaign has identified the failings and the risks but also they opportunities. It's for our government to decide which opportunities it would pursue.
The remain campaign has truly forgotten what democracy is - this referendum is evidence to that.
confused_buyer said:
zygalski said:
But it does show a wide consensus regarding the economic implications of Brexit among economists.
I put more faith in them in judging the economic costs/benefits than the man in the pub.
The problem is that on the two huge economic decisions we have had to make as a nation in the last 30 years with regard to Europe the man in the pub turned out to be right and the economists wrong. I put more faith in them in judging the economic costs/benefits than the man in the pub.
FiF said:
///ajd said:
FiF said:
And of course that question includes the criteria of "leaves the single market" which as often mentioned rigs the table in the direction of getting the answer you want. Thus it's not as meaningful and killer argument that people think it is. Sorry.
Right.....So we're definately staying in the single market are we?
This is NOT what the official leave campaign is saying at all - nor will it change the four freedoms in any way.
So, no change to immigration, in the single market, less influence but maybe pay a bit less. That's Norway.
Its either that or you are proposing some cake and eat it Norway option, for free, with no immigration, cos we're Great Britain. The Davies QT flag waving rule britannia proposal.
i realise now why the official campaigns didn't want to touch it. it develops a too detailed understanding in the reader as to how difficult some of the issues are!
flexcit is cake and eat it.
it is amusing to see the attacks on remain due to the lamentable lack of a robust plan on the brexit side. i've even heard brexiters complaining that cameron doesn't have a good plan for brexit - no s
t sherlock, there isn't one!zygalski said:
But it does show a wide consensus regarding the economic implications of Brexit among economists.
I put more faith in them in judging the economic costs/benefits than the man in the pub.
So we've found the 'price' for relinquishing control of our country then; the mere threat of some economic turbulence is enough. By voting to stay in we're agreeing to continue ceding control of our country to faceless bureaucrats in Brussels.I put more faith in them in judging the economic costs/benefits than the man in the pub.
Our trade with the EU is declining, we're probably more important to them than the other way around. They're also petrified of contagion and other countries seeing us go. For that reason I have no doubt they will do everything they can to make it hard for us, despite the fact we're also a huge importer from them. Should we stay in because of such threats? No.
We would also be free to grow our trade with the rest of the world and this could more than offset the comparatively small trade we do with other EU countries or losses from exiting.
The EU is about power at all costs. It will do or say whatever it has to to retain that power and control.
FiF said:
You know what I'm proposing, don't intend to say it again for your deaf ears. It's been posted and linked often enough, even recently as yesterday, for even someone as blinkered as you to understand what is being proposed. If you want to argue about what Vote Leave waffle on about, then please argue with them not me nor the Leave Alliance.
So you keep on saying that me and ajd are blinkered because we disagree with you-but then say that we should ignore the plans from the official leave campaign and instead focus on the one you think is best? Funk said:
zygalski said:
But it does show a wide consensus regarding the economic implications of Brexit among economists.
I put more faith in them in judging the economic costs/benefits than the man in the pub.
So we've found the 'price' for relinquishing control of our country then; the mere threat of some economic turbulence is enough. By voting to stay in we're agreeing to continue ceding control of our country to faceless bureaucrats in Brussels.I put more faith in them in judging the economic costs/benefits than the man in the pub.
Our trade with the EU is declining, we're probably more important to them than the other way around. They're also petrified of contagion and other countries seeing us go. For that reason I have no doubt they will do everything they can to make it hard for us, despite the fact we're also a huge importer from them. Should we stay in because of such threats? No.
We would also be free to grow our trade with the rest of the world and this could more than offset the comparatively small trade we do with other EU countries or losses from exiting.
The EU is about power at all costs. It will do or say whatever it has to to retain that power and control.
Proud to be English.
Proud to VOTE REMAIN
So CMD has so far achieved no reforms, there has been no treaty change, the idea of voting to remain in a reformed eu, which is the question in the referendum is a lie.
Until there is treaty change, it will remain a lie.
A vote to remain is one where you accept you don't want control of yours or your family's destinies. One where you trust unequivocally unelected bureaucrats in Brussels, one where the value of your taxes is continually diminished to support struggling and failing economies with no improvement within our lifetimes realistic.
Madness.
Until there is treaty change, it will remain a lie.
A vote to remain is one where you accept you don't want control of yours or your family's destinies. One where you trust unequivocally unelected bureaucrats in Brussels, one where the value of your taxes is continually diminished to support struggling and failing economies with no improvement within our lifetimes realistic.
Madness.
John145 said:
So CMD has so far achieved no reforms, there has been no treaty change, the idea of voting to remain in a reformed eu, which is the question in the referendum is a lie.
Until there is treaty change, it will remain a lie.
A vote to remain is one where you accept you don't want control of yours or your family's destinies. One where you trust unequivocally unelected bureaucrats in Brussels, one where the value of your taxes is continually diminished to support struggling and failing economies with no improvement within our lifetimes realistic.
Madness.
Oh please... exaggeration and hyperbole doesn't help the Leave cause.Until there is treaty change, it will remain a lie.
A vote to remain is one where you accept you don't want control of yours or your family's destinies. One where you trust unequivocally unelected bureaucrats in Brussels, one where the value of your taxes is continually diminished to support struggling and failing economies with no improvement within our lifetimes realistic.
Madness.
I asked a question on the previous volume about which EU laws people most wanted to rescind, and the most significant answers was alternate weekly bin collections, the power of vacuum cleaners, the size of the element in the kettle, and some computer equipment recycling rules. Hardly life or death.
So,the well being of my family for one is perfectly fine if we stay in the EU.
EddieSteadyGo said:
John145 said:
So CMD has so far achieved no reforms, there has been no treaty change, the idea of voting to remain in a reformed eu, which is the question in the referendum is a lie.
Until there is treaty change, it will remain a lie.
A vote to remain is one where you accept you don't want control of yours or your family's destinies. One where you trust unequivocally unelected bureaucrats in Brussels, one where the value of your taxes is continually diminished to support struggling and failing economies with no improvement within our lifetimes realistic.
Madness.
Oh please... exaggeration and hyperbole doesn't help the Leave cause.Until there is treaty change, it will remain a lie.
A vote to remain is one where you accept you don't want control of yours or your family's destinies. One where you trust unequivocally unelected bureaucrats in Brussels, one where the value of your taxes is continually diminished to support struggling and failing economies with no improvement within our lifetimes realistic.
Madness.
I asked a question on the previous volume about which EU laws people most wanted to rescind, and the most significant answers was alternate weekly bin collections, the power of vacuum cleaners, the size of the element in the kettle, and some computer equipment recycling rules. Hardly life or death.
So,the well being of my family for one is perfectly fine if we stay in the EU.
Let's ignore the effect of uncontrolled immigration on our poorer populations.
Let's ignore the amount of money we give away. It is 350m a week. Yes we get some in a rebate, but as soon as it leaves the GB's bank account we have no control of how much will come back or where to. Do we know what rebate we will get next year? In 3 years? 10 years? No, no and no.
When is the next time the eu will demand £2 billion? We don't know.
There is no exaggeration, without treaty change CMDs reforms have not been met, we are being fed a lie.
When your children get old enough to need a job to support their studies their competition will not be limited to local availability but (by that time) an Eu community where anyone can take it. Where our minimum wage is seen as attractive. Where our in work benefits are unimaginable.
Imagine your 18 year old son/daughter going for their first weekend job. It's minimum wage as there is no incentive for employers to pay more. Their competition is agency staff with years of experience willing to do the same job for the same money. This isn't make believe fear for a potential future. This is what happens today across the country and it will only get worse if we remain.
I believe a strong, happy country has a low wealth disparity, this is in in unachievable within the eu.
Edited by John145 on Sunday 29th May 12:26
Edited by John145 on Sunday 29th May 12:31
John145 said:
EddieSteadyGo said:
John145 said:
So CMD has so far achieved no reforms, there has been no treaty change, the idea of voting to remain in a reformed eu, which is the question in the referendum is a lie.
Until there is treaty change, it will remain a lie.
A vote to remain is one where you accept you don't want control of yours or your family's destinies. One where you trust unequivocally unelected bureaucrats in Brussels, one where the value of your taxes is continually diminished to support struggling and failing economies with no improvement within our lifetimes realistic.
Madness.
Oh please... exaggeration and hyperbole doesn't help the Leave cause.Until there is treaty change, it will remain a lie.
A vote to remain is one where you accept you don't want control of yours or your family's destinies. One where you trust unequivocally unelected bureaucrats in Brussels, one where the value of your taxes is continually diminished to support struggling and failing economies with no improvement within our lifetimes realistic.
Madness.
I asked a question on the previous volume about which EU laws people most wanted to rescind, and the most significant answers was alternate weekly bin collections, the power of vacuum cleaners, the size of the element in the kettle, and some computer equipment recycling rules. Hardly life or death.
So,the well being of my family for one is perfectly fine if we stay in the EU.
Let's ignore the effect of uncontrolled immigration on our poorer populations.
Let's ignore the amount of money we give away. It is 350m a week. Yes we get some in a rebate, but as soon as it leaves the GB's bank account we have no control of how much will come back or where to. Do we know what rebate we will get next year? In 3 years? 10 years? No, no and no.
When is the next time the eu will demand £2 billion? We don't know.
There is no exaggeration, without treaty change CMDs reforms have not been met, we are being fed a lie.
) PHer would have liked.Anyway, regardless of the recent past, the UK is doing rather well on the economic front & has been for the last few years. The UK is also a member of the EU.
QED
John145 said:
EddieSteadyGo said:
John145 said:
So CMD has so far achieved no reforms, there has been no treaty change, the idea of voting to remain in a reformed eu, which is the question in the referendum is a lie.
Until there is treaty change, it will remain a lie.
A vote to remain is one where you accept you don't want control of yours or your family's destinies. One where you trust unequivocally unelected bureaucrats in Brussels, one where the value of your taxes is continually diminished to support struggling and failing economies with no improvement within our lifetimes realistic.
Madness.
Oh please... exaggeration and hyperbole doesn't help the Leave cause.Until there is treaty change, it will remain a lie.
A vote to remain is one where you accept you don't want control of yours or your family's destinies. One where you trust unequivocally unelected bureaucrats in Brussels, one where the value of your taxes is continually diminished to support struggling and failing economies with no improvement within our lifetimes realistic.
Madness.
I asked a question on the previous volume about which EU laws people most wanted to rescind, and the most significant answers was alternate weekly bin collections, the power of vacuum cleaners, the size of the element in the kettle, and some computer equipment recycling rules. Hardly life or death.
So,the well being of my family for one is perfectly fine if we stay in the EU.
Let's ignore the effect of uncontrolled immigration on our poorer populations.
Let's ignore the amount of money we give away. It is 350m a week. Yes we get some in a rebate, but as soon as it leaves the GB's bank account we have no control of how much will come back or where to. Do we know what rebate we will get next year? In 3 years? 10 years? No, no and no.
When is the next time the eu will demand £2 billion? We don't know.
There is no exaggeration, without treaty change CMDs reforms have not been met, we are being fed a lie.
It isn't £350m we contribute - it is £250m. The money we contribute is more than offset by the benefits of being in the single market. Hence why pretty much every economists thinks are we better off financially staying in.
The government have announced increased to the minimum wage and in fact a living wage. This helps protects people from in-work poverty.
The fishing industry I don't know much about but I seem to recall much of the effect is down to conservation of fishing stocks that otherwise would have continued to dwindle having been decimated by years of over fishing.
And the level of EU migration is simply down to the growth and success of the economy. The EU migrants come here as they want to work. If you don't want EU migration the answer is simple - don't have policies which encourage economic growth and which creates jobs.
zygalski said:
The economy has bounced back rather quicker than most predicted from having Labour in power from 1997-2010. We don't seem to be in the ruinous state that many on here seem to think we would be. As a Labour supporter I have to apologise for our former government not damaging the UK economy anything like as badly as many a patriotic PHer would have liked.
Anyway, regardless of the recent past, the UK is doing rather well on the economic front & has been for the last few years. The UK is also a member of the EU.
QED
Imagine how much better we would be doing if we could maximise the value of immigration. If we had free trade with India and China and Brazil. Imagine how much better we would be doing if we could set our own vat rates.Anyway, regardless of the recent past, the UK is doing rather well on the economic front & has been for the last few years. The UK is also a member of the EU.
QED
A conservative government, business focused, would thrive in our global economy. Being in fortress Europe, it's genuinely surprising how well we've done as a nation. But - this performance is not felt by the whole population, the richer you are the more you notice it.
EddieSteadyGo said:
You are rehashing old arguements here.
It isn't £350m we contribute - it is £250m. The money we contribute is more than offset by the benefits of being in the single market. Hence why pretty much every economists thinks are we better off financially staying in.
The government have announced increased to the minimum wage and in fact a living wage. This helps protects people from in-work poverty.
The fishing industry I don't know much about but I seem to recall much of the effect is down to conservation of fishing stocks that otherwise would have continued to dwindle having been decimated by years of over fishing.
And the level of EU migration is simply down to the growth and success of the economy. The EU migrants come here as they want to work. If you don't want EU migration the answer is simple - don't have policies which encourage economic growth and which creates jobs.
Ponzi scheme. It isn't £350m we contribute - it is £250m. The money we contribute is more than offset by the benefits of being in the single market. Hence why pretty much every economists thinks are we better off financially staying in.
The government have announced increased to the minimum wage and in fact a living wage. This helps protects people from in-work poverty.
The fishing industry I don't know much about but I seem to recall much of the effect is down to conservation of fishing stocks that otherwise would have continued to dwindle having been decimated by years of over fishing.
And the level of EU migration is simply down to the growth and success of the economy. The EU migrants come here as they want to work. If you don't want EU migration the answer is simple - don't have policies which encourage economic growth and which creates jobs.
The remain letter stating for every £1 we put in we get £10 back - utter b
ks.Why don't we put more money in then? £50 and get £500? 5 billion a week and get 50 billion back? With these economic arguments the magic money tree will be well and truly stripped bare.
So wi the increase in minimum help or hinder the uncontrolled immigration?
Why are remainders so dismissive/contemptuous of Norway? Here's one example of where Norway has 28 times the influence of the UK - and in an area dear to PH. The UNECE is the international body which, amongst many other things, sets standards for automobiles. Norway has a seat on the
UNECE, with a corresponding vote. The EU also has a seat. Just one seat despite at least five of its members having significant auto manufacturing interests. Can someone remind me of all those Norwegian marques ?
UNECE, with a corresponding vote. The EU also has a seat. Just one seat despite at least five of its members having significant auto manufacturing interests. Can someone remind me of all those Norwegian marques ?
cookie118 said:
Funk said:
We would also be free to grow our trade with the rest of the world and this could more than offset the comparatively small trade we do with other EU countries or losses from exiting.
So 40-50% (depending on measure) of our total trade is 'comparatively small'?By being outside of the EU we could be better off and able to trade more freely on a global basis rather than being constrained by poor EU-negotiated trade deals. The opportunities of the global market are far greater than any intra-EU opportunities, not to mention that the EU economy is also stagnant.
I take these with a pinch of salt and am more than open to hearing them refuted but the figures touted by the Brexit movie show that Switzerland has £29tn of trade deals globally, Singapore has £35tn, South Korea has £45tn and Chile has £50tn. Comparatively the EU has just £5tn in trade agreements and even counting intra-EU trade as 'trade deals' it only reaches ~£18tn.
If it's true then the EU is spectacularly bad at negotiating trade deals on behalf of its members... And that's if we even need official trade deals at all..?
John145 said:
EddieSteadyGo said:
You are rehashing old arguements here.
It isn't £350m we contribute - it is £250m. The money we contribute is more than offset by the benefits of being in the single market. Hence why pretty much every economists thinks are we better off financially staying in.
The government have announced increased to the minimum wage and in fact a living wage. This helps protects people from in-work poverty.
The fishing industry I don't know much about but I seem to recall much of the effect is down to conservation of fishing stocks that otherwise would have continued to dwindle having been decimated by years of over fishing.
And the level of EU migration is simply down to the growth and success of the economy. The EU migrants come here as they want to work. If you don't want EU migration the answer is simple - don't have policies which encourage economic growth and which creates jobs.
Ponzi scheme. It isn't £350m we contribute - it is £250m. The money we contribute is more than offset by the benefits of being in the single market. Hence why pretty much every economists thinks are we better off financially staying in.
The government have announced increased to the minimum wage and in fact a living wage. This helps protects people from in-work poverty.
The fishing industry I don't know much about but I seem to recall much of the effect is down to conservation of fishing stocks that otherwise would have continued to dwindle having been decimated by years of over fishing.
And the level of EU migration is simply down to the growth and success of the economy. The EU migrants come here as they want to work. If you don't want EU migration the answer is simple - don't have policies which encourage economic growth and which creates jobs.
The remain letter stating for every £1 we put in we get £10 back - utter b
ks.Why don't we put more money in then? £50 and get £500? 5 billion a week and get 50 billion back? With these economic arguments the magic money tree will be well and truly stripped bare.
So wi the increase in minimum help or hinder the uncontrolled immigration?
The benefits we get are related to the increase growth from trade by being part of the largest single market of 500m people. This has a positive effect on our economy.
The £250m is our contribution, like a membership fee, to gain the benefits from being in the club.
If the membership fee is increased or reduced, it wouldn't affect broadly the economic benefits we gain.
But the fact remains that we gain from trade more than the costs of membership. Hence as I mentioned it is one reason why pretty much all independent parties agree that from a financial perspective we are better off in.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff