The 'No to the EU' campaign Vol 2
Discussion
plasticpig said:
No sour grapes here. The problem with EEA is twofold. We would still be contributing to the EU coffers and the control of immigration. Although the EEA has an emergency brake clause where the UK could in theory limit free movement I am in no way convinced it could be used to limit immigration to 10's of thousands which is a stated government objective. The contribution formula to the EU for EEA members would mean there would be a saving from what we currently pay but nowhere near the £350m a week used by the Brexit campaign.
I agree about the figure 350m. But as I have said on many a post both sides of the campaign were s
te in my view, and i personally took no notice of Vote Leave shambles, preferring the Leave Alliance for their arguments and input. The remain arguments were mainly hysterical in my view, some of which is coming out now ( eg King, Javid ). Hence I favour the Flexcit roadmap. My reasons for voting leave had nothing to do with money nor immigration, and everything to do with the concept of being governed by a supranational unelected government, together with the direction of travel of the EU towards integration. Edited to add the growing role of globalisation in setting trade deals ( eg WTO and codex for example) and the diminishing importance of the EU in setting trade rules (they are an anachronism in my view) so having our own seat at the WTO table like Norway seems a good idea to me.
To be honest most of these arguments are futile, the die has been cast and we all just have to get on with it. Nobody knows how we will end up, but my money is on the EEA / EFTA route to kick it off.
Edited by steveatesh on Monday 27th June 19:59
Zod said:
sidicks said:
Zod said:
don't agree. The majority of Leave voters (not all here, please note, before you get upset) voted for £350m per week for the NHS and restrictions on immigration, both of which have now been discounted by various Leave campaigners. For such voters, the niceties of being in or out of the EEA or EFTA or relying on WTO rules are not a concern.
Not trueReally, nobody thought that the NHS was going to get £350m a week. That is just plain silly.
I do sometimes wonder why you write such nonsense. You must think that we are all as thick as two short planks.
Then again, the remain side tried to tell us that there would be cuts in the NHS if we left. By the end of the campaign you were reduced to claiming that we wouldn't bve spending an extra £350m a week. Have you any idea how utterly pathetic that looks?
You told us that 3.3m people would lose their jobs if we Brexited. Than turned out to be balderdash.
You told us that Britain could have no global influence outside the EU. More Nonsense. We will, as you well know, retake our seat on the WTO and keep our seat on the Security Council.
You told us that the EU had kept the peace in Europe, whereas, as we saw in the former Yugoslavia, it was NATO that kept the peace. The useless EU did nothing at all.
You weren't happy telling all those lies. You then had to heap insults on us. We were told that we were uneducated, lower class, pale and old. Zod, you seemed especially happy to peddle that nonsense. Shame on you.
When a lunatic murdered an MP, you tried to suggest that his hatred had been stoked by the Leave campaign. This really shocked me. Just how low is it possible to go?
Do you apologise for all the lies, insults and smears?
No. You just carry on as if you hadn't been beaten.
As you can probably guess, I'm a bit fed up of all the lies.
I'm fed up with the insults.
If you must carry on with the lies and insults, which I know you must, could I at least ask that we don't get any more sneering?
TIA.
essayer said:
Blue62 said:
For anyone who is interested this is a summary of a conference call my old school chum was engaged in today
Hope their employer was happy for you to divulge that! 
don4l said:
Zod said:
sidicks said:
Zod said:
don't agree. The majority of Leave voters (not all here, please note, before you get upset) voted for £350m per week for the NHS and restrictions on immigration, both of which have now been discounted by various Leave campaigners. For such voters, the niceties of being in or out of the EEA or EFTA or relying on WTO rules are not a concern.
Not trueYou told us that the EU had kept the peace in Europe, whereas, as we saw in the former Yugoslavia, it was NATO that kept the peace. The useless EU did nothing at all.
First, it's day 4 after the referendum. Who knows how meny jobs will be lost because of this. But jobs will be lost, and hardship caused.
Second, do you know any European history? Do you understand that we have been at each other's throats for the best part of 2000 years, if not more? Do you understand what a privilege it is not to have to pick up a weapon and fight for what you believe in? To be able to see your kids grow up in peace? And I don't mean the minor "wars" we have fought all over the globe since '45, but a full on European war? The European project has made peace on the continent a reality for 70 years. I, for one, hope it continues in that vain for at least another 70.
As for NATO and the Balkans, it one of the reasons the EU now wants an army, and it's a reason I agree with.
Edited by jonnyb on Monday 27th June 20:44
Blue62 said:
For anyone who is interested this is a summary of a conference call my old school chum was engaged in today with Alistair Darling, he is based in NYC and works for an Investment Bank.
Summary of his comments:
- No one on either side prepared for this and as a result there will be major uncertainty, which is the worst thing you can have
- At least with the 2008 crisis, you knew what you were dealing with and, however hard, what the medicine was
- Elections in France and Germany next year will have a part to play in how Brexit is dealt with. It is thought that France has even more eurosceptics than the UK.
- To get any deal, it is thought that the UK will have to accept freedom of movement as it is a key part of EU philosophy. However, EU may have to moderate a bit on this as this is a key issue causing the unpopularity of the EU across Europe.
- Scotland - don't expect another referendum too soon. Key issues last time were 1) unpopularity of the Euro 2) Border control with England. On op of this, Oil revenues have significantly declined.
- Labour party in Chaos
- The chance of another UK referendum is very low, unless negotiations produce a deal that the govt. can go back to the population with that is meaningfully different
- Other countries - as much as the EU is unpopular, the key difference is the Euro and few countries will contemplate having to set up a new currency. In Scotland, the Euro was not popular
- Why did people vote leave? Put simply, the UK was the only country that joined for purely trade reasons and has always been detached from the rest of Europe's philosophical thinking about integration. If people personally saw no benefit from Europe, why stay in? Many see no benefit (or believe so, whatever the reality).
BUT - we are where we are, we have two years to negotiate, and we should take as long as is needed to create the best situation possible.
That's it, for what it is worth, he went on to say they expect a 25bps cut.
I agree with most of the above. It seems fairly realistic.Summary of his comments:
- No one on either side prepared for this and as a result there will be major uncertainty, which is the worst thing you can have
- At least with the 2008 crisis, you knew what you were dealing with and, however hard, what the medicine was
- Elections in France and Germany next year will have a part to play in how Brexit is dealt with. It is thought that France has even more eurosceptics than the UK.
- To get any deal, it is thought that the UK will have to accept freedom of movement as it is a key part of EU philosophy. However, EU may have to moderate a bit on this as this is a key issue causing the unpopularity of the EU across Europe.
- Scotland - don't expect another referendum too soon. Key issues last time were 1) unpopularity of the Euro 2) Border control with England. On op of this, Oil revenues have significantly declined.
- Labour party in Chaos
- The chance of another UK referendum is very low, unless negotiations produce a deal that the govt. can go back to the population with that is meaningfully different
- Other countries - as much as the EU is unpopular, the key difference is the Euro and few countries will contemplate having to set up a new currency. In Scotland, the Euro was not popular
- Why did people vote leave? Put simply, the UK was the only country that joined for purely trade reasons and has always been detached from the rest of Europe's philosophical thinking about integration. If people personally saw no benefit from Europe, why stay in? Many see no benefit (or believe so, whatever the reality).
BUT - we are where we are, we have two years to negotiate, and we should take as long as is needed to create the best situation possible.
That's it, for what it is worth, he went on to say they expect a 25bps cut.
The bit that I disagree with is the bit that I have highlighted.
We really have to understand the strength of our negotiating position. I genuinely fear that most people are so terrified of life that they would make unnecessary concessions.
Junker is probably going to be forced to resign over his arrogant handling of Britain's renegotiation.
Earlier today, I read some of the European newspapers. I was surprised at the state of fear that we have induced. I hadn't realised how important we are.
They are absolutely bricking it. Sadly, they failed to explain their fears to Junker/Tusk 5 months ago. They were all happy to see Cameron get stuffed.
Today, they are terrified that the gravy train is going to come to a halt. The Spanish are hoping that the EU will give Greece some debt relief. I wonder who the Spanish think should be next in line for some debt relief.
jonnyb said:
2 points.
Do you understand that we have been at each other's throats for the best part of 2000 years, if not more?
Not "we". "They". Grasp that and you can understand why Britain is such an awkward fit in the EU as currently constructed. The whole enterprise is specifically constructed to protect member states from messy, inconvenient outbreaks of popular sentiment. On that level it works exactly as advertised. Ask the Greeks.Do you understand that we have been at each other's throats for the best part of 2000 years, if not more?
230TE said:
jonnyb said:
2 points.
Do you understand that we have been at each other's throats for the best part of 2000 years, if not more?
Not "we". "They". Grasp that and you can understand why Britain is such an awkward fit in the EU as currently constructed. The whole enterprise is specifically constructed to protect member states from messy, inconvenient outbreaks of popular sentiment. On that level it works exactly as advertised. Ask the Greeks.Do you understand that we have been at each other's throats for the best part of 2000 years, if not more?
Your right though, it's designed to keep the peace. Popular sentiment usually ends in violence.
jonnyb said:
2 points.
First, it's day 4 after the referendum. Who knows how meny jobs will be lost because of this. But jobs will be lost, and hardship caused.
Second, do you know any European history? Do you understand that we have been at each other's throats for the best part of 2000 years, if not more? Do you understand what a privilege it is not to have to pick up a weapon and fight for what you believe in? To be able to see your kids grow up in peace? And I don't mean the minor "wars" we have fought all over the globe since '45, but a full on European war? The European project has made peace on the continent a reality for 70 years. I, for one, hope it continues in that vain for at least another 70.
As for NATO and the Balkans, it one of the reasons the EU now wants an army, and it's a reason I agree with.
I agree about the job situation - too early to say. But what time period do you use? 1 year, 5 years, 10 years? I think in the short to medium term (now until 3 to 10 years) could be difficult, but after that we have the possibility of really benefiting economically. assuming similar trading patterns, getting "our" fish back etc.First, it's day 4 after the referendum. Who knows how meny jobs will be lost because of this. But jobs will be lost, and hardship caused.
Second, do you know any European history? Do you understand that we have been at each other's throats for the best part of 2000 years, if not more? Do you understand what a privilege it is not to have to pick up a weapon and fight for what you believe in? To be able to see your kids grow up in peace? And I don't mean the minor "wars" we have fought all over the globe since '45, but a full on European war? The European project has made peace on the continent a reality for 70 years. I, for one, hope it continues in that vain for at least another 70.
As for NATO and the Balkans, it one of the reasons the EU now wants an army, and it's a reason I agree with.
You could easily argue the combination of nuclear weapons/ the treatment of Germany after WW2 is what solved a lot of things. To simplify things; forgiving Germany a lot of debt and so letting them actually rebuild, rather than spending years and years of paying a debt they wouldn't be able to (i.e. the cause of WW2). The same Germany that didn't respect the wishes of the Greek people because "they know better" and dooming them to years and years of suffering in repaying a debt that isn't really realistic. Why do you think there is the rise of extremism - it isn't just when things are bad, BUT when they are hopeless too. That is where Greece is now due to the way the EU dealt with them.
jonnyb said:
No, we. We have been engaged in just about every European war since Boudica.
Your right though, it's designed to keep the peace. Popular sentiment usually ends in violence.
Not in this country. We had our revolution in 1688 and it ended with an improved version of democracy. We avoided the temptations of Communism and Fascism alike. We have no reason to fear our own people, or our neighbours. That is not necessarily the case for other European countries.Your right though, it's designed to keep the peace. Popular sentiment usually ends in violence.
jonnyb said:
As for NATO and the Balkans, it one of the reasons the EU now wants an army, and it's a reason I agree with.
The EU shouldnt need an army. Its member states have the cover of NATO. Unless the EU starts pushing its weight around outside the EU, which could very well end up upsetting NATO could it not?Edited by jonnyb on Monday 27th June 20:44
Funny how 5 or 6 days ago the whole "EU army" wasnt going to happen, quite a few things have suddenly gone from "made up" to in the pipeline....
The EU was intended to make war between France and Germany impossible.
If you believe it has done so - questionable IMO - you'll be happy to hear that they are both still members.
It's expansion has brought war with Russia closer, the hopeless situation of the southern states isn't good for long term stability, and the influx from the Middle East is clearly worrying some countries too.
That's not even a net draw.
If you believe it has done so - questionable IMO - you'll be happy to hear that they are both still members.
It's expansion has brought war with Russia closer, the hopeless situation of the southern states isn't good for long term stability, and the influx from the Middle East is clearly worrying some countries too.
That's not even a net draw.
grumbledoak said:
The EU was intended to make war between France and Germany impossible.
If you believe it has done so - questionable IMO - you'll be happy to hear that they are both still members.
It's expansion has brought war with Russia closer, the hopeless situation of the southern states isn't good for long term stability, and the influx from the Middle East is clearly worrying some countries too.
That's not even a net draw.
I am bored sh&tless hearing about the hopeless situation of the southern states such as greece. what's never mentioned is the EU didn't cause the problem rather, save their skinny olive asses. the finger of blame should be pointed to these lovely lovely people:If you believe it has done so - questionable IMO - you'll be happy to hear that they are both still members.
It's expansion has brought war with Russia closer, the hopeless situation of the southern states isn't good for long term stability, and the influx from the Middle East is clearly worrying some countries too.
That's not even a net draw.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/greek-d...
With these feet said:
jonnyb said:
As for NATO and the Balkans, it one of the reasons the EU now wants an army, and it's a reason I agree with.
The EU shouldnt need an army. Its member states have the cover of NATO. Unless the EU starts pushing its weight around outside the EU, which could very well end up upsetting NATO could it notEdited by jonnyb on Monday 27th June 20:44
steveatesh said:
Don't know if this has been posted but Adam Smith with a EEA/EfTA pathway, a Flexcit derivative is how Dr North calls it.
Interestingly Ken Clarke also called for this route today in the Commons.... its on the table and running by the sound of things:
http://www.adamsmith.org/evolution-not-revolution
Thanks for posting that, it's a very good read. I'm rather more enthusiastic about the "Norway" option having read it.Interestingly Ken Clarke also called for this route today in the Commons.... its on the table and running by the sound of things:
http://www.adamsmith.org/evolution-not-revolution
jonnyb said:
True, but don't then berate the EU for doing nothing in the Balkans. Personaly I think the EU should be allowed to defend its own borders with its own forces. So why not an EU army?
Just so long as I don't have to be a part of it they can fill their boots. I'd advise against it, but just so long as I'm not party to it, that's fine.Einion Yrth said:
jonnyb said:
No, we. We have been engaged in just about every European war since Boudica.
Boudicca was forced into a guerilla insurgency by foreign invaders. Her husband was murdered and she and her daughters were raped.I think she had more than adequate cause, quite frankly.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff