moonraker Posted 7 March, 2016 Share Posted 7 March, 2016 (edited) Smack on Wes. Ultimately, if you forget all other arguments, being in the EU means that the British people are governed by people we did not elect. Britain, the country that carried democracy to the world in the modern era, is giving its democracy up. That goes completely against the British way of live and ideals, something that has been eroded by successive governments recently in all walks of life. And lets not even get started on the shear bureaucratic corruption that infests high level European politics and bodies... Just look at both Fifa and UEFA... For that reason I am voting out regardless... But add to that the shear gibberish they are spouting under "project fear" to try and sway the public to their arguments... We are such a major economy that us leaving will cause a global recession... but we can't survive alone? Or make our own decisions? Are they fecking joking? It costs us £135m a week to be in, the NHS could be saved with that kind of money let alone with the end to health tourism? And we have a trade deficit with europe... it is not a trading or economic superpower and we would be far better off trading with the rest of the world and the commonwealth which represents a group of nations with diversified economies..... And lets not forget the thinly veiled threats of "punitive trade sanctions", holiday home taxes bla bla bla... who gives a toss? Get out, take back control of our economy, allow us to dredge rivers again, take back our fishing rights etc etc... people are brainwashed into thinking we need europe... we don't, it is the other way around completely, without us, it is just Germany and France and whole host of financially dodgy nations (simplification i know)... Anyway, the debate is irrelevant. 52% of the country voted UKIP or Tory in the last election. approximately 50% of labour supporters are pro brexit... And just look at the bi-election turn outs for UKIP that didn't manifest itself in the GE.... Add to that the fact that people are not passionately European... people simply will not turn out in their droves to vote for "Bremain" but my god they'll vote Brexit. And one final point? Who would you listen to and trust, snobby pension raiding osborne and cameron, or a combination of Boris, Ian Duncan Smith and Farage? Even Corbyn wants out of the EU and tore the "reforms" apart in PM question time before sitting down and being weak once again by saying labour supports Bremain... Far too many weak politicians with no back bone. I'll vote for democracy and to be ruled only by people that Britain elects... Not the EU. Worry about how bad the EU is for us afterwards. Way off 86 Oh dear more Brexit lies, where did you get those figures from? UKIP and the Tories had 49.5% of the vote. If we assume that kipper are 100%, 50% of Tories, 30% of labour vote out (where did you get your labour supporter figures from? Even at 50% labour support Brexit only manages 46%), LD, SNP and Plaid are 100% for remain you will get to 40.1% for out, adding another 2 -3 % for marginal ‘nationalist parties’ 44% is a fair reflection from the GE. It is for Brexit to make a positive argument to leave, something they have singularly failed to do. I think your contention ‘people simply will not turn out in their droves to vote for "Bremain" but my god they'll vote Brexit’ is complete tripe or at best wishful thinking. If as I suspect the outcome will be very close, it will be very difficult for the ‘loosing side’ to accept it, especially if the turn out is less than 75%. It is unlikely to be a once and for all decision. Finnaly bi-elections have never been an indication of a national poll. And as for voting for the people britain elects, that would be the people voted for by only 37% of the electrate and who are oposed to a fairer (more democratic) voting system. Edited 7 March, 2016 by moonraker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 7 March, 2016 Share Posted 7 March, 2016 (edited) Just look at both Fifa and UEFA... FIFA are the world governing body, nothing to do with Europe. ...52% of the country voted UKIP or Tory in the last election. Cons + UKIP got less than 50% of the votes cast, and 32.7% of the total electorate. Besides which, the Tory vote on this issue is split, your assumption is that it is not. And one final point? Who would you listen to and trust, snobby pension raiding osborne and cameron, or a combination of Boris, Ian Duncan Smith and Farage? What sort of choice is that ? Edited 7 March, 2016 by badgerx16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 7 March, 2016 Share Posted 7 March, 2016 Way off 86 Oh dear more Brexit lies, where did you get those figures from? UKIP and the Tories had 49.5% of the vote. If we assume that kipper are 100%, 50% of Tories, 30% of labour vote out (where did you get your labour supporter figures from? Even at 50% labour support Brexit only manages 46%), LD, SNP and Plaid are 100% for remain you will get to 40.1% for out, adding another 2 -3 % for marginal ‘nationalist parties’ 44% is a fair reflection from the GE. It is for Brexit to make a positive argument to leave, something they have singularly failed to do. I think your contention ‘people simply will not turn out in their droves to vote for "Bremain" but my god they'll vote Brexit’ is complete tripe or at best wishful thinking. If as I suspect the outcome will be very close, it will be very difficult for the ‘loosing side’ to accept it, especially if the turn out is less than 75%. It is unlikely to be a once and for all decision. Finnaly bi-elections have never been an indication of a national poll. And as for voting for the people britain elects, that would be the people voted for by only 37% of the electrate and who are oposed to a fairer (more democratic) voting system. Quoting percentages of MPs views is completely pointless, it's the British people who will decide, how the MPs will vote is irrelivant. Wether you are left wing or right makes little difference IMO, I'm more left leaning and I am going to vote out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 7 March, 2016 Share Posted 7 March, 2016 You've entirely missed the point. What is nonsense is companies like Ford threatening to pull out of the UK if we leave the EU, when they are perfectly happy to do it while we remain in. It is really so much hypocritical bluster. And of course, what convinced Ford to do it, is lower unit labour costs in Turkey and a very low interest loan from the EU bank. Didn't the EU grant Fords about £100m to open the new Transit factory in Turkey? Didn't the EU do the same in Poland etc so that firms would move there? So the very organisation the government want to remain in is the same organisation moving work to other countries and permitting low skilled immigrants to come here with about £3.5b being paid out by taxpayers in various benefits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 7 March, 2016 Share Posted 7 March, 2016 Didn't the EU grant Fords about £100m to open the new Transit factory in Turkey? Didn't the EU do the same in Poland etc so that firms would move there? So the very organisation the government want to remain in is the same organisation moving work to other countries and permitting low skilled immigrants to come here with about £3.5b being paid out by taxpayers in various benefits. It was a loan and not a grant, but still controversial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 7 March, 2016 Share Posted 7 March, 2016 (edited) It was a loan and not a grant, but still controversial. It was - mainly because Fords seemed to have lied / misled the Government over their plans, and probably the EU too. The UK Government gave them a £10m grant for Southampton only two weeks before the closure was announced. "The MPs questioned the awarding of a £9.3m Government grant just days before the announcement was made and a £80m (€100m) loan from the European Investment Bank (EIB) signed off for Ford Otosan's sprawling Turkish Transit plant in July, which will take over Southampton’s work. Michael Fallon, a minister from the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, said the department was told by Ford in September it would continue to produce the chassis cab variant of the Transit in Southampton in 2013, adding “we had no reason to question what they told us.” He said Ford only revealed their closure plans to the department the evening before the announcement was made to the world. Mr Fallon said he was “disappointed they chose not to engage with us until the day before the announcement.” He said the EIB loan was approved for the retooling of Ford’s Turkish plant to make the next generation of the Transit and was “not based on the cessation of production in Southampton.” http://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/news/10028714.Ford_closure__Donate_factory_site_to_city__demands_MP/ Edited 7 March, 2016 by buctootim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandwichsaint Posted 7 March, 2016 Share Posted 7 March, 2016 Smack on Wes. Ultimately, if you forget all other arguments, being in the EU means that the British people are governed by people we did not elect. Britain, the country that carried democracy to the world in the modern era, is giving its democracy up. That goes completely against the British way of live and ideals, something that has been eroded by successive governments recently in all walks of life. And lets not even get started on the shear bureaucratic corruption that infests high level European politics and bodies... Just look at both Fifa and UEFA... For that reason I am voting out regardless... But add to that the shear gibberish they are spouting under "project fear" to try and sway the public to their arguments... We are such a major economy that us leaving will cause a global recession... but we can't survive alone? Or make our own decisions? Are they fecking joking? It costs us £135m a week to be in, the NHS could be saved with that kind of money let alone with the end to health tourism? And we have a trade deficit with europe... it is not a trading or economic superpower and we would be far better off trading with the rest of the world and the commonwealth which represents a group of nations with diversified economies..... And lets not forget the thinly veiled threats of "punitive trade sanctions", holiday home taxes bla bla bla... who gives a toss? Get out, take back control of our economy, allow us to dredge rivers again, take back our fishing rights etc etc... people are brainwashed into thinking we need europe... we don't, it is the other way around completely, without us, it is just Germany and France and whole host of financially dodgy nations (simplification i know)... Anyway, the debate is irrelevant. 52% of the country voted UKIP or Tory in the last election. approximately 50% of labour supporters are pro brexit... And just look at the bi-election turn outs for UKIP that didn't manifest itself in the GE.... Add to that the fact that people are not passionately European... people simply will not turn out in their droves to vote for "Bremain" but my god they'll vote Brexit. And one final point? Who would you listen to and trust, snobby pension raiding osborne and cameron, or a combination of Boris, Ian Duncan Smith and Farage? Even Corbyn wants out of the EU and tore the "reforms" apart in PM question time before sitting down and being weak once again by saying labour supports Bremain... Far too many weak politicians with no back bone. I'll vote for democracy and to be ruled only by people that Britain elects... Not the EU. Worry about how bad the EU is for us afterwards. Nice work Glasgow. TBF your (silly) football posts have gone under the radar for the last month or two but a troll can never resist the grandstand finish....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moonraker Posted 7 March, 2016 Share Posted 7 March, 2016 Quoting percentages of MPs views is completely pointless, it's the British people who will decide, how the MPs will vote is irrelivant. Wether you are left wing or right makes little difference IMO, I'm more left leaning and I am going to vote out. Nothing to do with MPs I was quoting percentages of voters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecuk268 Posted 8 March, 2016 Share Posted 8 March, 2016 It was a loan and not a grant, but still controversial. They also gave a loan of £1bn for Crossrail for which Boris sang their praises. Talking of Boris, I see that he's performed another u-turn after it emerged that a senior GLC manager had sent an email to all staff saying that they should support Boris's views or at least not contradict them. When this was made public he denied that it was anything to do with him, even though it was issued by his Chief of Staff, and that they could say whatever they wished. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 8 March, 2016 Share Posted 8 March, 2016 They also gave a loan of £1bn for Crossrail for which Boris sang their praises. Talking of Boris, I see that he's performed another u-turn after it emerged that a senior GLC manager had sent an email to all staff saying that they should support Boris's views or at least not contradict them. When this was made public he denied that it was anything to do with him, even though it was issued by his Chief of Staff, and that they could say whatever they wished. wasnt that loan because a lot of the specifications had to be changed to meet EU standards...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moonraker Posted 8 March, 2016 Share Posted 8 March, 2016 wasnt that loan because a lot of the specifications had to be changed to meet EU standards...? Any evidence for that? when first annouced the arche eurosceptic said: The Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, said: "Our good friends at the EIB have provided us with a billion more reasons to proceed with the unstoppable force that is Crossrail. It is one of the largest loans ever secured for a transport project and I am especially pleased to have this backing for our drive to provide London with the facilities required to keep the capital one of the world's leading cities." Be funny if they called the laon in if we leave the EU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 8 March, 2016 Share Posted 8 March, 2016 Any evidence for that? when first annouced the arche eurosceptic said: The Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, said: "Our good friends at the EIB have provided us with a billion more reasons to proceed with the unstoppable force that is Crossrail. It is one of the largest loans ever secured for a transport project and I am especially pleased to have this backing for our drive to provide London with the facilities required to keep the capital one of the world's leading cities." Be funny if they called the laon in if we leave the EU. something about cross rail had to meet EU wide regulation on such projects...Boris gave one example on sunday about the size of the tunnels had to be altered (made bigger) in order to fit a German train for example. Funding was 'made available' to carry that out. chances of a french, german train going down the cross rail system? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moonraker Posted 8 March, 2016 Share Posted 8 March, 2016 something about cross rail had to meet EU wide regulation on such projects...Boris gave one example on sunday about the size of the tunnels had to be altered (made bigger) in order to fit a German train for example. Funding was 'made available' to carry that out. chances of a french, german train going down the cross rail system? So no evidence then, just putting 2 and 2 together and making 5. Creating bigger tunnels makes real sense, the whole UK rail system is devoid of double decker trains due to our small tunnels and bridges. If we could accomodate these trains we could inrcrease capacity massively. I am sure cramped commuters would welcome this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moonraker Posted 8 March, 2016 Share Posted 8 March, 2016 Just checked the tunnel size was designed to accomodate proper trains not just underground models, this allows: an increase in capcity, more comfortable seating, higher sppeds and more options for roling stock. It seem Boris has once again reinvented history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hutch Posted 8 March, 2016 Share Posted 8 March, 2016 CROSSRAIL AWARDS EUROPEAN INTEROPERABILITY RAILWAY REGULATIONS CONTRACT Crossrail has awarded a contract to ensure the new central tunnel section will be compliant with European legislation concerning the interoperability of railway operations: Crossrail will operate a high-frequency metro service of up to 24 trains per hour during the peak between Whitechapel and Paddington through new 21km tunnels under London connecting the Great Western Main Line into Paddington with the Great Eastern Main Line into Liverpool Street. The new central section connects two existing European Trans European Network routes as defined by the EU Directive on Interoperability. European legislation requires that any new railway infrastructure in the European Union, and to which the Directive applies, is constructed to common standards thereby promoting a single market by removing technical barriers to the supply of equipment and the running of trains between Member States. Crossrail will be built in accordance with the EU Directive and brought into service under the UK Railway (Interoperability) Regulations 2011. The regulations require that Crossrail’s central section is constructed and delivered in a way that complies to a series of common European technical specifications for interoperability. A Notified Body has to be appointed to verify that Crossrail is compliant with these specifications. Lloyds Register has been selected to carry out this verification assessment for Crossrail’s central section - they will scrutinise the detailed design and construction of the new railway and develop the verification evidence to certify compliance with the regulations. It's not just the tunnels, it's the trains themselves. And the type of electricity supply and switching. And the signalling. And... I'm offering no opinion on whether it's a good thing or a bad thing, just pointing out that it is an actual thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 8 March, 2016 Share Posted 8 March, 2016 something about cross rail had to meet EU wide regulation on such projects...Boris gave one example on sunday about the size of the tunnels had to be altered (made bigger) in order to fit a German train for example. Funding was 'made available' to carry that out. chances of a french, german train going down the cross rail system? The chances must be quite good, I would have thought. I don't think we build trains here any more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 8 March, 2016 Share Posted 8 March, 2016 So no evidence then, just putting 2 and 2 together and making 5. Creating bigger tunnels makes real sense, the whole UK rail system is devoid of double decker trains due to our small tunnels and bridges. If we could accomodate these trains we could inrcrease capacity massively. I am sure cramped commuters would welcome this. use google, plenty of info out there. Hutch has just done it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moonraker Posted 8 March, 2016 Share Posted 8 March, 2016 use google, plenty of info out there. Hutch has just done it Oh dear, plenty out there, try reading it. The article Hutch refers to is from 2012, there is no link to the loan. The loan was split in 2; The vital infrastructure project, which aims to reduce congestion in and around the UK capital, benefited from a GBP 1bn EIB loan in 2009 for the project’s initial tunnel construction phase. This was complemented by a further GBP 500m loan in late 2013 to help finance a fleet of high-capacity, state-of-the-art trains – the next step in the project’s development. So the original award predates the EU regs by 3 years and the second part clearly states it was to help fund high capacity trains. Its about capacity sorry it can't be twisted into another anti EU rant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hutch Posted 8 March, 2016 Share Posted 8 March, 2016 So the original award predates the EU regs by 3 years... No it didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecuk268 Posted 8 March, 2016 Share Posted 8 March, 2016 The chances must be quite good, I would have thought. I don't think we build trains here any more. Bombardier in Derby are building 65 new trains for Crossrail. Also, Hitachi in Durham are building new trains for the Great Western main line although the first evaluation models were built in Japan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bognor Posted 8 March, 2016 Share Posted 8 March, 2016 something about cross rail had to meet EU wide regulation on such projects...Boris gave one example on sunday about the size of the tunnels had to be altered (made bigger) in order to fit a German train for example. Funding was 'made available' to carry that out. chances of a french, german train going down the cross rail system? Deutsche Bahn already run their trains on our network for Rail Freight... https://www.rail.dbschenker.co.uk/rail-uk-en/ourcompany/About_DB_Cargo_UK/profile.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hutch Posted 8 March, 2016 Share Posted 8 March, 2016 Deutsche Bahn already run their trains on our network for Rail Freight... https://www.rail.dbschenker.co.uk/rail-uk-en/ourcompany/About_DB_Cargo_UK/profile.html Did you get their numbers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 8 March, 2016 Share Posted 8 March, 2016 Deutsche Bahn already run their trains on our network for Rail Freight... https://www.rail.dbschenker.co.uk/rail-uk-en/ourcompany/About_DB_Cargo_UK/profile.html British trains are a bit too narrow anyway, the seats are too cramped. We'd be better off if our trains were wider as in most of Europe / US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 8 March, 2016 Share Posted 8 March, 2016 Bombardier in Derby are building 65 new trains for Crossrail. Also, Hitachi in Durham are building new trains for the Great Western main line although the first evaluation models were built in Japan. Thanks. I thought I read that they were intending to close Derby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 8 March, 2016 Share Posted 8 March, 2016 British trains are a bit too narrow anyway, the seats are too cramped. We'd be better off if our trains were wider as in most of Europe / US. That's the penalty for being first. I really liked the Danish trains to Midtjylland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 8 March, 2016 Share Posted 8 March, 2016 That's the penalty for being first. True. The height of luxury in 1850, not so much now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoPints Posted 8 March, 2016 Share Posted 8 March, 2016 "The governor of the Bank of England has said that the possibility of Britain leaving the EU is the "biggest domestic risk to financial stability"." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35751919 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 8 March, 2016 Share Posted 8 March, 2016 "Boris Johnson says an email telling his senior staff to back him over the EU referendum has been withdrawn." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35749084 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 8 March, 2016 Share Posted 8 March, 2016 "The governor of the Bank of England has said that the possibility of Britain leaving the EU is the "biggest domestic risk to financial stability"." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35751919 That's the bloke who owes his job to George Osborne . A bloke who said on Sky news Nov 11th 2015 "Our job is to make whatever the British people decide work. And there’s a status quo, we’re making that work and we think it is working, but if things change we will do what’s necessary.” It is also worth pointing out that he also added “the majority of the legislation and regulation applying to the financial sector in the UK is determined at EU level”, and that the EU was “a key link in the chain” by which the financial crisis affected Britain. Don't forget Cameron was also prepared to leave unless he got " substantial reform " . So his tinkering with migrants benefits must have been a major economic breakthrough to bring the Govenor onto the project fear side . I'm starting to lean towards David Owens analysis that number 10 are throwing the kitchen sink into project fear so early because their private polling is spooking them . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orange Posted 8 March, 2016 Share Posted 8 March, 2016 1. You've got this the wrong way round. We are not the EU's biggest export market - not by a mile. However, 55% of what the UK earns in goods and services came from other EU member countries. This is why the Brexiters' Project Clueless is so far off-beam. While they prattle on about all the treaties they can sign to repair the damage, they ignore the politics of negotiating those treaties. The EU member-states will have the upper hand in those negotiations - and some, like Germany, will feel more able and ready to compete more aggressively, particularly with the City, for the services we export. That's not 'fear' but reality. 2. You falsely assume that those who support 'remain' do so uncritically. The EU has a democratic deficit, a political inertia when it comes to fast-moving events (like the refugee crisis and the migrant problems that have been piggy-backed onto it), and longstanding structural problems integrating such disparate economies into a single currency. However, the EU's economy is also by far the largest in the world, dwarfing China and the US. A good number of those who intend to vote remain may have changed their vote were the Brexit campaign not conducted so cretinously. The best the Brexiters can manage is their hero, Boris Johnson, waving his arms at a supposed conspiracy of remainers to silence the brave little voices of the leavers. What's needed, instead, is some hard information, some actual evidence, on what the consequences of leaving are. Brexiters prefer to wallow in their hard-done-by puddles of grief, and are severely hampered by a campaign that's led by what must be one of the worst line-ups ever: Farage, Galloway, IDS, with Agent Boris making a complete ass of himself. So in the interests of having a discussion about something with a little bit of evidential meat on it, here's an independent evaluation carried out by three economists from the London School of Economics' Centre for Economic Performance. They model an 'optimistic' impact on the UK economy (which is still damagingly negative) and a 'pessimistic' one which is frankly disastrous - an impact in the UK alone equivalent to the credit crunch, only much more long-lasting. http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/EA022.pdf To whoever made the half-witted comment earlier about how this referendum is not about jobs but about sovereignty, I very munch doubt that British employees up and down the country will think their job is worth sacrificing for any supposed 'loss' of decision-making powers in the Palace of Westminster. We have a goods trade deficit of over 8 billion with the EU. And i don't know about the rest of Europe, but we are Germany's biggest trading partner. Why would they not seek to come to an amicable trade deal in the long run? And again, where else in the world is it necessary to be in federalised political union to trade? My point is, the IN campaign seem to be unwilling to robustly defend the political institutions of Brussels, their fundamental structures, and why it's the more desirable option for us to be governed by this centralised power. As you've sort of illustrated in your post, it seems their is clearly a two dimensional plan- project fear on the economic woes of leaving, and by taking pot shots at the 'personalities of the OUT camp'. For example the IN leaflet i received seemed more intent on associating Brexit with Farage, then defending Brussels itself. And there's a huge range of very respected and experienced figures on the OUT side- so its either ignorant or cheap of you to simply paint it as a 'Johnson-Farage- Galloway' pact. And it's interesting that you deem people concerned about the sovereignty of our country to be half-witted. Voting to stay in is not a vote for the status quo. The EU is heading further and further to closer union. That is their 'solution' to their disastrous Euro Project, they've been open about it, and we will be sure to get sucked further in with them. A YES vote will just be the green light for them. So you may not care about the U.K further handing it's democratic governance to a supranational European state, but a lot of people actually do, believe it or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bognor Posted 9 March, 2016 Share Posted 9 March, 2016 Voting to stay in is not a vote for the status quo. The EU is heading further and further to closer union. That is their 'solution' to their disastrous Euro Project, they've been open about it, and we will be sure to get sucked further in with them. A YES vote will just be the green light for them. So you may not care about the U.K further handing it's democratic governance to a supranational European state, but a lot of people actually do, believe it or not. That is a very interesting point. In my moments of thinking 'in', i think about not rocking the boat and better the devil you know, which is what the 'in' camp want you to think. But the reality is,as you say, not the status quo. The EU won't stay the same. So for fence sitters like me, it's quite a difficult choice between a venture into the unknown and a venture into the unknown. Neither side can say with certainty what will happen. This is where Cameron has failed miserably. His 'reforms' are little more than ****ing in the wind. If we were to have a real say and a real veto over policy, the argument for staying in would be a lot stronger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 9 March, 2016 Share Posted 9 March, 2016 The EU and the Euro is a car crash waiting to happen. Like the Soviet Union, Third Reich, Austro Hungarian Empire, The British Empire etc from the start of time, the EU is going to collapse in due course. Eventually the Germans will reject it and it will fall apart. The Southern states like the money but are undermining it every day. We are the only really stupid country in it. All the others cherry pick what they want and ignore the inconvenient we just endorse everything. Time to get out and view the collapse from the outside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHAPEL END CHARLIE Posted 9 March, 2016 Share Posted 9 March, 2016 We have a goods trade deficit of over 8 billion with the EU. And i don't know about the rest of Europe, but we are Germany's biggest trading partner. Why would they not seek to come to an amicable trade deal in the long run? And again, where else in the world is it necessary to be in federalised political union to trade? My point is, the IN campaign seem to be unwilling to robustly defend the political institutions of Brussels, their fundamental structures, and why it's the more desirable option for us to be governed by this centralised power. As you've sort of illustrated in your post, it seems their is clearly a two dimensional plan- project fear on the economic woes of leaving, and by taking pot shots at the 'personalities of the OUT camp'. For example the IN leaflet i received seemed more intent on associating Brexit with Farage, then defending Brussels itself. And there's a huge range of very respected and experienced figures on the OUT side- so its either ignorant or cheap of you to simply paint it as a 'Johnson-Farage- Galloway' pact. And it's interesting that you deem people concerned about the sovereignty of our country to be half-witted. Voting to stay in is not a vote for the status quo. The EU is heading further and further to closer union. That is their 'solution' to their disastrous Euro Project, they've been open about it, and we will be sure to get sucked further in with them. A YES vote will just be the green light for them. So you may not care about the U.K further handing it's democratic governance to a supranational European state, but a lot of people actually do, believe it or not. Unfortunately for the Britex cause it is not a simple matter of weighing trade balances because Norwegian and Swiss experience shows that developed European states that seek to gain full tariff-free access to the vital and hugely lucrative EU Single Market must also accept the principle of the free movement of people too as this is considered by member states to be a core principle that cannot be compromised. Think of it as akin to applying to join an exclusive members club - i.e you either accept the club rules or forget it. A pretty stark ''take it or leave it'' or even ''Hobson's Choice'' situation in other words. Some facts for your information: 1 > The record shows that the UK elects to accept more immigrants from outside the EU than from within. 2 > In 2013 Norway - despite not being in the EU - accepted TWICE as many EU immigrants (per head) as the UK then did. 3 > Despite the fact that Germany (supposedly all-powerful in the EU) runs a substantial trade surplus with Switzerland the Swiss have nevertheless been informed that their recent referendum decision to curtail immigration is incompatible with their access to the EU Single Market. You talk of all the ''well respected'' politicians who support the Britex cause. Well I can only reply to that by stating that all those currently holding the ''great offices of state'' in this country, i.e. the Prime Minister, the Foreign Secretary, the Home Secretary, the Defence Secretary and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, along with the leader of Her Majesty's Opposition ALL the main party leaders (with the obvious exception of UKIP) and the majority of our MP's have concluded that our continued membership of the EU is in the national interest. Even the governor of the Bank of England seemed pretty unenthusiastic I thought yesterday, so the ''stay'' camp would seem to be rather more respectable - in that sense - than the ''leave'' side. Yes although the PM has secured a opt-out from any UK commitment to a ''ever closer union'' I do agree that our soverengthy is indeed compromised by our EU membership - to some extent at least. However, don't you think that the soverengthy of the UK would be severely compromised were England to vote to leave and the rest of the UK opted to remain perhaps? It seems to me that anyone who knows the first thing about this nation and its long history really should know that he concept of ''soverengthy'' itself is always a relative and flexible term, rather than absolute and immutable one. The world is a complicated and difficult place - we can't simply ''pull up the drawbridge'' and excuse ourselves from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 9 March, 2016 Share Posted 9 March, 2016 (edited) Voting to stay in is not a vote for the status quo. The EU is heading further and further to closer union. That is their 'solution' to their disastrous Euro Project, they've been open about it, and we will be sure to get sucked further in with them. A YES vote will just be the green light for them. So you may not care about the U.K further handing it's democratic governance to a supranational European state, but a lot of people actually do, believe it or not. The EU and the Euro is a car crash waiting to happen. Like the Soviet Union, Third Reich, Austro Hungarian Empire, The British Empire etc from the start of time, the EU is going to collapse in due course. Time to get out and view the collapse from the outside. So we we should get out because its on the road to a dominating superstate and we should get out because its weak and is going to collapse? Fundamental differences about what sort of EU members want - bigger and deeper or shallower and lighter have been simmering for years. Until recently countries like Britain, Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Denmark have been in the minority but the rise of nationalism in France and anti refugee reaction in Germany and Austria has changed that balance of power dynamic. We arent on the road to a superstate anymore, there isnt the support for it. In my view the EU will change substantially for the better in the next few years, but could instead collapse in acrimony if Britain left. Neither leaving just as the EU reforms, nor being blamed by others for its collapse is going to put Britain in a better position. Britain has a good chance of creating the kind of EU most want to see just by staying put and leading the case for change. Edited 9 March, 2016 by buctootim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 9 March, 2016 Share Posted 9 March, 2016 But we've already seen that seeking meaningful change is futile. That's what that charade was with Cameron a few weeks ago. Real change isn't going to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 9 March, 2016 Share Posted 9 March, 2016 those who say Turkey will not be part of the EU..... https://www.facebook.com/UKIP/?fref=nf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moonraker Posted 9 March, 2016 Share Posted 9 March, 2016 So we we should get out because its on the road to a dominating superstate and we should get out because its weak and is going to collapse? Fundamental differences about what sort of EU members want - bigger and deeper or shallower and lighter have been simmering for years. Until recently countries like Britain, Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Denmark have been in the minority but the rise of nationalism in France and anti refugee reaction in Germany and Austria has changed that balance of power dynamic. We arent on the road to a superstate anymore, there isnt the support for it. In my view the EU will change substantially for the better in the next few years, but could instead collapse in acrimony if Britain left. Neither leaving just as the EU reforms, nor being blamed by others for its collapse is going to put Britain in a better position. Britain has a good chance of creating the kind of EU most want to see just by staying put and leading the case for change. This, their is little public support for a European Super state in any of the 28 members. It is feasible the UK has a golden opportunity, if we remain in, to help shape and create a European Family that recognises differing cultural and political needs whilst being open and tolerant. If we leave their is no opportunity and we will be the poorer for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 9 March, 2016 Share Posted 9 March, 2016 In my view the EU will change substantially for the better in the next few years, I can't believe that will happen, it only ever goes one way. Turkeys don't vote for Christmas - the EU is in charge and it will only ever want more power and more of our money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 9 March, 2016 Share Posted 9 March, 2016 As for us influencing the EU, forget it. The bastards hate us as much as a lot of us hate their arrogance, they just need our money. The latest port rules will adversely affect British ports for the protection of state subsidised Hamburg etc. The security rules proposed after Paris for air passengers has been knocked back. Time to go. If the best that the remain brigade can do is say that the EU will collapse if we leave, I can't think of a better reason for leaving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 9 March, 2016 Share Posted 9 March, 2016 This, their is little public support for a European Super state in any of the 28 members. It is feasible the UK has a golden opportunity, if we remain in, to help shape and create a European Family that recognises differing cultural and political needs whilst being open and tolerant. If we leave their is no opportunity and we will be the poorer for it. Where is this golden opportunity that you speak of? When have we ever had the chance to get fundamental change? It simply won't ever happen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moonraker Posted 9 March, 2016 Share Posted 9 March, 2016 Where is this golden opportunity that you speak of? When have we ever had the chance to get fundamental change? It simply won't ever happen You seem as certain that the EU cannot change for the better as you are hat the UK can obtain a favourable deal on trade outside the EU. The current problems with the Euro and the refugee crises are focusing minds, both the publics and politicians, it is these issues that provide the opportunity for change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 9 March, 2016 Share Posted 9 March, 2016 You seem as certain that the EU cannot change for the better as you are hat the UK can obtain a favourable deal on trade outside the EU. The current problems with the Euro and the refugee crises are focusing minds, both the publics and politicians, it is these issues that provide the opportunity for change. Don't talk nonsense man . The Euro can only survive if the EU becomes more integrated , not less . Everybody talks about reforms , but the only reforms that ever happen are reforms that move it further away from a Trading bloc and nearer a United States . " Ever closer union" is not just an advertising slogan or a sound bite , it's the foundations of the whole project . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 9 March, 2016 Share Posted 9 March, 2016 You seem as certain that the EU cannot change for the better as you are hat the UK can obtain a favourable deal on trade outside the EU. The current problems with the Euro and the refugee crises are focusing minds, both the publics and politicians, it is these issues that provide the opportunity for change. Are they? Where is the evidence of this? The pledges to make fundamental change? Any indication at all that the EU has any desire to make these fundamental changes? As someone said earlier it would be turkeys voting for Christmas. I didn't say anything about trade deals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 10 March, 2016 Share Posted 10 March, 2016 Turkey will not be joining. There's one fact. absolute FACT? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 10 March, 2016 Share Posted 10 March, 2016 absolute FACT? Yep. Absolute Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 10 March, 2016 Share Posted 10 March, 2016 So, anyone still undecided, or just me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lets B Avenue Posted 10 March, 2016 Share Posted 10 March, 2016 So, anyone still undecided, or just me? I'm not sure. It might be just you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 10 March, 2016 Share Posted 10 March, 2016 Yep. Absolute It's not though. If turkey thought it was absolutely impossible then they wouldnt bother trying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 10 March, 2016 Share Posted 10 March, 2016 It's not though. If turkey thought it was absolutely impossible then they wouldnt bother trying. Not really, they aren't stupid. They know members fear of Turkey joining is a great way to extract concessions, like £6.5bn. Turkey is never going to join because 1. Any one of 28 countries can veto their membership 2. They dont have the necessary safeguards in place for human rights / press freedom / democracy 3. Erdogan wants to roll back secularism and democracy - he is moving away from the EU, not towards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 10 March, 2016 Share Posted 10 March, 2016 So, anyone still undecided, or just me? I'd like to be undecided. I wish there was more of choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now