EU referendum - in or out?

[davidrj 194]

35 minutes ago, George111 said:

Iv'e no evidence but It would simply be impossible to say how many from the EU there really are here because they don't all put them selves into the system whether that's because they can't speak/wright English or modern day slaves

EU citizens have a right to live and work here, so it's muddying the waters to talk of illegal immigrants

How many of the million Britts living in Spain are able to speak or write in Spanish?

[Nordle11 564]

Yo puedo  

 

I like the idea of free movement of course, and the trade benefits that come with being part of the EU, but these things can be setup outside of us leaving the EU surely. If not it's pretty much biting off your nose to spite your face. Just because we want to leave, does not mean we cannot all work towards other beneficial trade/financial agreements within Europe.

[Mynki 23]

Worth a read...

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35751919

[Colin G. 147]

Also worth a read 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35754738

[Geordie582 18]

On 3/7/2016 at 0:03 PM, TomGoodheart said:

Oh, that's' definitely an "Out, Out, Out!" Colin!

 Seconded (and thirded, fourthed.....)

[davidrj 194]

An interesting article on sovereignty, from the IN standpoint, Here

[Rob 2,998]

I don't think many people are arguing for being totally isolationist - labour migration has always taken place. It is the control of borders that needs to be implemented. Nor indeed would trade suddenly grind to a halt if the Eu ceased to exist. During the Cold War I went behind the Iron Curtain on business. During the apartheid era I went to South Africa. The political structures of the countries was immaterial to whether we could trade or not. Goods and services were offered and paid for and everyone was happy except for the political activists. Trade with the EU would be no different.

On the question of EU laws, the past couple of decades has also shown that over legislation is alive and well in this country. In the Blair/Brown years, if there wasn't a law they would make one on principle. Thanks to them you can't even fart these days without being Gas Safe registered. Yes, regulation does come out of Brussels and yes it affects everyone, but no one is reasonably saying that the burden is overwhelming. Stupid legistlation - yes, but not overwhelming. Aside from setting rules to allow free trade, there is little or nothing that the EU does which is beneficial to its citizens. You don't have to form a cozy club to be friends.

If we did leave the EU,presumably the French would organise blockades at Calais - the bad news for them is that we already suffer that. If they have a grievance with anything in Europe, they blockade Calais. B****r the rule book, they act in a way that is traditionally French, i.e. stick two fingers up. We are accused of being selective in Europe. We are not the only ones. There are 27 in the queue behind us. As Jaggy intimated at the top of the thread, the EU is the wrong structure for what it wants to do. It is however, incapable of change because of entrenched vested interests.

Edited March 8, 2016 by Rob

[Michael-Roo 777]

1 hour ago, Rob said:

During the apartheid era I went to South Africa. The political structures of the countries was immaterial to whether we could trade or not. Goods and services were offered and paid for and everyone was happy except for the political activists. 

'Political activists'. That'd be the people working, and dying, for representation and equality then would it?

[Rob 2,998]

27 minutes ago, Michael-Roo said:

'Political activists'. That'd be the people working, and dying, for representation and equality then would it?

No, that was the people standing on the street corners in this country selling Socialist Worker newspapers and the like, or the NF holding rallies against immigrants. One of the beauties of political activists is their natural adoption of a position of intolerance for anything off message. That's why the left and right wings make such natural bedfellows. They need each other. To tolerate the other side or give room to anyone offering a contrary position to debate would risk neutering their message.

Old habits die hard. A few months ago I saw someone standing outside a mill selling some political rag. He looked exactly the same as he did in the late 70s.

In fact, to bring the thread back on topic, it is no different to those in Brussels telling politicians after a referendum question that inconveniently gave the 'wrong' result to go back to their country and keep asking the same question until they get the answer that is needed to keep the project on the move. They are no better as an example of democracy. They are able to hold the people of Europe in contempt because they are accountable to nobody. If political problems could be resolved by rationable debate we would all be better off.

Edited March 9, 2016 by Rob

[1949threepence 3,366]

Thanks for all the contributions, guys. I haven't been on for a couple of days, and was quite surprised to see so many replies. Some really helpful and useful posts from both perspectives.

It seems to me that there are two main issues which concern people the most - the first of these is the economy. How wold we be affected if we voted out? The consensus seems to be that we wouldn't be as well off as we are inside the EU.

The second issue is the very obvious one of migration. This, I know, worries many people a lot. Especially as it pertains to the hundreds of thousands of migrants who arrived in Germany last year, and who may eventually all get visas to travel here as part of the free movement of people. Would their behaviour be a cause for concern? would there be pressure on people to dress or behave modestly/sensitively in areas of high migration numbers, so as not to upset the migrants? Are there ISIS sleepers within the migrant group? What's going to happen to all the migrants backing up in Greece and Turkey, now that the rest of Europe are fencing themelves off - that's so ironic. Pre 1989 the fences sealing off Eastern Europe were to keep people in. The fences now dividing Central from Southern Europe, are to keep people out   

I don't know - I truly don't. It's almost impossible to predict. As others have said we do need migrant labour, especially seasonal migrant labour for work on farms, and I do like Cameron's idea of just accepting 20,000 migrants from the camps in Turkey, over 5 years. Many more than this and we could find ourselves in real crisis, give the already extreme shortage of accommodation. In my area, for example, even very ordinary 2 bed terraced houses in rough and ready areas, are becoming like gold dust, both to buy or rent.

So I'm still undecided, although if anything, I'm beginning to come down more on the staying in side - on balance, this may be better. 

   

     

[PWA 1967 1,840]

On 3/8/2016 at 2:05 PM, davidrj said:

EU citizens have a right to live and work here, so it's muddying the waters to talk of illegal immigrants

How many of the million Britts living in Spain are able to speak or write in Spanish?

Slightly different i think.

They paid taxes ,contributions and most are retired and dont receive a penny anymore.

 

[Mynki 23]

41 minutes ago, PWA 1967 said:

Slightly different i think.

They paid taxes ,contributions and most are retired and dont receive a penny anymore.

 

There was a good piece on radio 5 about ex pats in Spain on the radio earlier today. Many want to stay in. Their pensions are paid in pounds and leaving is very likely to reduce the value of the pound, certainly in the short term of leaving anyway. 

[DaveG38 385]

The problem with the current arguments regarding 'in' or 'out' is that they are all very short term. Cameron says there will be 'shocks' and 'uncertainty' etc. and that's probably correct. But markets and economies soon shrug off these once things settle down, so I am discounting all the short term concerns that people are considering. For me it's more about the long term. Is the EU a long term growth prospect for UK goods and services? Simple answer, no. The EU is contracting with little sign it will recover in any term; short, medium or long. Why? Because the nature of the organisation is such that it is a huge self-serving bureacracy, incapable of reacting to situations or circumstances, and with little idea how to stimulate growth and encourage expansion in member states. It also encourages hand-outs to its poorer countries, which provides little incentive for them to improve. Meanwhile the larger states pick up the bill, including the UK.

Hence, the prospect of reform in the EU is remote and the idea that the organisation will do trade deals with China, India, Brazil etc. is an impossible dream. It's taken 9 years to try to do so with Canada, so I'm not holding my breath for much progress in my lifetime with the rest of the world. In simple terms there is no incentive for the EU hierarchy to change the present situation, since that will involve the turkeys voting for Christmas, and they aren't going to do that and leave their travel perks, their cars, their big offices and budgets behind. At the same time, whatever the 'deal' with Cameron, they are still on track for their dream of a United States of Europe. That won't go away and we will never be able to stop it. 

As for returning powers to national governments, it simply won't happen. That's an anathema to the EU organisation, which will simply plough on regardless. The evidence for this is all around in the way it relentlessly pushes forward, no matter what.

Finally, the EU is fundamentally undemocratic - I have no say in what it does. I can do nothing to help remove anybody I don't want. It's an unelected dictatorship which looks after itself and not it's citizens. It's accounts have not been properly signed off from it's audits for many years, suggesting endemic corruption.

As far as I'm concerned, do away with it for the UK. The idea that we couldn't survive is simply nonsense. And the biggest reason is what the 'in' campaigners don't say. Leave aside project 'fear' and there's really nothing left that represents good reasons for remaining 'in.' I've listened to many of the arguments and it's always based on what will happen if we leave, not what will happen if we stay. For instance, if we stay what would the UK do about migration when Turkey gets membership? What threats and risks does that pose? What impact would that have on the UK culture, way of life etc. Cameron and co. can't say, or maybe won't say, but I'm under no illusions that the impact would be profound and not in a positive way.

For all these reasons, I'm for 'OUT'. I have confidence that the UK would do very well outside the straightjacket of the EU. 

 

[Rob 2,998]

Very well put.

I also think the short term upheaval will pass as once we have a definite position moving forward we can plan for our benefit. Sure there will be compromises to be made, but overall it will allow us to act in our best interests. I think that the net result of us leaving would be neutral at the worst, with the freedom to actively improve our lot putting the ball firmly in our court. With that comes responsibility, but it may be that our current political operators do not have the right mindset for independent thought.

In the event of us leaving, what would be needed is very much a centrist government that recognises the need for both fiscal prudence and social responsibility, Neither left nor right have a monopoly on common sense or the best way forward, playing as they do to their political allies. Funds are always going to be limited, so would have to be directed judiciously with both capitalist and socialist content - something that is currently anathema to the two main parties. The best move for society would be to get the economiocally inactive back to work, or in some cases into work for the first time. This would require more actively involvement at a local level, very much with a carrot and stick. My personal view is something along the lines of the coalition we had between 2010 & 2015 which necessarily tempers extreme policies. Maybe this requires a change in the electoral system. What is certain is that most people don't care as long as society is generally equitable to all who make the effort. If you put something in, nobody begrudges you getting something out.

Trade won't stop, immigration/emigration won't stop as anyone requiring a skill set not locally available will employ the services of someone who can do the job wherever they might come from. It was ever the case. Many people I worked with in the past have relocated to the US, Australia, Canada, Europe, South Africa and everywhere between. I have also worked with a number of people who have moved to the UK based on their skill. I see no change in this.

The EU is not there to serve its citizens, rather to provide a greater power base for those in charge. If it was actively pursuing a course designed to remove national sovereignty, there might be a future for it, but that would be a step too far for all those vested interests.

 

 

 

[1949threepence 3,366]

Just as an update, the latest Financial Times poll of polls gives the following result:-

Remain      46%

Leave         43%

Undecided  11% 

Link

[Gary1000 41]

They were talking about this on one of the talk stations yesterday with guests from a bunch of the Eurovision countries, they were in Sweden at the Eurovisions. There were Swiss, Swedish, Norwegian, Irish etc. No politians, just people drawn from the crowd. The general concensus seemed to be we should leave to give the EU a good kicking.

[Rob 2,998]

If we go it will be the price paid for trying to fudge the issue. The aspiration towards 'ever closer union' has a practical end point - full union. But given the EU is now 60 years old and nobody has dared to suggest full political union which is a pre-requisite for the Euro project to succeed, it ain't gonna happen.

It's the train that politicians want to travel on because of the money it dispenses to them and their pet projects, but never want it to arrive. Should the unthinkable happen and full union occur, they would have to sacrifice their power and freebies arising from national government obsolescence. The EU is essentially unreformable, pandering as it does to the egos of the political classes.

What is required is a trading block, with national sovereignty returned. If you consider the Greek situation, they are under the control of the EU commission and the IMF, with no way to trade out of their problems due to a reduced asset base. That could happen here too given the only pots left to tax are pensions and property. Ultimately, if you don't allow freedom to trade and make balance of payments a priority, every pound spent by the government taken from savings is money that can't be used to earn money, so it really does matter whether we buy goods from abroad, or source them internally.

Nobody is suggesting it would be an easy next few years, but the EU has already decided to go down a course of doing nothing. Of course every country cannot run a surplus, but the current EU structure magnifies both problems and success. That is why German goods sell abroad so well, the Euro's value being pegged back by the weaker countries. But the converse is also true, with the Euro being too strong for the weak countries to trade their way out. Every country in Europe has one hand tied behind its back.

It is also incumbent on people from this country to support their national businesses wherever possible. Cross-border trade has to occur because nobody is self-sufficient in everything. National governments can't veto imports from within the EU, but nobody can tell national citizens that they have to buy foreign goods. It's a choice that we could all make for the better given we are only going to pay people to sit on their backsides if they aren't working.

Think about it.

[jon 30]

4 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

Just as an update, the latest Financial Times poll of polls gives the following result:-

Remain      46%

Leave         43%

Undecided  11% 

The predecimal forum poll based on 16 members who have stated their views over this whole thread.

Remain 25%

Leave 44%

Undecided 31%

I have read through this thread with interest and some valid points have been put forward from the  ins and outs.

Me, I am undecided but my gut feeling is out. 

I would like to see an unbiased debate type TV programme to sway me one way or the other.

 

 

 

[Fubar 71]

DIdn't vote the first time. Away at sea and couldn't care less. Although I seem to remember that I wasn't too keen.

Now. Definitely stay and no argument will sway me from that and I can't be bothered to explain why.

Edited May 13, 2016 by Fubar

[azda 973]

I guess importing will weigh heavily on the economy if it opts out. In Germany we have various krankenkassen, which you pay into every month, much like the National insurance which helps pay for the NHS but the difference is you won't get treated without your card which tells the hospitals/doctors/dentists that you are paying into it.

In my opinion the system is failing by letting Tom Dick and Harry be treated as a tourist without appropriate insurance. Anyway, this will end up like the indy referendum in favour of the Government as big Dave doesn't want too leave, America doesn't want you too leave, i'll go with a 55%-45% for staying.....

[Rob 2,998]

Maybe if we leave and prices increase as a result of a worsening exchange rate it will curb the ridiculous levels of consumer spending. People seem to buy everything and anything only to discard it the following month. Clothes can be washed for example and aren't single use items. The obsession with having the latest fashion/gadget/colour is probably the largest contributor to our balance of payments deficit. Money is too easily come by - apparently. And if you can afford to pay your debts you can just walk away from them because the previous government decreed it is demeaning to be declared bankrupt - total crap.

Edited May 14, 2016 by Rob

[Gary D 76]

1 hour ago, Rob said:

"Clothes can be washed for example and aren't single use items."

You try telling the wife that, I could wear the same pants for days but she just won't be having it.

[Geordie582 18]

I don't think anyone has mentioned the main reason for voting OUT, as I am, is the fact that the EU is run by a bunch of UNELECTED mandarins and the MEP's have at last admitted that they can change NOTHING! If someone, somewhere has said this before - I don't apologise for saying it again.

[azda 973]

On 7. März 2016 at 3:08 PM, Nordle11 said:

Yo puedo  

 

I like the idea of free movement of course, and the trade benefits that come with being part of the EU, but these things can be setup outside of us leaving the EU surely. If not it's pretty much biting off your nose to spite your face. Just because we want to leave, does not mean we cannot all work towards other beneficial trade/financial agreements within Europe.

The benefit of free trade is only within Europe, opt out and there is no more free trade, importing/exporting will cost more and as the UK only really have a financial hub and not much manufacturing then you'll be importing more than exporting, possibly as a result of all this the £ could and probably weaken against other currencies and may likely end up in a rather large recession, the knock on effect we all know about. London will be ok though..

 

Then come the membership of NATO, the security of the U.K will become under severe pressure, just like it would have had Scotland left the Union. Be careful what you wish/vote for is all I say

Edited May 14, 2016 by azda

[Chingford 166]

I found this an interesting piece for discussion

https://www.facebook.com/leaveeuofficial/videos/946139178817657/?pnref=story