| The Comments |
Thanks for that Ads.Just had a look and will go back.
Someone mentioned D Davis which made me look him up again. I posted comment from I Botham this am as a typical Brexiter speaking. If someone wants to know nearly the whole Brexit case then they could do worse than look at D Davis's speech to the Institute of Engineers.
0
Like
|
I believe some Brexit supporters in the media have genuine misguided beliefs the UK would be better off outside the EU. However many, especially politicians have an eye for the main chance to further their careers. they are gambling DC will be forced out after a Brexit vote. It is difficult to see how he could continue. The country would face political turmoil and Scotland will demand another separation vote.
I'm sure the government has contingency plans for 'after the event' but the best laid plans can easily come off the rails. I have made my own. All expats living in Europe should do the same.
That said I believe the British people will make the right decision and vote to remain in Europe. Anything else is risking too much.
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
1
Like
|
That is another unfair problem - a true ex-pat cannot vote in the coming referendum and, yet, the true ex-pat has a better understanding of what being in the EU really means, even though it would, mainly, be for self satisfaction reasons.
It does not take a genius to know the awful outcomes by coming out of the EU Club, it only takes ignorance by not stayng in!! I seem to remember arguements being put for not entering the Euro monetry system - ´We do not want to lose our Queen´s head from the currency´!!
0
Like
|
How does anyone know what it will be like if the UK leaves, the same people didn't have a clue or the foresight what would happen when the UK joined and it all changed from one thing to the other?
Who knows how the UK would have faired had it not joined, for all anyone knows it could have done just as well back then, as some are saying it is now, progress goes on, like it or not. The UK would have moved into the twenty-first century come what may.
The latest talk is if we leave it will cost everyone £4,000+ a year, maybe a lot cheaper then what it costs us all now anyway for all we know.
The current government is not exactly making a great job in what it's doing now, yet knows we will all be better of if we stay in....Well for sure most of them will be when they finally leave power.
0
Like
|
I've only been half following this debate, mainly as I don't see it as important as the protagonists would have us believe. But I also don't believe the Scotland's independence is a major issue either, so what do I know? - probably about the same as everyone else - we are all guessing.
It seems to me that if you're more public sector and the sort of person like a "safe" choice you opt to stay in the EU, if you're more of an entrepreneur you support the exit.
There does seem to be an extraordinary gravy train in the EU, with obscene levels of wastage and bureaucracy which is funded by the UK which is why I'm probably moving towards voting to leave - I don't believe Cameron's negotiations will make a hap'oth of difference, you cannot change the culture that easily.
But it seems an unfair fight. All the money and resources seems to be with the "stay in" camp, also and the "exiters" appear to be leaderless, which might explain why they are on the back foot all the time. But whilst they are fragmented most of the better speakers seem to back the leave campaign. They seem to have more to say rather than the repetition of the scare tactics of the others, which to me, seem a bit irrational in the longer term.
_______________________
Don't argue with an idiot, he will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
1
Like
|
a true ex-pat cannot vote in the coming referendum
Ex-pats can vote up to 15yrs after being registered to vote in the UK. Some would say this is generous.
However I would support the case that says ex-pats have a stronger case to vote than recent arrivals in the UK.
I would be happy to see the period for ex-Pat voting extended to 25yrs provided that new arrivals to the UK were unable to vote until they had been there 25yrs.
0
Like
|
The point is, we do know what it is like being in the EU and those that want to remain in want to retain the that status. Those that want out certainly would be stepping into the unknown (though, for sure, the UK would lose exemption from the tariffs imposed on non-EU countries unless, of course, the UK joined EFTA, then having to following the rules without the chance of making or, even, influencing the rules).
Of course, the EU is not perfect, but it has got clout in a world of survival of the fittest. The UK of Victorian times no longer exists and will never, ever, do so again!! Leaving the EU will be the first step to becoming a new third-world country! No one will listen to the UK (if it still exists with the possibility of Scotland and Northern Ireland leaving the Union) and none of the UK´s former colonies will shed a tear over that!!
On the assumption that the ´outers´ might have a point (which they do not), then it would always be possible, in the long run, to have a referendum, several years in the future, to then consider in or out - but not now!!
1
Like
|
I've only been half following this debate, mainly as I don't see it as important as the protagonists would have us believe.
Not important acer!!?
Britain requires access to open markets to sell its goods and services in Europe and the rest of the world. Europe is a larger market than the USA and the largest trading block on the planet. Britain cannot survive economically without free trade. Even if it votes for Brexit the country will still have to remain in Europe in some form or another. Britain is part of Europe, geographically and culturally, like it or not.
Prior to membership tariff barriers existed between EU states and states not signed up to EU treaty agreements. Therefore trade and exports were limited and imports expensive. Capital and investment did not flow into Britain in the substantial way it does today. Free movement of a skilled labour pool from the EU has driven down the cost of employment for companies allowing them to invest in machinery and plant. Employment rights have changed, job protection and working conditions improved substantially because of EU agreements.
Britain has benefited enormously from EU membership. Compared to the few negatives it is a win, win situation for the nation. That means more government income, more schools, hospitals and a higher standard of living for it's people. Not important eh?
Voting to turn the nations back on all that for some vague leap in the dark fantasy, dreamed up by a bunch of failed or backward politicians such as UKIP is nothing short of either madness or plain ignorance.
This message was last edited by Mickyfinn on 18/04/2016.
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
2
Like
|
You could be right Mickyfinn, perhaps that was a bit too flippant. But I certainly do believe that any change will take a while to materialise - nothing will happen overnight.
You say "Britain has benefited enormously from EU membership" - in what way?
You say we receive "more government income, more schools, hospitals and a higher standard of living for it's people" - but we pay massively more into the EU coffers that we get back!!! If we hadn't made all these payments we would be considerably better off. So where is your logic?
You say "Employment rights have changed, job protection and working conditions improved substantially because of EU agreements". Some of these would have happened anyway and as a generalism I prefer jurisdiction to remain with UK courts. Too frequently laws from Brussels don't suit the different needs of the member states.
You use the "leap in the dark" cliche, which is becoming a trade mark of pro EU folk. But there is something to be said for being unshackled from EU red tape.
It probably boils down to the kind of Britain you want to see in the future and increasingly I see Brussels as a farce. The EU countries include many losers who will forever expect charity to support their crumbling regimes. Just look around in Spain at the volume of motorways, and other infrastructure built with EU money.
It's now like a giant protection racket - unless you "cough up" and continue to make your payments, they will make it difficult for you to trade!
_______________________
Don't argue with an idiot, he will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
0
Like
|
The logic is that the figure being bandied about of £350 million a week does not take account of the rebate, direct grants and funding that comes back to the UK eg for farmers, regional development, especially in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland etc. The UK is the 2nd biggest contributor to the EU budget in terms of amount, but when the relative size of the population is concerned the UK is 8th, behind Holland and ultimately Germany, by far the biggest net payer.
_______________________
Scollins
1
Like
|
EU spending by country
Where does the EU money go in your country?
United Kingdom:6,984.7 M€
- 56.6%Agriculture
-
24.7%Regional policy (cohesion and structural funds)
-
14.7%Research and development
-
2.0%Citizenship, freedom, security and justice
-
0,0%Actions and programmes outside the EU1
-
2,1%Administration
In 2014 the UK received €6.98 billion in EU funding. Of this, €3.95 billion, or 57%, went on farm spending, which is above the EU average of 42%. Regional policy accounted for €1.72 billion (25%), well below the EU average of 42%. Research and development accounted for €1.02 billion (15%), more than double the EU average of 7%.
Source:http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/news-room/20141202IFG82334/EU-budget-explained-expenditure-and-contribution-by-member-state
I think if you believe in a Britain as a country in isolation to Europe you are likely to believe in Brexit. However a shift in horizons a little and see Europe as a geographical entity you may form a different view. A small portion of Britain's contributions go to help make Europe a better place for everyone. Is that not a great aspiration? Isolationisim is a route to nowhere. Pulling up the drawbridge and turning the nations back on the continent will not help Britain one jot.
The USA tried that for many years in the thirties. Germany and Japan then saw an opportunity to exploit it for their own purpose.
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
2
Like
|
EU contribution per country
How much does your country contribute to the EU budget?
United Kingdom:11,341.6 M€
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
0
Like
|
|
This thread is following the national trend with folk throwing figures at each other which are not at all easy to digest. For me a big part of the problem is that these are distorted by the two factions.
I had a look at the BBC website, hoping this would be more impartial. On the major issue, who pays what into the EU budget, the net figures are shown as:
Largest contributors € billions
Germany 6.25
UK 3.5
Netherlands 2.5
France 2.0
Largest receivers € billions
Greece 5.5
Poland 5.25
Spain 4.25
This is the net position relating to 2007 and further confused by rebates but represents the direct financial payments minus direct financial benefit.
The report makes the point that the above figures for Netherlands are distorted due to the volume of goods which passes through their country.
I had not realised how much Germany were paying, without hardly a murmur. But is it right that we pay double the French? And how come the Poles are receiving so much? For sure the UK is paying a lot to belong to this club and for me there is no doubt that the value of membership should be questioned.
This message was last edited by acer on 19/04/2016.
_______________________
Don't argue with an idiot, he will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
0
Like
|
Much of the contributions are based on GNI (gross national income). Incomes are high in Germany and the UK, much lower on an average national basis elsewhere.
Budgets are agreed by member states not imposed so there is room for negotiation and horse trading. That's democratic is it not?.
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
1
Like
|
Mr Gove is to say, a vote to leave will be " a galvanising, liberating, empowering moment of patriotic renewal". Sadly, we would never actually embrace that statement and do anything different than what we have done for the last 70 years if it came to pass.
It reminds me of Mao's "Great Leap Forward". "Enormous amounts of investment produced only modest increases in production or none at all. ... In short, the Great Leap was a very expensive disaster."
The numbers being batted back and forth by BREXIT and REMAIN are being debated as they should and on balance, removing exageration on both sides they still don't look great for the BREXIT case.
Ignoring the issues of trade are not possible. In the case of REMAIN we know what we know. In the case of BREXIT there are nothing but unknowns.
REMAIN is attempting to galvanise support by preaching financial woe. But be clear, as exaggerated as it might be it is not only a real risk but it is an inevitable consequence in the medium term at least (2 to 10 years). BREXIT might just be fantastic in the long term (10+ to 30 years), but if that is the case why are so many young people and especially well educated young people so opposed to it?
BREXIT is attempting to galvanise support by preaching a new dawn, an awakening of economic opportunity and potential prosperity free of outside interference. Trouble is, from my research, every previous instance of this preaching has ended badly. There has been no tangible goal for people to grasp and work hard for. Even threats of violence etc did not galvanise the people of China or Korea or Russia. Cuba has gone nowhere and is deperate to be let back into the international club.
If we were at war with the EU I could understand the point that is being made by Gove and Farage and Johnson. But we are not at war boys. The EU are our neighbours, partners and friends. We will not always agree with them nor they with us, but that is how it is with neighbours, partners and friends.
Whilst the polls remain on a knife edge this is shaping up more and more like the Scottish Referendum on Independance. The financial and trade issues could not be answered by the Leave the UK side and the people are so very lucky that they went the route of "what we know is safest and best". I can't imagine what Scotland would look like now if they had left with the price of oil where it is. Unemployment, poverty, taxes...it would be an ugly mess. Be sure that Nicola is thanking the heavens each week that they did not exit the UK at that vote. Be certain that if the UK exist's the EU, Scotland will exit the UK if they can rejoin the EU.
Short of the campaign, this vote has already been decided. It will be a REMAIN victory. The Tory's gave us the Referendum, it helped them get elected. Their party is probably split close to 50/50 on the issue. UKIP, I presume is 100% behind BREXIT. The rest of the general election parties are overwhelmingly opposed. That would put REMAIN at 67.8% and BREXIT at 32.2% (based on the general election). Despite everything said, I fail to see where BREXIT is going to garner 18 percentage points from REMAIN. Immigration is just not a big enough single issue to swing it.
Sorry BREXIT you are not happening this time around. You do have some good ideas and values and I hope that following the vote we try to put the best of those into practise.
1
Like
|
I've just heard Gove's speech and to me it's a breath of fresh air - it actually gives many valid reasons for withdrawing and clear advantages for doing so.
In mine a couple of days I said I thought the exit side lacked leadership, but this was an excellent, intelligent speech and I hope Gove replaces Boris - he was amusing on HIGNFY, but it's high time he moved away from the nice but dim, bluster style.
You could be right Perrypower1, people often have fixed views and "staying in" is the easy option, but at least Michael Gove has brought some meaning to the debate. The pro EU guys may now have to raise their game and justify the enormous cost.
_______________________
Don't argue with an idiot, he will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
1
Like
|
Gove compared Britain to countries such as India, South Africa, Norway and Switzerland saying,'they make their way alone in the world Britain can too.' Please note he is advocating total seperation from any trading body.
That statement is so easy to pick apart it's almost laughable. Norway has massive oil revenues with a 5 million population. Switzerland has 8 million and has billions of gold reserves in the bank; India has 1.25billion people and a country which has the 7th largest land mass on the planet. South Africa has huge natural resources and a population the size of Spain with three times the land mass.
Britain does not compare in even the smallest way to these countries. Britain is a service economy with some manufacturing and few natural resources. A service and manufacturing economy requires being part of a trading block to function.
Remove the trading partners and they will likely freeze you out with tariff. Oh no they will still want to sell the UK their goods Briteers cry. Will they? Can you guarantee that Mr. Gove? There is the first uncertain risk.... I could go on but I won't.
Michael Gove has been anti EU for thirty years. No matter how the EU adapted and changed for the better he would be the same. Locked in to his own rhetoric.
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
0
Like
|
Can I ask a question that doesn't appear to have been asked yet?
If the remain camp win, what is envisaged in terms of credible plan(s) / options to reform and under what projected timeframe?
Who would be our "allies" within the 28 members states and/or factions within existing member state representatives to effect a credible strategy? Or are reformists wishing to effect greater transparency/accountability and aspirations to tackle inefficiencies (and corruption?) now in the minority within the EU Parliament?
Have any discussion papers or any strategy / scale of change been produced to date, or is this yet another "total unknown" quantity?
3
Like
|
'Please note he is advocating total seperation from any trading body.'
Putting words in peoples mouths again. Just like saying people are mis-guided without justifying it.
'That statement is so easy to pick apart it's almost laughable'
Do it then. And while you are at it list the richest economies in the world.
2
Like
|