1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

E.U: Leave or Stay? Your thoughts.

Discussion in 'Serious' started by TheBlackSwordsMan, 22 Feb 2016.

  1. aramil

    aramil One does not simply upgrade Forums

    Joined:
    10 Jul 2012
    Posts:
    961
    Likes Received:
    56
    [​IMG]
    I feel the world would be somewhat a better place :lol:
     
  2. Xir

    Xir Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    26 Apr 2006
    Posts:
    5,250
    Likes Received:
    88
    Your reason for:
    Are:
    You don't want less EU, you want A LOT MORE EU :D

    Problem is, the UK doesn't want that, they just want a trade economy.

    This.

    The British boys want a say larger than their share, while paying less than their share, and using that say to brake the entire process of forming a EU.
    Can't blame them though, they have a different goal. The British boys prefer an EEC over a EU.
    Maybe they're right.

    Anyway as you stated before, in a true EU, all states should be treated the same, and we'd need at least a fiscal union for the euro to work, which again means a lot more EU.
    They don't want that (many other countries don't) so maybe out is the way.

    One positive side to leaving the EU is the British politicians can't blame the EU for everything anymore :naughty:


    Ah, the Italians would just ban you from carrying more than three feathers at a time!
     
  3. Xir

    Xir Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    26 Apr 2006
    Posts:
    5,250
    Likes Received:
    88
    As a previous owner of a number of FIAT's I have to agree they made shambles of my monitary system. :D
     
    Disequilibria and Risky like this.
  4. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,259
    Likes Received:
    316
    I totally understand and empathise with you. :)

    I so want to vote out just to stick two fingers up at Cameron, not because of any dislike for him but more just to say i think what he's negotiated is fairly worthless and that an in/out referendum shouldn't be a motivator for getting a better deal, they should be putting in the effort that he has in negotiating a better deal all the time, not just because they're being threatened with something.

    According to fullfact.org has a good analysis of the claim that we can't enact our own laws, to summarise they say...
    ...

    Based on the last few years of austerity i would say we wouldn't have.

    It probably is speculation but seeing as how bad things were before the EU intervened and how difficult we're finding it to meet targets for clean beaches, rivers, and cleaner air i would say we wouldn't have done it our self.

    Major first world issues or not it's still nice not to be getting screwed over mobile charges and air travel, is it not?

    Whatever our education system is i know one thing for sure, it sure is expensive.

    Well based on how politicians fought against some of those changes we can say fairly confidently that they wouldn't have brought in similar laws.

    Is banking count as an industry? If so then yea we do, if not though i would argue that the amount of investment in our own industries have been sorely lacking, you only have to compare the amount invested in the steel industry to see that investment in what's typically though of as industry has been on the decline for many, many years.

    Yes we'd be able to cooperate from outside the EU but without the European arrest warrant it would take much longer to get anything done.

    You'll get no argument from me on that point, TTIP would be one poisonous piece of regulation if it came into force.

    True no one can "prove" either way but we can make educated assumptions based on all available evidence, like we can assume that our rivers, beaches and air pollution would've only got worse seeing as that was the direction of travel before the EU forced change on the UK.
     
  5. aramil

    aramil One does not simply upgrade Forums

    Joined:
    10 Jul 2012
    Posts:
    961
    Likes Received:
    56
    Because when we joined (and last voted) this is what our and the european governments said we where joining.
    pretty much sums it up.

    sorry the EU says i cannot do things to any industry that would give them an uncompetative edge over other EU states. And I can not stop China for example flooding the uk with cheaper products without EU approval.

    This assumes that in the proceeding years public demand, from not being in the EU and so not having the "it's them" excuse would of made them do any of it. 40 years is a long time for change and without the EU we could of travelled a different path. so who really knows.

    The whole EU idea has become toxic setting germans against greek, french against itallians, etc. It is no longer outward & forward looking, and has become insular and closed almost stuck in an idea of the past (trying to protect everything and allow nothing). To survive it needs at least a fiscal union for the euro to work, which again means a lot more EU. And as stated by many people you will never get all of these countries to agree to give up that much control.

    What other option is there? A Europe wide trade deal anyone?

    If the EU countries had actually been honest in the first part and had sat round a table on worked on a who/what/where/when of a unified europe which was democratically responcable and accountable would we be having these issues now? People complain when our government outright lies to us, and we call for change/get rid of them/reform, yet it seems to be OK when the EU does it (mainly via the back door), because sometimes they do something that may be worthwhile (or at least try to claim credit for global changes (unleaded fuel)).

    It is broken, and if it takes the UK to give it a good kick in the teeth and a bloody nose for the rest of the EU to realise that and do something about it, then all the better, but it won't happen if we stay.
     
    Last edited: 25 Feb 2016
  6. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,259
    Likes Received:
    316
    While true in part i feel you've missed some key points, yes we can't do things to any industry that would give them an uncompetative edge over other EU states, but the EU can and has slapped tariffs on cheap imports, something that out current government tried to block, that seems to indicate that our current government is/was happy with the effect of cheap imports on our industry.

    Based purely on the example above i would suggest that we can make an educated guess, no?

    I kind of agree but then again i think it all started out wrong, if they had an end goal to start with things probably would've worked out much better, as it is we either have to work with what we've got and try to make things better or just admit it's broken and go back to the pre-EU days.
     
  7. aramil

    aramil One does not simply upgrade Forums

    Joined:
    10 Jul 2012
    Posts:
    961
    Likes Received:
    56
    No. (calls for speculation over a 40 year period ending up with exactly the same government we have today)

    but you can't change what does not want to change or in fact is not accountable.

    Corky42 is head of the EU, with his chums. he is unelected as are his chums.
    He has a commision of chums and they run EU law.
    He has a court which can over rule any memeber states courts and enforce any change the above makes.

    Would Corky42 and chums (who are well paid) allow one (noisey nation) to remove the power they hold and make it democratic and hold them to account? without almost all the other EU countries demanding the same? (which realistically you will not get).

    I agree with the idea, but it will never happen.
     
    Last edited: 25 Feb 2016
  8. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,259
    Likes Received:
    316
    We're going to have to agree to disagree on that one then as i think making an educated guess based on all the available evidence isn't beyond most people, granted they may come to different conclusions than myself and others but that doesn't mean anyone's opinion on how a government would've acted under different circumstances is wrong.

    We know that's not true, if the EU does not want to change then how did Mr Cameron negotiate the changes (putting aside the significance of those changes). That's what annoys me so much, it's not like the EU is deaf to complaints or changes so why did it take the threat of a country leaving for them to actual do something.

    Corky42 would be Livin' la Vida Loca, :D

    Just because an idea may never happen though that doesn't mean, for me personally, that you should just throw in the towel, many people though out history thought something would never happen but women got the vote, apartheid ended, etc, etc.
     
  9. Risky

    Risky Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    10 Sep 2001
    Posts:
    4,095
    Likes Received:
    36
    Not sure where not paying their share came in.

    If you look here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_the_European_Union you can see that the UK is one of the net contributors, there is a rebate but that is because the so much of the budget was spent of agricultural subsidies and the UK has a smaller and more commercial agriculture sector and without the rebate would have ended up funding the farmers of richer countries.
     
  10. Risky

    Risky Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    10 Sep 2001
    Posts:
    4,095
    Likes Received:
    36
    One of the odd things here is that people talk of the EU as if it has power in itself. Actually the central bodies (the commission, the parliament) are pretty weak. Most of the real power is vested with the council of ministers, e.g. the national governments.

    Not that I am defending the EU bodies, the parliament is a ludicrous self-important, wasteful joke. The European electorate treat it with the dignity it deserves by using it an an occasion to kick their own national leaders by electing various nationalists, communists, greens and other flavour of the day protest parties.
     
  11. Kovoet

    Kovoet New Member

    Joined:
    26 Aug 2009
    Posts:
    7,129
    Likes Received:
    348
    Who is actually in charge of the U.K., that is my question? Cameron has no control over it. Can't do anything except going through the EU.
    No one can tell me with the influx of migrants coming of which we will not be able to police or control is going to do us any good in the long run.

    We have not one political party here with a set of balls. Labour and toris area as bad as one another.

    Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk
     
  12. Risky

    Risky Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    10 Sep 2001
    Posts:
    4,095
    Likes Received:
    36
    The Council of Ministers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_the_European_Union) has effective control and that is where the individual national governments will negociate and vote on anything that is to be done by the EU.
     
  13. Xir

    Xir Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    26 Apr 2006
    Posts:
    5,250
    Likes Received:
    88
    Well, there was the initial rebate for agricultural reasons Edit, the same as the one below
    Than Thatcher "wanted her money back" (this is the agricultural rebate, at the time 80 of the EU spendings were for agriculture, now ~40%
    Now Cameron makes a "deal" where the UK pays less. (Hasn't he done that before?)

    I only have figures for 2014, sorry.

    The Dutch payd ~4,7B€ ~270€ per person
    The Germans payd~15,5B€ ~190€ per person.
    The UK payd ~4,9BE ~80€ per person

    In GDP: NL 0,71% D 0,52% UK 0,23%

    For some reason though, the dutch don't get to have three times the say in Europe than you guys do, but they pay 3x as much (per person)

    this was 2014, the "Deal" has gotten sweeter since, hasn't it. :rolleyes:

    *Figures from the "Bundeszentrale für politische bildung" http://www.bpb.de/
     
    Last edited: 25 Feb 2016
  14. Xir

    Xir Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    26 Apr 2006
    Posts:
    5,250
    Likes Received:
    88
  15. specofdust

    specofdust Banned

    Joined:
    26 Feb 2005
    Posts:
    9,568
    Likes Received:
    168
    The obvious question there Xir is, given that this is an issue of paying taxes and no-one is really obligated to pay more than legally required, why would the UK want to pay more towards the EU? Surely that is more an issue for NL regarding their own EU contributions than for the UK?
     
  16. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,259
    Likes Received:
    316
    IDK how accurate the figures are and they're only for 2013 but going on these charts published by the Telegraph we end up 4th highest once contributions and receipts are taken into account, the Netherlands are 6th.

    EDIT: A more recent and probably accurate chart has the UK in 3rd and the Netherlands in 4th for 2014.
     
    Last edited: 25 Feb 2016
  17. DXR_13KE

    DXR_13KE BananaModder

    Joined:
    14 Sep 2005
    Posts:
    9,118
    Likes Received:
    363
    Are you looking at total expenditure for those values?
     
  18. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,259
    Likes Received:
    316
    I was looking at how much we pay in and how much we get back, there's a name for that isn't there, I've always struggled remembering what ones net and what ones gross. :wallbash: :p
     
  19. DXR_13KE

    DXR_13KE BananaModder

    Joined:
    14 Sep 2005
    Posts:
    9,118
    Likes Received:
    363
    Do the positions change when you change to per capita values?
    Just curious.
     
  20. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,259
    Likes Received:
    316
    I don't think either of the charts has data for that.
     

Share This Page