E.U: Leave or Stay? Your thoughts.

I haven't seen any questions address by the leave side so good luck on getting that answered.

I would love for someone to paint a picture of what they expect after a vote to leave as all i can see are negatives, vote leave claim they could spend the 1% of total government spend that gets sent to Brussels each year on the NHS and other things but do people seriously believe that when our current government has been cutting public services to the bone?
If anything that 1% is just going to be used to pay down the deficit, we lose almost four times the amount we send to Brussels each year in TAX gap (the difference between the revenue that should be collected each year and the amount actually received).

Vote leave claim we'd get back control of our borders, putting aside the fact we already have control, does vote leave truly believe that our current government would actually leave the EEA?
Are vote leave seriously saying they'd prefer to apply some of these tariffs when exporting goods into the EU, are they seriously saying they want a quote system that would limit the amount of certain product we could sell into the EU?

I just want someone from the vote leave side to tell me that exiting the EU isn't going to be the disaster that i envision, that leaving the EU isn't something to be terrified of, i don't mind admitting that the idea terrifies me as, leaving aside all the rhetoric from the politicians, my own research shows me that leaving the EU would actually be far worse than what they claim.

 

That's absolutely fine but that was not the point I was making and it was not what Corky42 was doing.

To express having a problem with what someone offers as evidence is fine, to right out refute something because of another aspect of the persons profession – which in this case had no connection with the other – that you happen to not like or that may or may not hold up to scrutiny is more of a knee jerk reaction.

 

Some reading material:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum
https://www.opendemocracy.net/can-e...et/is-eu-nazi-project-debunking-enduring-myth
Protip: it's not because a website has "fact" in its name that its content is true, or relevant.

 

TBH I didn't look much further at the "information" when i discovered it was coming from a crackpot, i tend to ignore crackpots most of the time as what they say normally turns out to be wrong or based on similar misguided logic.

If you really want i can spend an hour or so dissecting that particular crackpots claims but i get the feeling it's going to be a waste of my time.

EDIT: Just looking at the first person on the crackpots list: Walter Hallstein, he wasn't a fervent advocate of Nazi law, he in fact studied Foreign Private and International Private Law (i.e when companies or people have a dispute that crosses international borders, like getting a divorce or contracts between companies)

He wasn't a member of the Nazi party, he reputedly rejected Nazi ideology, his appointment as professor of law was opposed by Nazi officials.

Either way getting a French foreign minister to propose the formation of the ECSC and the French to be the driving force in its formation seems a rather strange way for a West German Government to go about things.

 

@Pliqu3011

I don't see EU is as a National Socialist project of old (many reasons for that, some obvious others not so obvious) but it could be argued that Germany is it's driving force with an interest of keeping it going. Germany was always the hegemony in Europe but at the same time heavily dependent on other European nations for resources and trade, with EU she has full access and influence without risking war.

You can go about this in so many different ways, it could be this it could be that but wait just a minute, it could also be the other.

-------

Historically speaking we have always moved towards more centralization of power and decision making and often times when peoples tried to oppose it it led to war, the result afterwards was always more centralized power and decision making, so, if we go by the historical track record together with the current direction of travel all sovereign nation states in Europe will – no pun – be history in a near future. I don't necessarily see war as the driving force but fear.

Ninja edit.
Interesting to see how Jean-Claude Juncker tries to goose step at the begining and how he followes up with the Roman salute, at least he had the whereabouts not to do the National Socialist salute shouting mein fuhrer.

 

That depends on what that profession reveals about the person's ability to think critically and objectively.

 

Corky, it's a fair point that we are dealing with uncertainties if we leave the EU, but in the same vein all that is being offered to us by the remain camp are their visions of what will happen if we leave. Surely it would have been much better for all concerned if they had invested some energy and time into convincing us all that the EU can be reformed, can be efficient (or at least more so than it is), can be fairer and generally be worth maintaining the relationship we have?

As an EU cynic, it could have meant that I would consider my own opinions. A couple of people have said that I wouldn't have changed my mind whatever, but that is wrong. All I ever wanted was for someone to tell me what plans the UK and the EU had for post referendum discussions. The vote to remain, if that's the way the vote goes, doesn't negate the issues we all know exist within the EU, there is work that needs doing, but not one person has given any information on how they propose to do that work, what work needs doing or even consider a time scale. That is every bit as worrying to me as the UK leaving the EU. In the end I decided to base my decision on which way to vote on whether there was a real desire from the EU and it's member states to reform. I felt there wasn't so I'm not going to support the EU.

Be fair for a mo, much criticism is being dished out the leave camp, which is fair enough, but the remain camp have botched this campaign every bit as much and no-one here who is pro-EU has been very willing to admit that. What are we (the electorate) being given to work with here?

 

All of which is true Nexxo it's all in context and perhaps I should have included that caveat, but as a general rule of thumb my point still stands.

 

You are right about that, and it's a great source of annoyance to me also. But the electorate has plenty of opportunity to demand from the Remain side a vision of how to take the EU forwards. In fact the electorate had 40-plus years to do that and never took an interest. In 1997 it clearly indicated that it wasn't even interested in a conversation about the EU.

Now **** is hitting the fan in the UK on all sorts of levels the EU is a convenient scapegoat (the alternative is to admit that people were idiots for voting for the government it did), and the referendum has just become an easy way to express rage towards Cameeon, the EU, them immigrants and whatever else sticks in people's craw without having to admit personal responsibility for their own political apathy and ignorance. It is a rage quit, nothing more.

Now this is important: Do you think that the government should be in control, or the electorate? If you think it is the latter, then the latter should take first responsibility. Saying that things suck and just walking off and letting the government sort out the ensuing chaos is not taking responsibility. Either you take responsibility for improving things or you propose a viable alternative. If you think the other party is unwise, you have the de facto responsibility to be wiser. If you think they are being irresponsible or neglectful, you have the de facto duty to be more responsible and take care. Otherwise you're just different, not better. And we're looking for better, aren't we?

 

But we aren't dealing with uncertainties, at least not to my understanding, we have plenty of information and using that we can make predictions of possible future events, something that no one on vote leave has done or is prepared to do, including (no disrespect) yourself.

I mean you have a wealth of information available to you and all I'm asking is for someone like yourself to explain what they predict a post leave UK would look like, like i said the only reason I'm asking is because no matter how much research i do all i see are negative effects.

The post remain plans have been laid out numerous times to you though and if i recall you said the pace of change wasn't quick enough for your liking, other than that i can't remember a single thing (apologies it's a long thread) you've highlighted that you consider as a problem that would be address by leaving the EU.

I mean i get what you say about what you see as the inability of the EU to change or that no one has proposed how the EU is going to change but the how it changes is down to the electorate (as explained in previous posts), all you have to do is look at any of the political parties manifestos from the last 40 years to see how you could've voted to for the change you wanted to see.

Take the 2015 manifestos as an example: Starting with the Conservatives...

Then there's the Labour version...

Now that's just the two main parties and yet you say no one has given you any information, at every election for the last 40+ years you've been presented with information on how they want to reform the EU and how they propose to do it, at every election you're presented with what each political party see as work that needs doing in the EU and you vote accordingly.

Yes none of the politicians have covered themselves in glory but we're not politicians and as such I'm asking for someone who supports leaving the EU to tell me a single problem (as they see it) that would be fixed by leaving the EU, surely that's not much to ask, identify what you see as a problem and say how you think leaving the EU may fix that problem.

 

You are missing the fundamental issue of people being able to vote in/out a leadership who can get things done in the interests of its electorate, You know, the people who pay taxes and supply paycheques for the upkeep of the economy. Not have some failed national politicians who were kicked out of office here, Only setting up shop and making decisions in Brussels on any one of the commision's, NGO's or lobby groups WHO WE VOTED NOT TO HAVE IN THESE POSITIONS, please Nexxo, show me and the readers when we did vote for them.
"Feel good" is just your opinion, and blind it is. People are angry and concerned Nexxo, "Feel good" just doesn't cut it.

Most people I speak to understand it will be a challenge, Just as the Swiss electorate understand their democratic challenges with the EU. It quite frankly is an insult to think we can't do it. The same people who have lied and deceived the British electorate in recent past (as well as being monumentally wrong ie adopting the euro) don't seem to see the loathing of their bought and paid for scare tactics, In fact it might surprise many it emboldens the spirit to get a job done properly.
Britain had multiple world reaching achievements well before the dream of a European totalitarian superstate was envisaged, in whatever form it has manifested in history including the current one.
We have helped forge parts of the current EU, that we should not forget and be proud of, BUT unfortunately it is now in a state that is ignorantly stagnant, protectionist, and our concerns and proposals are being swept under the doormat (Cameron's negotiations), That is what the electorate now cannot avoid seeing.
That's not a feel good thing, That is a sad fact.

The EU answers to corporate interests, as is was designed to do from it's very inception, It gained power by stealth, ever so slowly via multiple treaties each one eroding the sovereignty of the nations signed up and either not voted on or explained fully to the electorates, There is a very good obvious reason for that my friends, to quote Baden-Powell "Slowly Slowly catchy monkey".
ANY citizens in historically democratic european member states should be bothered by this apart from corporate interests, people with their head in the trough or people who have a vehement hatred of the democratic process that is the right of the electorate.

One thing (among many) brexit should be worried about is voting fraud, I guess the open door immigration policy pays off here and I fear this report is the tip of the iceberg. Add the fact the EU normally ignores electorates when it comes time to decide their destiny.
I am confident the Brussels Brigade will show their true colours once again, "The EU can be reformed from the inside" say the remainers, my arse.
The current political EU needs a complete overhaul, but the Brussels elite that are not going to allow reform of their cosy little world from the inside, They need to be put out of a job.

Maybe, Just maybe the EU should be acting on the concerns of it's citizens. Maybe, just maybe if they considered that their policies and ignorance are harming our future prospects, And maybe, just maybe what changes Britain was proposing is the right thing to do, We wouldn't be having this conversation (EU membership).
If we vote to stay and the EU acts against (or not at all) what I have just mentioned above, This conversation will happen again, trust me it will.
Next time the tone will be very different, I have ultimate confidence in this, which is not a good thing.

Here's an idea which the remain side can debate instead of questioning leaving. What is going to happen if we remain?

Here is my own version of Project Fear:

Immigration and the UK welfare state: The flood of migrants and unskilled will crush what little we have left to support the unfortunate, elderly or damn right lazy (yes I know people who spraff the state of benefits) The result will be a public uproar when the benefits train comes to an end because we cannot sustain it or public uproar because it is costing so much, It's a no win.
EU rules for immigration cannot curb this result, they are encouraging it.

Immigration and housing: If you are reading this from the comfort of middle class suburbia sipping socialist champagne, You have no idea what is happening in the inner cityscape. How many EU project signs do you see in your city that are sitting in front of a new hospital, housing project or school. How much does the EU give us to help cope with new arrivals, nothing as far as I can see.
We have a housing shortage and a construction industry hampered by EU regulations, See the connection. Small construction companies cannot compete. We cannot keep up with demand and the demand is growing while the means are diminishing. This isn't rocket science. Even friends working in this sector can see this and have to struggle with it.
In the North east it's only the arty projects and (insultingly) industries the EU helped decimate where you see the blue and yellow flag of prosperity. It's disturbingly eye opening.

Jobs: We have already been told by governments, news outlets and (ironically for the EU) corporate interests that human participation in the workforce will significantly diminish in the next 25 years, More people and less jobs does not equal a thriving economy in the UK or the EU.
This ties in with immigration and welfare, This bill has to be footed by taxpayers, who need jobs. The EU does not help, but hinders the small business, So unless you are working for a corporation with a cosy seat at the EU table, your knackered. I refer you to TTIP at this point.

So as much as anyone can blur the landscape with "what is brexit going to do" questions to enforce a personal preference to remain, The answer lies in the questions and current events of "what if we remain".

 

I think that you are missing the fundamental point that governmental decisions can be irreversible. When this government signs up to TTIP --which the UK has been pushing for, not the EU (just goes to show how much you've been paying attention)-- and you don't like it and vote them out? Tough. You will be stuck with TTIP anyway, in perpetuity; the next government cannot cancel the agreement. You have to decide what you want before you vote them in, not wait for them to screw up before voting them out and hoping the next one does it better... somehow.

I would put it to you that where we are now viz a viz the EU is the result of forty years of the UK electorate voting for successive governments that have been quite explicit in their manifestos about how they planned to engage in Europe, and voting for MEPs who were quite explicit --especially in the case of UKIP-- about how they were going to engage with the EU. How has that worked out for you all? You didn't vote for this? The hell you didn't. You just weren't paying attention.

Let's talk about the Euro. Gordon Brown was the chancellor who decided against joining it because he judged the conditions not right. People predicted a negative impact for the UK financial market because the EU set the condition that the hugely profitable clearing house services for the Euro should be inside the Euro zone. The UK went to the European Court of Justice to challenge that, and unexpectedly, it won. As such these services were based in London and the UK financial market did very well out of it. This is the reason why the doomsayers turned out to be wrong. It also shows that the UK can leverage a lot of influence in the EU, using EU institutions, to get what it wants --if it chooses to. And that is entirely up to the government, and ultimately the electorate. Now as I said, Gordon Brown choose to stay out of the Euro. He also was the one who organised the G20 response to the 2008 credit crunch. So we can assume that he knows his stuff when it comes to economics. Now he is for remaining in the EU. That ought to tell you something.

It seems to me that this electorate is apathetic, doesn't care to inform itself, doesn't care to think for itself, doesn't care to instruct its politicians. It just expects them to be mindreading fairy godmothers granting their every whim and when --surprise, surprise-- career politicians turn our to act in their own interest there are howls of surprised outrage. I mean, how many times do you have to be fooled (at least sixteen times at last count, apparently)?

I'm an NHS mental health worker who started his tour of duty in the sink estates of Hull and now works in one of the most deprived areas of Birmingham. I have an inkling of what goes on in the inner cityscape (my champagne comes from Aldi, by the way). Our National Rare Diseases Unit in Birmingham is funded by £13 million of EU money. In fact the EU funds a lot of projects in the UK but unfortunately doesn't have a habit of putting up signs in front of them saying so (nobody who visits our new Rare Diseases Unit has a clue that it was the EU that made it possible). It has been said that perhaps it should, and you'd realise how much money it actually pours into this country. Or, you know, you could fire up Google and find out for yourself.

Meanwhile it is the UK government that has been slashing NHS budgets by another £22 billion last year, with the result that for the first time in its history all hospital trusts are in the red. Even the really well-managed ones, that have never been in the red before. Because it's pursuing an Austerity policy that even the IMF has said is damaging to the UK economy.

Now you STILL haven't told me how a Brexit is supposed to make things better. How it is supposed to curb immigration when the government already has a points-based system for non-EU immigrants who are still coming in at the same rate as EU immigrants (actually, a bit more). Even Migration Watch --no lovers of immigration-- think the points-based system is a horrendous idea. How it is supposed to improve the economy instead of make it worse. We get some hazy fantasy 'coulds' that are in total denial of the reality. We have Farage suggesting that unless the UK Brexits there could be violence in the street and foreign rapists molesting our women. And after all that rhetoric the buck is neatly passed to the government again: they'll have to decide how to make a Brexit work. That's their job. So you're basically doing it again: Voting leave without knowing what you are voting for (not just against), and expecting the government to somehow read your mind and fulfil your wishes... Somehow.

 

Think the biggest problem for both is that the turn out will not be great either way. people really just do not care. Last estimate had it down as a 50% turn out rate. which would be only slightly higher than the general elections.

I have not heard a good argument for a leave or stay vote in all honesty. Most of it is crap spouted by idiots. Boris johnson can go jump into a river for all I care about him. He becomes leader of the conservatives they will auto lose a election, Outside of London he has to be one of the most hated men in britain.

The whole we will be better or worse off is just random crap. With no hard facts to back it up.

The simple fact is the man in charge can not 100% say we will be better off or not. If we get good trade deals we would be alot better off. If we do not we could be worse off.

Problem is till you have left you can not say with 100% certainty that we will be worse or better off.

We will have to allow free movement to get most of the trade deals in place.

I dout I will personally vote either way. Unless something happens to make me think yes or no before the deadline. Nothing I have yet read has done that.

 

Actually there are a lot of hard facts by a raft of independent institutions, but Vote Leave chooses to ignore them by crying "scaremongering!" rather than challenging them with rational counterargument or facts to the contrary. The public --who can barely add up a shopping list as they go along, or work out how much a 10% discount is; which nearly broke the economy by reckless borrowing, who can't figure out an APR on a credit card-- dismiss all these institutions with: "What do economists know anyway; they didn't predict the credit crunch". Well, actually they did. But their warnings were ignored with cries of "scaremongering!". See the pattern here?

I mean, what has Vote Leave actually proposed? How will a Brexit actually work? I'm still waiting. It's just Fantasy Politics.

 

They are NOT facts Nexxo, they are predictions, forecasts, extrapolations or anything else but fact! This is the problem from both sides, they are presenting non-factual information as fact. You are as guilty of this as the leave and remain camp!

 

No, they are predictions, forecasts, extrapolations based on facts and reason. Now they've stated theirs, where are those of Vote Leave?

Oh, "we have to have faith in a great country" that needed an IMF loan in 1976 to bail it out. In the "British bulldog spirit" that apathetically looked on as 40 years of EU development passed them by and their government did whatever it wanted unchecked. In an electorate finally exercising its "democratic sovereign power" while apparently being ignorant of small but important details like who actually is driving TTIP. You know: feel-good arguments. No logic, no rationale, no facts, no figures (well, not accurate ones, anyway).

This is no different from people saying: "What do doctors know anyway? They still can't always cure cancer. It's all a conspiracy by Big Parma!". So let's trust a faith healer instead*.

Please. You want to leave? Tell me how a Brexit would work, and how it would make things better. You're the electorate. You're supposed to take the lead. You're supposed to instruct your elected officials. I'm still waiting.


* Incidentally I saw a faith healer with cancer once. He opted for surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy.

 

So then stop claiming the remain side has the facts of the matter then Nexxo!For a man of your supposed intellect you should know the absolute difference between the two so stop claiming that the opinions, whether reasoned or not, are facts as you have continuously done throughout this thread.

 

Until then we have nothing more to talk about.

 

So what are these things that a leadership are going to get done?

As for the claim that we didn't vote for "them" while you're correct in saying we didn't directly elect people for a position on the European Commission we did elect the people that put forward who they considered suitable for the role, but don't let a little thing like electing people who make decisions on your behalf get in the way of a good rant.

I'm not sure how other NGO's and lobby groups are any different than UK based NGO's and lobby groups, maybe you could explain that one to me.

Yes people are angry but I'm still waiting the hear what their angry at and how leaving the EU is going to fix their problems and make them happy.

Can't do what? What is it that leaving the EU is going to enable a liberal conservative government to do, what is it that people who plan to vote leave expect, it seems no one can provide an answer.

So what you're saying is that we (the UK) has had major influence in shaping the EU but for some reason that's now impossible, despite Mr Cameron's negotiations to reshape the EU?
There seems to be some confusion, we helped shape the EU, Mr Cameron's negotiations reshaped the EU, but you also say there's no chance of reforming the EU so we should leave.

Yea because lobbying would never happen in UK politics would it, oh wait.

Would those be the same treaties we signed up to?

Thank goodness voting fraud never happen in the UK, or that none of our political parties break the rules when it comes to elections

And I'm confused, you say we have helped forge parts of the current EU and you acknowledge Mr Cameron's negotiations, but you also say that the Brussels elite aren't going to allow reform, what one is it? Either they don't allow reform and Mr Cameron's negotiations and our role in shaping the EU is wrong or there not, the two a mutual exclusive, logically both can't be true.

It's been answer many, many times, it's just some people are choosing to ignore the answer, maybe because it doesn't fit with their perceptions, in case you missed it the answer is in the post preceding yours, look right here.

The thing about fear is that the more you know the less you fear it, for instance when you look at the facts you start to understand how EU migrants are more likely to be net contributors to the welfare system, in fact EU migrants contribute £1.34 for every £1 they took out versus non-EU migrants contributing £1.02 for every £1 received.

Care to point out these EU regulations that have hampered the building of new houses?

As for demand outstripping supply i totally agree, although the supply side of the equation isn't helped by the fact that house building has been falling for the last 40+ years, as for the demand side I'm not sure how much of an effect 8.6% of new social housing tenants going to foreign born nationals effect things, especially when you consider that 8.6% also includes people from outside EU, who, without looking it up, are probably more likely to need social housing than EU nationals.

Good job EU migrants are more likely to be of benefit to the UK economy then isn't it, without EU migrants the bill that has to be footed by taxpayers would be even bigger.

When you say TTIP are you referring to the same TTIP that was championed within the EU by the Conservatives? The same Conservative government that will be in charge of negotiating trade deals with the rest of the world in the event that we leave the EU, the same TTIP that François Hollande told Jeremy Corbyn that he'd veto, the same TTIP that seems all but dead, that's unless a new deal is signed by a Liberal Conservative government after a vote to leave, after all they wouldn't be hamstrung by that annoying rule preventing them from making their own trade deals.

It's got nothing to do with personal preferences, those are feelings you have based on no evidence, that;s not something we're lacking, personal preferences are things like what you fancy to eat tonight, or what color your new cars going to be.

There's plenty of information out there for people to make their predictions of what will happen if the UK votes to leave but as yet I've not heard a single one of those prediction's, there's so much information that people have no problem predicting what will happen if we remain, is it to much to ask the same from the people that champion leaving?

 

To be fair and frank, I can't be bothered with this anymore. We have someone who has blown their own trumpet and claimed the intellectual higher ground numerous times, they've also made contradictory statements regarding fact and opinions numerous times. Waste of time and effort and also a waste of a great evening with the glorious sun too.