Poll: The EU Referendum: What Will You Vote? (New Poll)

Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?

  • Total voters
    1,204
Status
Not open for further replies.

rawuk

rawuk

rawuk

Associate
Joined
29 Nov 2015
Posts
447
Location
East
Macro said:
It's worth keeping this in mind. The UK leaving the EU would almost certainly end up with Scotland leaving the UK given how close the last referendum was potentially leaving a much dimished economic, military and political entity in the space of only a couple of years.

Not saying that's a good or bad thing, there's plenty of smaller counties doing just fine thank you (Scandinavia is a typical example), but it is worth keeping in mind a EU exit could be the start of some of the most fundamental changes to the United Kingdom in hundreds of years. For the first time in a long time England, Wales and NI with no UK, EU, Commonwealth (to speak of) or Empire. It's back to Tudor times for us! :)
Click to expand...
This is one interesting angle of the Brexit.

Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland may wish to remain. The question then would have to be should we stay in them when England is the primary component of the UK?

Being a little under informed on the operations of the EU I have recently come across the fact each countries MEP count is based on population size...? So if Turkey joined it would have more MEP's than us?
 

datalol-jack

datalol-jack

datalol-jack

Soldato
Joined
1 Mar 2010
Posts
6,306
Outcast said:
Peter Sillars recognises the hypocrisy of wanting Scottish rule for Scotland but then giving up Scottish rule to be governed by Brussels !!

Does not compute !!

Also.. CON-niving shenannigans ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDvKKDX_rgg
Click to expand...

Try again. Considering the current constitutional arrangement, Scotland would have far more powers and opportunities (especially as part of the Nordic group) in the EU than in Brexit Britain.

And even if the Scots said no to gambling on the price of oil before, further economic squeezes may just force their hand in joining the larger Union and, as per SNP rhetoric, the lesser of the two evils. Plus the EU would be happy to inject more cash into the region to smooth its transition, following any re-admission negotiations and in line with their regional development policy. This on its own wouldn't work for Salmond and Sturgeon now, but pressed to follow Westminster lead into a Brexit, their case would be strong enough for another vote on independence.

What could we offer them then? We're struggling to fully implement DevoMax to everyone's satisfaction as it is.

As for your unrelated video bender: Do I really need to bring Arron Banks out of your purple closet? Really now.

Is there money in politics? Yes. Is some of it linked directly to vested interests? Of course. Does it increasingly mirror the American model? Yes. Is it desirable? No! Is the EU to blame for this state of affairs? Erm... no!

rawuk said:
Being a little under informed on the operations of the EU
Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutions_of_the_European_Union

In summary: There are checks and balances. The chief principle being proportional representation and consensus politics. So both the size of your population and the strength of your economy matter. However, QMV and other grouping arrangements protect weaker/smaller members of the bloc.

Re Putin: A weakened or disintegrated EU basically hands him a strategic victory he never bargained for by default. Something he desperately needs with his list of gambits and flagging economy, which will be coming to the fore in the next couple of years.

Furthermore, unlike Obama's administration, Putin's foreign policy works directly against our interests in Europe and further abroad; won't cry over precious tax roubles spent on proxy wars; and will completely laugh in the face of any sanctions Britain can impose on its own, especially if the financial hub of the bloc moves out of London.

Now's the time to work with our allies -- and the economic foundations that support them -- not stab them in the back!
 

Tunney

Tunney

Tunney

Soldato
Joined
11 Oct 2004
Posts
14,549
Location
London
Moses said:
Scandinavia's not all sunshine and roses, though. Eg. Norway's having to work out what to do with the oil price as it is, Finland's not looking amazing with Nokia going boom and it all kicking off with Russia, etc.
Click to expand...

Finland's bigger concern is that the Angry Birds fad seems to be over. :p I doubt they're that worried about Russia though considering the kicking they gave them the last time that Russia tried to invade.

*tries to resist the urge to be pedantic and point out that Finland isn't in Scandinavia*
 

Tunney

Tunney

Tunney

Soldato
Joined
11 Oct 2004
Posts
14,549
Location
London
Nate--IRL-- said:
???

wrong.jpg

Nate
Click to expand...

From Wikipedia:

While the term Scandinavia is commonly used for Denmark, Norway and Sweden, the term the Nordic countries is used unambiguously for Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Iceland, including their associated territories (Greenland, the Faroe Islands, and the Åland Islands). Scandinavia can thus be considered a subset of the Nordic countries. Furthermore, the term Fennoscandia refers to Scandinavia, Finland and Karelia, excluding Denmark and overseas territories; however, the usage of this term is restricted to geology, when speaking of the Fennoscandian Shield (Baltic Shield).
 

FoxEye

FoxEye

FoxEye

Caporegime
Joined
17 Feb 2006
Posts
29,263
Location
Cornwall
The war(s) belong in history books, and bringing them up in this discussion is about as low as you can get.

Not surprised that a bunch of senile old Tory MPs would start banging on about it. And of course the DM would pick it up and run with it. Expect nothing less from them.
 

robgmun

robgmun

robgmun

Soldato
Joined
30 Apr 2006
Posts
17,960
Location
London
itchy said:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...e-war-Brexit-claims-t-survive-without-us.html

:rolleyes:

It looks like the Germans think they can rule Europe, think again you German kraut. :mad:
Click to expand...

I said a few years back the Germans failed in WW2 military wise but are trying it again economy wise now. They've been looking into ways to dismantle The City (as in London's financial district) for many many years now and the only reason they couldn't is because we're not closer to the EU.

Lets be frank here, make no mistake, an in vote will mean that after the time limit of Cameron's 'concessions' are over, that the UK will fully integrate into the EU. A vote for in is 'all in' vote. It happened before and it'll happen again. We'll be fully decentralised and ruled by bureaucrats that we don't directly vote for and can't kick out of office if we don't like them. Still, from some of the posters here it seems like some people want that to happen!

An out vote means we are our own country, with our own laws, a sovereign nation that doesn't answer to anyone else. We're a ****ing strong country economy and socially speaking, everyone in the world wants to deal with us. Personally i believe in us, so when posters like DannyDog saying we can't handle it, it depresses me that people has so little faith in there own country. And unfortunately it seems like a lot of people like that are MP's too :(
 
Last edited:

ReltonBFD

ReltonBFD

ReltonBFD

Associate
Joined
15 Nov 2012
Posts
619
Honestly the state of this **** house is unreal, if you vote to remain your blind, you are hoodwinked.

Authoritarian rule won't work in Britain and I don't think it's really ever worked without uprising, the EU as become too big, too powerful. It's a country, we are gonna be a state not a country.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom