Because it has been sold to ask as a binding agreement and that is questionable.
Poll: The EU Referendum: How Will You Vote? (April Poll)
- Thread starter Burnsy2023
- Start date
- Status
Because it has been sold to ask as a binding agreement and that is questionable.
Has it? Referenda in the UK are legally not binding and always have been.
/Shrug, it's hard for them to remain impartial in this case.
I don't think that a company should be prevented from being able to say that they thing tariffs could go up. However as they don't have any proof that they will yet they need to be very clear as to this is what they think.
Cameron has portrayed the deal he got with the EU as binding.
Has he? Or have you misunderstood him/read into it what you wanted too?
All I've actually seen Cameron say is that he'd hold a referendum on EU membership.
So it is entirely possibly we vote to stay and then the offer is rescinded.
1) Implies we won't be able to go to the EU and work if we Leave - scaremongering.
2) in other words if we Leave the EU our economy tanks - scaremongering.
3) No it doesn't. I honestly don't know why people even claim our influence is enhanced - clearly it isn't because we are handing it over to a different government.
I don't have full confidence in David Cameron to do whats right for anyone but himself.
I'll assume you didn't vote Conservative then lol.
You can rephrase anything you like that way. "We'll get our sovereignty back" implies "we don't have sovereignty in the EU - scaremongering".
The fact is that positive and negative are simply different ways of phrasing the same thing and that those are two very big benefits of being in the EU: free movement and a stronger economy.
We gain far more influence by pooling our sovereignty than we gain by attempting to go it alone. And we're not handing it over to a different government; the EU include us. Of course, because there's no clear Leave plan and no way to know how well, or badly, negotiations will go, we can't be sure how much influence we'd end up with if we leave most likely we'll end up still be influenced by 90% of the EU stuff we are now but simply have little or no say over it.
IMF: Brexit could cause severe damage
No doubt the IMF saying 'The UK's exit from the European Union could cause "severe regional and global damage"' will be dismissed as scaremongering by the Brexiters but there comes a point at which you have to look at the array of different economic observers saying the exact same thing and consider whether, just maybe, they have a point.
So, Brexiters, how much economic damage do your think Brexit is worth?
No doubt the IMF saying 'The UK's exit from the European Union could cause "severe regional and global damage"' will be dismissed as scaremongering by the Brexiters but there comes a point at which you have to look at the array of different economic observers saying the exact same thing and consider whether, just maybe, they have a point.
So, Brexiters, how much economic damage do your think Brexit is worth?
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 7,614
So it *could* be fine too?
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 1,379
Considering we lose a lot from the fee's to be in the EU, the lack of control we get over our own laws, the health tourism, the welfare system the EU wants to let romanians and others abuse, the freedom of movement that lets any low rent worker in etc. then I think the economic argument wouldn't be as strong as it's made out to be if you factored it all in. Add in the forced migration of refugees germany accepted (it'll happen eventually) and the expansion into allowing turkey in and we'll see a lot more people wanting to jump into our country too.
We could always form a common wealth union that wouldn't want to tie us down to crap like romania, turkey and open borders too
Also if you expect people to concede an economic argument then you have to be smart enough to concede points against the EU too like the expansionism and lack of sovereignity under it. You might not particularly value that point personally but it doesn't change it's impact just like raising the minimum wage would have no benefit for someone paid more but would still be of benefit to many, you seem to undervalue having control in your own court. Most countries are better served being able to use policy that matches there own needs in both value, speed and effect along with adding any concessions for country specific reasons. The EU just is a one glove fits all policy, do you think most companies would survive if they had to negotiate, concede ground and manage a business based on general vote with 28 other businesses? It'd cause issues to say the least, they should be using smart management to move around and make changes they need but the EU is the opposite of that approach so the economic hindrances it places. I doubt there's huge issues with how it's all implemented but even just a few uncompetitive and hindering regulations would add up for an entire economy that should be making it's own decisions rather than being forced along with general stuff.
Last edited:
The IMF
I mean really ? they have a long history of getting predicitions very wrong, they're not to be trusted at all.Told this country we should join the Euro.
Did well in Greece didn't they ?
Last edited:
- Status