Poll: EU Referendum Voting Intentions

How do you intent to vote in the EU referendum

  • Yes - to stay in the EU

    Votes: 486 58.1%

  • No - to leave the EU

    Votes: 307 36.7%

  • Sepp Blatter

    Votes: 43 5.1%
  • Total voters
    836
Status
Not open for further replies.
anything I don't mind said:
I think it seems the reasonable approach. What is unreasonable is to enter without a vote then make it next to impossible to leave because of voting corruption, massive pro eu propaganda and the rest. If Cameron has the power to leave then he should just do that without the population voting on it.
Click to expand...

At least as part of joining the EU a case was made even if it was flawed as some may have argued. The case for leaving hasn't yet been made.
 
Burnsy2023 said:
When you look at any highly skilled job like finance, IT, healthcare or research you'll see members from all over Europe. You simply can't fill this in the UK and the EU undoubtedly makes this easier to recruit talent to the UK.
Click to expand...

Oh fair enough I must have read that as unskilled, for a moment I thought you were saying importing dominos pizza sign holders and car washers was a success :p
 
phil675 said:
Oh fair enough I must have read that as unskilled, for a moment I thought you were saying importing dominos pizza sign holders and car washers was a success :p
Click to expand...

Indeed. We do need to realise that whilst unskilled labour brings issues, it's difficult to change it without also making it harder and more expensive to recruit skilled workers.
 
There wouldn't be a shortage of skilled workers if companies took people on and trained them on the job like they used too instead of running straight for the cheapest workers in europe that can do the job
 
arknor said:
There wouldn't be a shortage of skilled workers if companies took people on and trained them on the job like they used too instead of running straight for the cheapest workers in europe that can do the job
Click to expand...

That's certainly not correct for all labour gaps like I mentioned above, indeed I think that whole point is a misnomer. I haven't seen any evidence to support it.

In fact it doesn't even make sense. If you can't fill the gaps from foreign labour then you raise wages - brick laying is a good example of this. We still have labour gaps in skilled trades like this but even more acutely in highly skilled professions.
 
Moses said:
Of course there's that risk, but I don't see it as a realistic one.
Click to expand...

It's not one I'd be overly concerned about either as to do that is liable to disadvantage others in the European Union to at least a similar level to us but it is still a risk.

Moses said:
Yep, it's a good thing. But we could be involved in it without being involved in anything to do with the EU if we so wanted - it's not as though anyone would object... no one would want us to be some weird safe harbour for criminals, and we wouldn't want that sort of person to want to come here.

Yep, and he did. I was merely pointing out that various pros attributed to the EU, and thus used as reasons why we should stay in, could easily be done without the EU and therefore aren't necessarily great examples.
Click to expand...

Again could be done and would be done are not always the same thing. It's also easy in hindsight to say "we'll we'd have done that on our own" - the subsequent questions to that answer are would we have done so and would we have had the ability and wherewithal to negotiate and drive through changes like that across potentially unwilling partners?

Moses said:
I'm solidly pro EU. I just find loads of the pro arguments to be ridiculous - like when people slate immigration and pro-EU people say how the NHS would fail without immigration. It's just a pathetic point to make, given we could end free movement and get NHS employees in on visas anyway. Debating immigration in isolation is utterly retarded - essentially ending free movement of people wouldn't be that bad if it was possible, but our EU partners are against that so we have to instead accept that there are bad aspects to free movement of people, but those negatives are outweighed by other positives of the EU. Free movement of people is somewhat flawed, but the EU as a whole = good.
Click to expand...

An unfortunate position to be in - for the EU and against the arguments that are made in favour of it... :p You're right of course that some of the arguments on both sides are ridiculous but that's part of the nature of these debates.

Out of interest what do you see as the strongest reasons for the EU?
 
Moses said:
It's something good the EU has done. But you have to admit that we don't need to be part of the EU to benefit from it, though, right?
Click to expand...

That benefit is only possible due to the work that has previously been achieved in the EU though. It seems to be a position in the UK that we should milk the EU for all it's worth with as little effort and commitment as possible. This just doesn't sit right with me.


Moses said:
So basically you get rid of free movement and then have a visa system, probably with quotas for most industries. With something like the NHS you could say we really, really need y number of doctors because we can't/don't produce enough - you have x here, so y - x = the quota of doctors you allow in on visas.

But then with another random industry you could say they need y number of people, and as it stands we can get x from the UK pool of labour, so then you say they can get part of that gap through migration (on visas), then the rest of the shortfall will have to be covered by them providing desirable apprenticeship schemes and so forth. The gap is y - x = z, but then you allow them to have visas for 50% of z, or however you want to weight it.
Click to expand...

Visas are far from ideal. Having a visa system will always add cost and delays to getting people that are needed. How much is this a problem? I don't have the data for that, but even small delays add up when you scale it up across the whole economy. Does that mean the NHS would collapse? No, I'm not suggesting that, but it could cost a whole load of money to keep us where we are now.

Moses said:
We'd only not be as progressive if we didn't want to be, no? Eg. if we were more conservative or more liberal than the EU we could do what we wanted, no?
Click to expand...

That's assuming that the people are actually properly represented on a national level which we're not. At the least MEPs are elected using PR.

Moses said:
Yep, and he did. I was merely pointing out that various pros attributed to the EU, and thus used as reasons why we should stay in, could easily be done without the EU and therefore aren't necessarily great examples.
Click to expand...

We could do a lot of things to make our society fairer but we don't. Like I said, the EU tends to take a long term view which domestic governments simply don't.
 
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jun/19/danish-peoples-party-dahl-border-controls-election Looks like DCam has an ally in Europe now. Free movement of people may be a fundamental principle of the EU but it's one that's increasingly looking unworkable and just a really bad idea.

Burnsy2023 said:
We could do a lot of things to make our society fairer but we don't. Like I said, the EU tends to take a long term view which domestic governments simply don't.
Click to expand...

Bwahaha - the EU does nothing of the sort. If the EU is good at anything it's getting all 28 member states to agree on something, even if that means abandoning a sensible long term plan and throwing in a short-term bung to a disagreeing state - e.g. Italy over confirming Jean-Claude Juncker as EU President.
 
LOL on C4 news just now we've just seen evidence of Italian and Austrian border forces conspiring to get a load of Med migrants onto a train that would get them into Germany. "United in Diversity" I don't think so.
 
SciNeT said:
Britain needs to get a better deal from Brussels or leave the EU major new study argues...
Click to expand...

Britain needs to get a better deal from Brussels or leave the EU major new study by a group whose stated purpose is "to give a voice to the large, but often silent, majority among Britain’s business community who want to see fundamental changes made to the terms of our EU membership" argues, you mean.

Being produced by such a group doesn't mean their arguments are invalid but it's hardly a massive new contribution to the debate or a neutral piece of research, is it?
 
I wonder how true this is?

http://www.breitbart.com/london/201...new-rules-to-advertise-uk-jobs-across-europe/

New EU rules which will see British jobs being advertised Europe-wide have gained the backing of Conservative Members of the European Parliament (MEPs).

The Parliament’s Committee of Employment and Social Affairs today voted in favour making it easier for jobseekers across Europe to find jobs in Britain and all other member states. The aim of the new rules is to allow citizens of countries with high unemployment rates to take advantage of the jobs market in countries such as the UK, where unemployment is low.

In an attachment to the text of the legislation, the author of the draft bill, Austrian MEP Heinz Becker explains: “The freedom to work anywhere in the EU is a key aspect of freedom of movement, one of the four basic freedoms on which the EU is founded, and thus also of EU citizenship.

“The mass unemployment affecting some parts of Europe provides a compelling argument in favour of improving labour mobility within the EU, creating new employment opportunities for workers and helping employers to fill vacancies more quickly and more effectively.”

The bill includes articles which will force Britain to publish all job applications advertised nationally on the EURES jobs portal hosted by the European Commission. The portal employs 850 employment experts tasked with linking jobseekers to employers across the EU.
Click to expand...

:eek:
 
OldCoals said:
I wonder how true this is?
Click to expand...

It's true in that there's legislation that will help, and encourage, the advertising of jobs across the EU. The tagline of "all British jobs" appears to be untrue.

Equally, it'll ensure more of the 300 million jobs or so in the rest of the EU will be advertised to UK citizens.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom