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.
100% out.

Europe is a shambles. A failed experiment with no leadership apart from the German economy.

Example before the greek crisis hit they got Billions of euros to build ports. Massive massive ports all very well and good. Thing is there is ZERO land infrastructure to support there ports. Nothing no major rail or road links, not very good for anyone apart from the port makers who no doubt are lobbying the unelected commissars as we speak. I was pro Europe but no longer its a mess.

Economical it will make little difference once the curve smooths as usual. But the pro in will be using this as a scare tactic.
 
In = status quo. Proven financial benefits for the country, some pressure from Poles/Romanians/etc. in the menial jobs sectors.

Out = Unpredictable financial consequences, more Indian/Pakistani/African immigrants, end of freedom of movement in the EU for Brits, barriers for British companies when expanding in the second largest economy on the planet.

Oh noes! Not more brown people!

I mean what have Asians and Africans ever done for us...apart from inventing us a national cuisine, opening shops that don't close at 5:30 pm and forging the most popular genres of music of the modern era....nuffink....that's what!
 
Some more.

+ Undemocratic, it would fail its own criteria of joining the EU by not being a democracy - Ever heard of the EU elections?

+ We were led into it under false pretences. - Not an argument

+ Our lack of commitment to the project is felt across the EU
+ As a result we have very little influence - Imagine the influence we will have from on the outside... :rolleyes: That's actually a pro stay argument.

+ I suspect the EU would be happier if we left. - not an argument

+ I think we will both be happier if we rejoined in 20 - 40 years time ready to fully commit (if we wanted to) - not an argument


+ Is going to expand and likely to have borders with Russia and the middle east in the not too distant future - Unless the Earth gets invaded by aliens first. Either way, not an argument.


+ Has been flooded with migrants that were invited by a few EU members but then want to spread around including Britain - Britain has full control on non-EU immigrants so... not an argument

+ Those migrants will hold EU passports in 5 years time and will gain the right to free movement - Make that 8+ years but I suppose you have a point if terrorists are willing to spend 8 years of their life learning the German language, laws, get jobs and have no criminal record whatsoever.


+ It has got too big too fast - That's one argument, I guess.

+ Sometimes the European Court on Human Rights has overruled our courts and what the people of Britain want - Teh EU and the ECHR are two different things. Fun fact: Russia is member of the ECHR ;). Not an argument.

So basically you have one argument, fast growth, one half argument and one pro stay argument. :D
 
Oh noes! Not more brown people!

I mean what have Asians and Africans ever done for us...apart from inventing us a national cuisine, opening shops that don't close at 5:30 pm and forging the most popular genres of music of the modern era....nuffink....that's what!

They integrate slower, have worse English skills, take in benefits more than they pay in, their cultures are vastly different than Western culture. It's a contradiction to be worried about immigrants in general and to be for leaving the EU.

I personally think immigration is a vital resource for the country, regardless of the country of origin.
 
+ Undemocratic, it would fail its own criteria of joining the EU by not being a democracy - Ever heard of the EU elections?

Yes. We vote for a representative in the European Parliament (anyone know who represents you? I have no idea, but I do know who my MP is).

"Although the European Parliament has legislative power that the Council and Commission do not possess, it does not formally possess legislative initiative, as most national parliaments of European Union member states do.[7][8][9] The Parliament is the "first institution" of the EU (mentioned first in the treaties, having ceremonial precedence over all authority at European level),[10] and shares equal legislative and budgetary powers with the Council (except in a few areas where the special legislative procedures apply)"

The European Commission (who we don't elect a representative for):

"The European Commission (EC) is the executive body of the European Union responsible for proposing legislation, implementing decisions, upholding the EU treaties and managing the day-to-day business of the EU"

This doesn't seem very democratic to me and many others.

+ We were led into it under false pretences. - Not an argument

How can we respect it when our beginnings were not honest? It is an argument and is one of the reasons why we are having this referendum.

+ Our lack of commitment to the project is felt across the EU
+ As a result we have very little influence - Imagine the influence we will have from on the outside... :rolleyes: That's actually a pro stay argument.

I don't really want to get sensational but it is like talking to a brick wall. Merkel: "Treaty change might be possible. Not now, but perhaps later." "Perhaps later" is what your wife says when she means no.

How much legislation was proposed by Britain? How much legislation have we blocked?

+ I suspect the EU would be happier if we left. - not an argument

It is an argument for improving our relations after the initial disappointment of leaving.

+ I think we will both be happier if we rejoined in 20 - 40 years time ready to fully commit (if we wanted to) - not an argument

The argument is that voting out, does not mean we vote out permanently the argument is only weak due to the time frames that are involved. My suspicions are a out vote will not mean us committing to leaving anyway.

+ Is going to expand and likely to have borders with Russia and the middle east in the not too distant future - Unless the Earth gets invaded by aliens first. Either way, not an argument.

10 to 20 years and it will do. And it is certainly an argument, many believe it has become too large too soon (I do too) and they have an aim of getting bigger.

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


+ Has been flooded with migrants that were invited by a few EU members but then want to spread around including Britain - Britain has full control on non-EU immigrants so... not an argument


+ Those migrants will hold EU passports in 5 years time and will gain the right to free movement - Make that 8+ years but I suppose you have a point if terrorists are willing to spend 8 years of their life learning the German language, laws, get jobs and have no criminal record whatsoever.

Not just terrorists. Rapists, murderers, those who have very little respect for women and the lack of respect for law and order in general. This issue will be the tipping point. There is a thread on another forum about Sweden and the people over there are very concerned. The atmosphere has changed and local crime has rocketed.
 
Sometimes the European Court on Human Rights has overruled our courts and what the people of Britain want

The keyword here is 'sometimes', but let's chuck the baby out with the bathwater, why don't we! Only show trials operate on mob majorities and appeasement of the crowd. From which template do you think any potential British Bill of Rights will be drawn up from? Do you honestly think laws are better when they follow public opinion or work solely from the principle of swift vengeance? Really think it through.

I think having a federal European Court of Justice is a huge bonus, rights, warts and all. Not perfect (no legal organisation is) but workable as it currently stands, hugely influenced by British thought on International Law, and it does get more decisions right than it does wrong. Especially in cases of individual liberty vs the polity of big business and broad state interests. It also acts as a check of last resort on potentially corrupt legal practices developing within and destabilising the block; basically the idea of a national high court taken a touch further.

And yes, the 'oh, no, EoJ looses terrorists/hate preachers on every corner of Britain!' crowd, I'm quite happy to sacrifice a modicum of personal safety, should it come to it, for more personal liberty in most cases. Your priorities may differ. But please do look beyond the cyclical media furore on this issue.
 
Last edited:
"The European Commission (EC) is the executive body of the European Union responsible for proposing legislation, implementing decisions, upholding the EU treaties and managing the day-to-day business of the EU"

This doesn't seem very democratic to me and many others.

And do you also vote in the Civil Service, its leaders and all the members of the cabinet too? Under most common representative arrangements, you vote for your reps and let them take care of the rest. Some bodies are set up as neutral and independent, others are voted on. It's as democratic/undemocratic as home, when you come to it.

More on your specific example:

The Commission operates as a cabinet government, with 28 members of the Commission (informally known as "commissioners").[4] There is one member per member state, though members are bound to represent the interests of the EU as a whole rather than their home state.

Sounds pretty sensible to me. And no, you cannot always get your own way for your own national interest, but that's the whole point! As an alternative to butchering each other for dominance every few decades, it works pretty well!
 
Last edited:
But please do look beyond the cyclical media furore on this issue.

Don't worry about me, I have spent a long time thinking, reading and watching Youtube on this issue focusing on both sides of the debate. I too conceded to the higher level of liberty as a positive for remaining, and this is something I'm quite big on. It is certainly a tough sell at the expense of lives though. The issue of the proposed Investigatory Powers Bill and the EUs take on it also comes to mind.
 
Don't worry about me, I have spent a long time thinking, reading and watching Youtube on this issue focusing on both sides of the debate. I too conceded to the higher level of liberty as a positive for remaining, and this is something I'm quite big on. It is certainly a tough sell at the expense of lives though. The issue of the proposed Investigatory Powers Bill and the EUs take on it also comes to mind.

That's fair enough, Trifid. This being GD, it's hard to tell who's just pulling one's leg, and who's actually looked into the matter and made up their mind based on evidence. :) As for discovering your MEPs, check out your local government website, they should have them listed in a dedicated subsection.
 
They integrate slower, have worse English skills, take in benefits more than they pay in, their cultures are vastly different than Western culture. It's a contradiction to be worried about immigrants in general and to be for leaving the EU.

So do you regret the mass immigration of Asians and Africans in 50s and 60s or were they better class of brown immigrant than today?
 
Bear in mind that this is a generally pro eu forum too and it was very close!

Im very pro EU, but at this moment in time i would actually reject my previous position and say "sure why not". The UK could end up better off because of it but i still think its a bit of a coin flip. Im sure my opinion will flip flop as the real discussion starts closer to the time.
 
Remain.

The Leave campaigns are bickering amongst themselves. Just because they can't cooperate doesn't mean that the rest of us can't. Only a united Europe is going to be able to compete with China and the US on a level footing. Only a united Europe can defeat ISIS.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom