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.
I don't understand why anyone would want to stay in the EU? :confused:

I think only rich people will vote to stay and everyone else, has head in phone and don't have a clue. :rolleyes:

I despair. :mad:

You have to be mad or rich to want the EU period. :rolleyes:
 
I'd actually been on the fence for a long time and I've spent most of my working life working for global companies so can see the benefits of the EU with ease of travel, access to healthcare, freedom of movement etc... Saying that, working in Australia, The USA and other non-EU countries has never really been a drag so I certainly think that we *could* survive being European but not in the EU. What are they going to do, cut off our trade altogether? I think not.

What I will say is that all the rhetoric from the EU politicians recently just makes me want to vote "leave" and say, "**** you" in all honesty. It might put my job in jeopardy but then my company still manages to operate absolutely fine in countries like Turkey, for example. Maybe all these post-apocalyptic predictions are just scaremongering.

Personally, I think the blatant contempt that the political elite hold the general population in may actually swing this one. Who knows? To me it's a once in a lifetime chance to do something different, and the more I hear from the EU establishment, the less I want them making decisions for us. I've always been very conservative politically but hey, I think I might actually go against the grain for once.
 
Last edited:
Narj said:
To me it's a once in a lifetime chance to do something different, and the more I hear from the EU establishment, the less I want them making decisions for us. I've always been very conservative politically but hey, I think I might actually go against the grain for once.
Click to expand...

^^^^^ This 110%. ;)
 
Just did a test install under proposed circumstances

xj6E8B4.jpg
 
So the scare tactics are starting, Dave has said we'll have our very own Jungle on the south coast if we leave.

How long until prices at Asda will rise to a level we can't afford like with the Scottish vote.
 
Last edited:
anticonscience said:
So the scare tactics are starting, Dave as said we'll have our very own Jungle on the south coast of we leave.

How long until prices at Asda will rise to a level we can't afford like with the Scottish vote.
Click to expand...

Yes I saw that - ridiculous scaremongering but we all knew it was coming. Does Cameron really think that all those so-called refugees want to live in camps, just not French camps? They'll beggar off to London and work in the criminal economy.

I fully expect that shortly before the referendum we'll have a teary-eyed Cameron threatening to resign as PM if we vote Leave.
 
itchy said:
I don't understand why anyone would want to stay in the EU? :confused:

I think only rich people will vote to stay and everyone else, has head in phone and don't have a clue. :rolleyes:

I despair. :mad:

You have to be mad or rich to want the EU period. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Well I personally don't think we'll automatically be screwed if we leave, but I think there's the potential to be screwed over time if we leave.

As for rich people... they'll still be OK out of the EU. For one, Dave will be able to repeal all the EU legislation that protects workers. He'll be able to have as many slaves low-paid workers on 0-hour contracts, working 100 hours a week as he likes.

He won't have to tighten up laws on housing, and slum landlords will continue to be able to drain the slaves low-paid workers for >50% of their net income, whilst living in mouldy, damp infested hell-holes.

Britain outside the EU has the potential to go back to Victorian era wealth distribution. The landed gentry and the plebs.

I don't think the wealthy 1% have anything to really fear from leaving the EU.
 
scorza said:
Yes I saw that - ridiculous scaremongering but we all knew it was coming. Does Cameron really think that all those so-called refugees want to live in camps, just not French camps? They'll beggar off to London and work in the criminal economy.

I fully expect that shortly before the referendum we'll have a teary-eyed Cameron threatening to resign as PM if we vote Leave.
Click to expand...

It's even more deluded then that. We don't this problem with flights because the transport carrier is responsible for making sure everyone has a right to travel to their destination. If they don't they will be fined.


I liked this quote on another forum:

For a stable political entity, cultural convergence should precede political convergence. See the USA, GB, Germany for successful examples.
Examples of what happens when you do it the other way around include Yugoslavia, the USSR and the EU.
Click to expand...


What Boris had to say today:

Bzzzt went the bell. I looked up in amazement from my reading on bus routes or sustainable drainage or whatever. It was 7am. Who the heck was ringing my doorbell before breakfast?

“Helloooo,” said a seductive female voice. “It’s ITV – we want to know your views on Europe.” And so I told her what I have told everyone else in the last few days. “Donnez moi un break,” I said.

This is the last phase of a critical negotiation. We have some proposals from the Polish leader, Donald Tusk, but they are not yet even agreed among other EU leaders. The president of the European Parliament, Martin Schulz, has already said that he wants to unscramble them.

This is the moment to stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood, squint down the barrel and only when you see the whites of their eyes, finally decide whether to stay in or leave the EU; because the arguments are as finely balanced as they have ever been.

The choice is really quite simple. In favour of staying, it is in Britain’s geo-strategic interests to be pretty intimately engaged in the doings of a continent that has a grim 20th-century history, and whose agonies have caused millions of Britons to lose their lives. History shows that they need us. Leaving would be widely read as a very negative signal for Europe. It would dismay some of our closest friends, not least the eastern Europeans for whom the EU has been a force for good: stability, openness, and prosperity.

It is also true that the single market is of considerable value to many UK companies and consumers, and that leaving would cause at least some business uncertainty, while embroiling the Government for several years in a fiddly process of negotiating new arrangements, so diverting energy from the real problems of this country – low skills, low social mobility, low investment etc – that have nothing to do with Europe.

Against these points we must enter the woeful defects of the EU. It is manifestly undemocratic and in some ways getting worse. It is wasteful, expensive and occasionally corrupt. The Common Agricultural Policy is iniquitous towards developing countries. The EU is legislating over an ever wider range of policy areas, now including human rights, and with Britain ever more frequently outvoted. There is currently no effective means of checking this one-way ratchet of growth-strangling regulation, and to make matters worse the EU is now devoting most of its intellectual energy to trying to save the euro, a flawed project from which we are thankfully exempt. The EU’s share of global trade is diminishing, and the people who prophesy doom as a result of Brexit are very largely the same people who said we should join the euro.

So there is the dilemma in a nutshell: Britain in the EU good, in so far as that means helping to shape the destiny of a troubled continent in uncertain times, while trading freely with our partners. Britain in the EU bad, in so far as it is a political project whose destiny of ever-closer union we don’t accept and whose lust to regulate we can’t stop.

That is why for the last couple of years I have argued that we would be – on the whole – better off in a reformed EU, but that Britain could have a great future outside. In deciding how to vote I (and I expect a few others) will want to know whether we have genuinely achieved any reform, and whether there is the prospect of any more. So let’s look at the Tusk proposals, in turn, and ask some hard questions.
First: this “protection” for the UK and other countries that don’t use the euro: is it a concession by them, or by us? The salient point appears to be that the UK will not be able to block moves to create a fiscal union – a deeply anti-democratic exercise. Do we really think that they should be able to use EU institutions, which we share, to centralise tax and budgetary powers? Why? And what does it all mean for the City? What are these new “macro-prudential” powers over banks that Brussels seems to want?

Next: competitiveness. The language is excellent. Tusk talks about lowering administrative burdens, cutting compliance costs and repealing unnecessary legislation. Very good. But we have heard this kind of thing for a while. How many laws has the EU actually repealed, what are they, and why should we believe that this process will accelerate? Why are we not insisting on a timetable for a real single market in services?

On sovereignty, it looks as though the Prime Minister has done better than many expected, in that EU leaders have apparently agreed that the phrase “ever-closer union” should no longer serve as a signpost for integration. That is potentially very important, since the European Court has often made use of the phrase in advancing its more aggressively federalist judgments. But how bankable is this? Will it be engraved in the treaties? Will the court be obliged to take account of this change, or will it be blown away – like Tony Blair’s evanescent opt-out from the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights? How can we restore the force of that Lisbon opt-out, and stop the court making rulings on human rights? In asserting Parliament’s sovereignty, how can we construct something that will be truly intimidating both to the law-making activism of the commission and the judicial activism of the court? Are we talking bazooka or popgun?

Last, on borders, we seem to have accepted the mantra that “free movement” is an age-old inviolable principle of the EU. This is not quite so. Until recently it only applied to “workers” rather than all EU citizens. Why didn’t we try harder to recapture control of our borders, rather than stick at this minor (if worthwhile) change to the law on benefits? There may be a good explanation, but we need to hear it.

These are the questions I pose, humbly and respectfully. Let’s hope for some answers in the next fortnight.
Click to expand...
 
Boris must have splinters in his bum from sitting on the fence that long.

Pathetic politicians scared to speak with their conscience.
 
Narj said:
Boris must have splinters in his bum from sitting on the fence that long.

Pathetic politicians scared to speak with their conscience.
Click to expand...

Honestly can't believe that **** I've been proper hoodwinked with him I honestly thought he was anti eu and pro Britain.

I think someone's had a word and said your gonna be on for a good position if you vote with us...
 
ReltonBFD said:
Honestly can't believe that **** I've been proper hoodwinked with him I honestly thought he was anti eu and pro Britain.

I think someone's had a word and said your gonna be on for a good position if you vote with us...
Click to expand...

I think a lot of people have really been surprised how he's done a complete U turn, lost any respect I had for him now.

Teresa May is another one who seems to have been got at.
 
I'm saying a referendum on if we should stay in or out of the EU, is about the EU as it stands, not some crackpot future version those with an out agenda make up in their heads!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom