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

[scorza]

We're not being forced to change our benefits system at all . Any changes that are made are purely and simply the choice of the Conservative government.

But they're making the choice to keep the system that has served us well for over a hundred years increasingly unviable

 

[stewski]

But they're making the choice to keep the system that has served us well for over a hundred years increasingly unviable

In what way has the EU forced the Government to shake up benefits?
If only the Governement/EU anyone really would shake up tax avoidance and tax evasion eh!

 

[scorza]

In what way has the EU forced the Government to shake up benefits?
If only the Governement/EU anyone really would shake up tax avoidance and tax evasion eh!

By forcing us to pay our benefits to EU migrants.

Why can't we do both?

 

[stewski]

By forcing us to pay our benefits to EU migrants.

Why can't we do both?

OK - Let's start with the big one tax evasion/tax avoidance.

 

[scorza]

OK - Let's start with the big one tax evasion/tax avoidance.

Why can't we do both?

 

[RDM]

In what way has the EU forced the Government to shake up benefits?
If only the Governement/EU anyone really would shake up tax avoidance and tax evasion eh!

The Government/EU are working on both tax avoidance (which covers an awful lot of ground, including stuff you probably do) and illegal tax evasion. But they take an awful lot of time and involve getting international agreements.

 

[RDM]

But they're making the choice to keep the system that has served us well for over a hundred years increasingly unviable

Ignoring the fact that we haven't had universal benefits for 100 years, how much as a % of our benefit bill is paid out to immigrants? I would imagine it is a fairly small amount compared to how much is paid to native brits. So it isn't really immigration that would make us change it.

 

[stewski]

Why can't we do both?

That's just the same question, I'd say let's put proportional effort for the return on investment. So at least a 4-1 effort in favour of attacking tax evaders and avoiders, let's have advertising campaigns that we are targeting big businesses and "coming to get you" and lets stop propping up British controlled territories that are little more than offshore havens for the super rich.

Finally lets have commentards on forums boiling about tax evasion and tax avoidance on at least a 4 - 1 basis, rather than posting tons of stuff about benefits and then just saying "lets do both" when the super obvious is pointed out to them.

 

[bayo000]

You know who else can't claim under that system? Young British unemployed people - ought not the safety net catch them also? The fact is that we're unique in that we've had a universal benefits system for a long time now and it has worked because it is the most appropriate system of benefits for our country. It doesn't mean that we're more or less generous than any other system, just that it's universal so everyone gets it. There's never been a problem with it we couldn't sort out until the EU expanded into Eastern Europe and Tony Blair thought that only 13,000 migrants would come.

It wasn't that long ago when the report about migrants contributions to the system was published

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29910497

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/nov/05/eu-migrants-uk-gains-20bn-ucl-study

You better look at the problem at home before blaming people that actually contribute. Sure there are immigrants that take advantage of the system but for each of them there will be 10s or hundreds that contribute their fair share.

 

[scorza]

Ignoring the fact that we haven't had universal benefits for 100 years, how much as a % of our benefit bill is paid out to immigrants? I would imagine it is a fairly small amount compared to how much is paid to native brits. So it isn't really immigration that would make us change it.

If it's not an issue then why did the PM get this emergency brake on benefits for migrants for 4 years?

 

[Danthus]

If it's not an issue then why did the PM get this emergency brake on benefits for migrants for 4 years?

He hasn't.

 

[scorza]

That's just the same question, I'd say let's put proportional effort for the return on investment. So at least a 4-1 effort in favour of attacking tax evaders and avoiders, let's have advertising campaigns that we are targeting big businesses and "coming to get you" and lets stop propping up British controlled territories that are little more than offshore havens for the super rich.

Finally lets have commentards on forums boiling about tax evasion and tax avoidance on at least a 4 - 1 basis, rather than posting tons of stuff about benefits and then just saying "lets do both" when the super obvious is pointed out to them.

Sorry, I should have been clearer; why can't we do both at the same time?

 

[Danthus]

Sorry, I should have been clearer; why can't we do both at the same time?

Because you wouldn't like what would be needed to be done in order to address tax avoidance.

 

[Freakbro]

If it's not an issue then why did the PM get this emergency brake on benefits for migrants for 4 years?

To counter the argument from the anti-EU lobby and to appease the feebleminded who think it's an actual issue because certain parts of the media say so?

 

[scorza]

Because you wouldn't like what would be needed to be done in order to address tax avoidance.

What would need to be done in order to address tax avoidance? I think you'll find that I'm quite keen on cutting down on tax avoidance. I just don't see why we need to tackle it before we can tackle any other problems - are the cuts in government that severe that it can now only do one thing at a time?

 

[scorza]

To counter the argument from the anti-EU lobby and to appease the feebleminded who think it's an actual issue because certain parts of the media say so?

That's funny because I actually understand the anti-EU arguments and benefits claiming by migrants is one of the less important negative consequences of uncontrolled immigration from the EU. The only time I remember reading about this issue is in the pro-EU press who were desperate to portray current net contribution as the only thing that mattered as far as the immigration debate went. No-one thinks it's an actual big issue, and Cameron's emergency brake will improve nothing even notwithstanding OldCoal's somewhat camouflaged but otherwise excellent point that Cameron hasn't even got an emergency brake because we need other countries to tell us when we can use it.

 

[Freakbro]

No-one thinks it's an actual big issue,

Rubbish, I could find numerous headlines and corresponding posts on these boards that deem it a huge issue

 

[deuse]

That's funny because I actually understand the anti-EU arguments and benefits claiming by migrants is one of the less important negative consequences of uncontrolled immigration from the EU. The only time I remember reading about this issue is in the pro-EU press who were desperate to portray current net contribution as the only thing that mattered as far as the immigration debate went. No-one thinks it's an actual big issue, and Cameron's emergency brake will improve nothing even notwithstanding OldCoal's somewhat camouflaged but otherwise excellent point that Cameron hasn't even got an emergency brake because we need other countries to tell us when we can use it.

Cameron hasn't go a thing and never will. And this brake deal is UP TO 4 years.
So that means they can stop the money anywhere between 1 hour and 4 years. And if the TPP goes through you won't stand a chance.

 

[Mr Jack]

But they're making the choice to keep the system that has served us well for over a hundred years increasingly unviable

No, they're not. There's no push factor here that is forcing us to change. It's entirely our choice. EU migrants simply do not claim enough welfare to make it "unviable"; in fact they claim less and contribute more than British citizens on average.

And stop saying "for over a hundred years"; it just makes you look silly when everyone who's vaguely looked at knows our welfare system has been chopped and changed loads of time in the last hundred years.

 

[jas72]

That's funny because I actually understand the anti-EU arguments and benefits claiming by migrants is one of the less important negative consequences of uncontrolled immigration from the EU. The only time I remember reading about this issue is in the pro-EU press who were desperate to portray current net contribution as the only thing that mattered as far as the immigration debate went. No-one thinks it's an actual big issue, and Cameron's emergency brake will improve nothing even notwithstanding OldCoal's somewhat camouflaged but otherwise excellent point that Cameron hasn't even got an emergency brake because we need other countries to tell us when we can use it.

What is the biggest issue then Scorza?

If you do leave the EU and all it's Economic Benefits what will you replace it with.

The UK is walking into minefield here with a blindfold on.

It's a hodge podge of misinformation and gripes most of which should be placed at the UK government's door but have been shifted sideways by a feeble government.

"Brussels made me do it" seems to be the standard phrase by the UK government and media.

Doesn't the UK have any influence in Europe? It actually does, it's one of the main members of the EU and blaming Europe seems to be the easy way out.

Based on the majority posts in this forum it's clear no one really has a clue why there even is a referendum in the first place.