Poll: The EU Referendum: What Will You Vote?

[kitch9]

Firstly, without the EU, the former Communist republics would be different shades of Ukraine. They are now democracies with tens of millions looking to buy the main thing that Britain sells: services. Britain has benefited tremendously from this highly lucrative market that simply does not exist if you step anywhere outside the border of the EU (or EFTA).

Secondly, while it's true EU migration has put some pressure on countries such as Britain, Germany or France, these migrants are needed in the big economies because if they weren't, Britain in example would not accept millions of Indians, Pakistani and Africans along with them. Unlike those 3 groups, EU migrants are more likely to be quickly assimilated, they usually speak English and they don't belong to vastly different cultures because their native cultures are heavily influenced by Western culture.

Finally, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. The EU can do much more as a single entity than any of its members. As one of the big 3 in the EU, Britain is in a position where its voice matters. Outside the EU, it will be former empire who left the most ambitious political project mankind has ever undertaken because it didn't like the Poles who wore Nike tracksuits and made jokes in their own language.

The UK entry requirements for say Australian nationals is exceedingly high, meanwhile we have streets full non English speaking Roma who spit seeds everywhere, terrorise the locals and undercut prices on the lowest paid jobs in order to claim in work benefits which are readily available to migrants.

I can't fathom why that benefits us.

 

[Tunney]

Worth remembering that Britain is the second largest exporter of workers in the EU and that's before you account for all of the retired Brits abroad.

 

[kitch9]

Worth remembering that Britain is the second largest exporter of workers in the EU and that's before you account for all of the retired Brits abroad.

Doesn't help net migration stats apparently. We are probably exporting our high skilled labour in return for an over supply of unskilled labour.

Again, not particularly exciting. That's the exact opposite of what we need.

 

[Closing]

The UK entry requirements for say Australian nationals is exceedingly high, meanwhile we have streets full non English speaking Roma who spit seeds everywhere, terrorise the locals and undercut prices on the lowest paid jobs in order to claim in work benefits which are readily available to migrants.

I can't fathom why that benefits us.

Here here!!

 

[phil675]

Firstly, without the EU, the former Communist republics would be different shades of Ukraine. They are now democracies with tens of millions looking to buy the main thing that Britain sells: services. Britain has benefited tremendously from this highly lucrative market that simply does not exist if you step anywhere outside the border of the EU (or EFTA).

Secondly, while it's true EU migration has put some pressure on countries such as Britain, Germany or France, these migrants are needed in the big economies because if they weren't, Britain in example would not accept millions of Indians, Pakistani and Africans along with them. Unlike those 3 groups, EU migrants are more likely to be quickly assimilated, they usually speak English and they don't belong to vastly different cultures because their native cultures are heavily influenced by Western culture.

Finally, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. The EU can do much more as a single entity than any of its members. As one of the big 3 in the EU, Britain is in a position where its voice matters. Outside the EU, it will be former empire who left the most ambitious political project mankind has ever undertaken because it didn't like the Poles who wore Nike tracksuits and made jokes in their own language.

We don't need mass, unrestricted immigration or an undemocratic body making overarching legislation for any of that.

Trade organization yes, United States of Europe no. Leave EU and be a trading member like Norway etc at the very least. Actual reform is never going to happen.

 

[evsknight]

I do get the distinct feeling that even if it the out vote wins, if it's close that it won't be what the we currently think. We're too embedded to be completely separate again

 

[phil675]

I do get the distinct feeling that even if it the out vote wins, if it's close that it won't be what the we currently think. We're too embedded to be completely separate again

Yes even if an out vote succeeds it will take huge political will to separate, and will take years, giving the EU plenty of time to make our lives hell. It's a start though.

 

[izzop]

I do get the distinct feeling that even if it the out vote wins, if it's close that it won't be what the we currently think. We're too embedded to be completely separate again

Yes even if an out vote succeeds it will take huge political will to separate, and will take years, giving the EU plenty of time to make our lives hell. It's a start though.

Certainly, it will take time and there won't be any direct change when you wake up the following day.

As said, it's a start and we need to start somewhere, that somewhere being Out.

 

[bowey]

Finally, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. The EU can do much more as a single entity than any of its members. As one of the big 3 in the EU, Britain is in a position where its voice matters.

EU state aid rules do not allow aid such as emergency loans or government guarantees on loans to steel manufacturers in financial difficulties

Our voice matters.

 

[robgmun]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...Furious-Brexit-campaign-says-PM-old-deal.html

This renegotiation between Cameron and the EU reminds me of the scene from Robot Chicken spoofing ESB

 

[Trifid]

Someone quoted this on another forum and it does make for unnerving reading looking back on it.

With chilling candour, this paper (from FCO folder 30/1048) predicted that it would take 30 years for the British people to wake up to the real nature of the European project that Edward Heath was about to take them into, by which time it would be too late for them to leave. Its author made clear that the Community was headed for economic, monetary and fiscal union, with a common foreign and defence policy, which would constitute the greatest surrender of Britain’s national sovereignty in history. Since “Community law” would take precedence over our own, ever more power would pass to this new bureaucratic system centred in Brussels – and, as the role of Parliament diminished, this would lead to a “popular feeling of alienation from government”.

It would therefore become the duty of politicians “not to exacerbate public concern by attributing unpopular measures… to the remote and unmanageable workings of the Community”. Politicians of all parties should be careful to conceal the fact that controversial laws originated in Brussels. By this means it might be possible to preserve the illusion that the British government was still sovereign, “for this century at least” – by which time it would no longer be possible for us to leave.

 

[scorza]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRKOr_RhdyA

Anyone see C4 news last night? They showed some clips of the above debate between current and former senior politicians from each of the 28 member states about Britain's future in the EU. Our representative was Lord Lamont (who was excellent) and boy did they all gang up on him - the Irish representative even went so far as to claim Britain leaving the EU would be treated as a 'hostile act' by Europe. This constant disrespect show towards Britain and the wishes of the British people from Europe's politicians is one of the reasons why I don't see that we have a future in this dangerous experiment.

 

[Trifid]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRKOr_RhdyA

I suspect those who are heading the out campaign will be looking very closely at the suggested UK budget contribution to the EU after the out campaign.

Edit: 33:40 - the woman who said "we didn't ask for a referendum". She seems nice.


And Ireland thinking it can cherry pick what it wants from London...

 

[scorza]

Migrationwatch: Leaving the EU would cut Migration by 100,000. We all know it's the only way to get net migration back down to the "tens of thousands" promised by David Cameron.

 

[Mr Jack]

Migrationwatch: Leaving the EU would cut Migration by 100,000. We all know it's the only way to get net migration back down to the "tens of thousands" promised by David Cameron.

I suspect that it would fall by more than that under those circumstances. If the UK fails to, or decides not to, get back into the common market then it's likely we'll see a considerable contraction in the UK economy. If, on the other hand, we want continued access to the EU common market, freedom to work is part of the price we'll pay alongside having a whole load of rules we need to keep to but have no say over.

 

[scorza]

I suspect that it would fall by more than that under those circumstances. If the UK fails to, or decides not to, get back into the common market then it's likely we'll see a considerable contraction in the UK economy. If, on the other hand, we want continued access to the EU common market, freedom to work is part of the price we'll pay alongside having a whole load of rules we need to keep to but have no say over.

I know you honestly believe what you write, but maybe you should have a read of this on what life is really like outside the EU. Mrs Kleveland is the director of the ‘Nei Til EU’ campaign which fought against going into the EU in 1972 and 1994.

“Your former prime minister Gordon Brown has said leaving the EU would be ‘the North Korea option, out in the cold with few friends, no influence, little new trade and even less new investment’. I have to say, this has not been our experience in Norway!

“But we have been through the same scare stories you are hearing now. In 1994, the big corporations said we would lose 100,000 jobs if we didn’t join. We were told investors would abandon our country. We decided we wouldn’t be bullied, and look what has happened. Unemployment has been lower than the EU average every year since 1994, and foreign investment in Norway has increased several hundred per cent.”

Mrs Kleveland also warned against the idea that it was necessary to melt into the EU in order to have a say at the “top table”, highlighting the increasing importance of worldwide engagement.

“Instead of being isolated, our small country has in many ways a louder voice in important global bodies like the World Trade Organisation than bigger EU countries, because Brussels controls how they vote. In fact, our neighbours in Denmark and Sweden will often come to us, asking that we make some proposal for them which the EU will not give permission for them to make on their own.

“I know not having the freedom to act without permission has been a problem here as well, for example in the steel industry”.

She did acknowledge that the Norway option has its problems, but denies that the country has to do whatever the EU says with no power to say no.

“We adopted about 9 per cent of EU laws and regulations between 2000 and 2013, but it’s a long way to 100 per cent. We do have a veto over directives we really do not like.

“Outside the EU, we control our own farm policies and our own fishing waters. We can make trade deals with any country anywhere in the world. The relationship is not perfect, but it is an improvement on full membership, and we are working to make it better. It would be wonderful if an independent Britain could become our partner in this work, so come out and join us! You will find that the so-called North Korea option is really not so bad.”

 

[Mr Jack]

I know you honestly believe what you write, but maybe you should have a read of this on what life is really like outside the EU. Mrs Kleveland is the director of the ‘Nei Til EU’ campaign which fought against going into the EU in 1972 and 1994.

Breitbart, lol.

But, more to the point, the "Norway option" is not the same option that MigrationWatch are talking about. Norway, of course, have to allow the same free right to work that we enjoy which is why I can freely look for jobs in Norway. The option MigrationWatch are talking about is not the same option.

If you're going to argue for advantages of leaving the EU you need to be clear about which of the possible outcomes of leaving the EU you are arguing for, you can't mix and match benefits from mutually incompatible outcomes.

 

[scorza]

Norway is free to impose its own immigration policy, until Schengen (which I imagine they now regret signing up to) then immigrants from EU countries required a work permit to be employed in Norway which is exactly the system we'd default to on Brexit according to Migrationwatch. Even now EU immigrants have to register with the Norwegian police within 3 months of arriving in the country and present their employment certificate - unthinkable discrimination to us in the UK.

 

[robgmun]

Breitbart, lol.

You can Breitbart, lol all you want, but when news outlets across Europe has been silenced then you have to turn to the few that's brave enough to report on whats really going on

 

[RDM]

You can Breitbart, lol all you want, but when news outlets across Europe has been silenced then you have to turn to the few that's brave enough to report on whats really going on

That isn't really the case though, isn't this just another case of people finding echo chambers reporting from a view point that they agree with? It isn't really any different than someone who is left leaning seeking out the Guardian's view on things. Breitbart has an editorial agenda, it aligns with your political ideology so you consider it more accurate because of it.