|
The Pros and Cons of Brexit and Remain; an attempt at objectivity
|
|
Topic Started: Feb 26 2018, 09:09 AM (637 Views)
|
|
Steve K
|
Feb 26 2018, 09:09 AM
Post #1
|
- Posts:
- 33,954
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
This is an attempt to objectively lay out the relative pluses of Leaving or Remain and the obvious counter arguments (but not the counter counter or counter counter counter arguments)
As fairly as I can I've laid out: - Reasons to leave the EU - Reasons to Remain - Specious/False reasons to Leave - Specious False reasons to Remain
The idea is the OP gets updated with serious omissions and error corrections but discussions about the personalities involved or negotiations stay in their relevant threads. So comments please
| Reasons to Leave EU |
|---|
| Reason to Leave | Counter Argument |
|---|
1. We give the EU control of £13.1B a year (~250M a week) and net contribute £8.6B a year and we could make better use of that money
(link)
| The £13B is less than 1% of GDP and less than 2% of government spend and our farming and scientific areas benefit considerably from the £4.5B in grants we receive back from that | 2. Free movement and European Citizenship means we have to allow any of 450 million Europeans come here, take our jobs, take our benefits and place difficult to manage burdens on our housing, education systems and social services
Nearly 200,000 are coming each year
| The net numbers are reducing (just 90,000 net per year now) as the Eastern nations become more convergent, we can block those who are not genuinely seeking work and many of the EU migrants are filling essential roles in the NHS and other areas | | 3. We have to accept as British law rules made in Brussels where we are outvoted by the other nations who do not care about UK needs | We only have to accept such rules in limited areas, in all key areas we have a veto and in all political areas that veto is only released IF a specific UK referendum approves the change | | 4. The EU keeps expanding with new nations that are non convergent to the UK | We can veto any new nation joining and will not make the mistakes we made in 2004 | | 5 The EU takes control of our fishing areas through the Common Fisheries Policy | Fish do not recognise borders and without some agreement with EU nations our fish resources will just get trawled up when they wander into their waters. Some agreement is inevitable in or out | 6. We cannot negotiate beneficial trade deals with other countries
| There are no countries we could negotiate with that would be beneficial to UK jobs where we do not already have a substantial trade agreement through the EU (eg Australia, Canada) | | 7. The EU forces us to accept cruel animal practices such as live animal transport | There are no substantial reasons to end such practices as most people are happy with current meat supply
| | |
| Reasons to Remain in the EU |
|---|
| Reason to Remain | Counter Argument |
|---|
1. Being in the Single Market is vital to our economic position especially in these areas - Selling Financial Services to EU - Maintaining a Far East underwritten automotive manufacturing sector - Paper free goods transfer for all industries but especially Aerospace and Automotive
In the most obvious exit scenarios these will be so badly affected the country will be poorer and jobs lost
| The single market means we import more from the EU than we export to them so we have a strong hand to negotiate good trade deals for our key areas
Jobs lost will be balanced by less EU migrants working here | 2. Lack of free access to Europe's markets risks our key industries falling below critical mass so will inevitably contract or even die sucking in even more imports from more efficient large market serving competitors
| We will negotiate a trade deal with the EU that means these industries will survive and thrive | 3. Border with Ireland will be forced to be a hard border to implement WTO and EU rules. This risks NI becoming more alienated from the rest of the UK and worse it risks increased tensions in the republican dominated border areas
| Not if we negotiate a wide ranging free trade deal with the EU | 4. Border with mainland Europe will become paperwork intensive making supply less reliable and more expensive
| Not if we negotiate a wide ranging free trade deal with the EU | 5. Imports of food from Europe will become more expensive as we have to implement WTO tariffs
| Not if we negotiate a wide ranging free trade deal with the EU, we don't have to have any tariffs and anyway who doesn't like living off home grown turnips | 6. Access to European flights area, travel through Europe, access to health services, recognition of driving licences etc
| These things are easily negotiated and won't be a problem | | 7 We will lose the international negotiating muscle of being in the EU | The EU does not always negotiate in our interest and we should be bold and confident and the world will listen to us | | |
| Specious or False 'reasons' to leave the EU |
|---|
| Supposed reason to Leave | Refutal |
|---|
| 1. We have to accept asylum seekers because of the EU | No we don't, we have exemptions from the EU refugee agreements. Our obligations are from other treaties | | 2. The EU is a dictatorship | The EU is a functioning democracy via the European Parliament, the EU can only force law in limited areas and we have vetos on all really key areas | | 3. The EU will become a Federal EU Superstate | It has no such plans and as a member we have a veto over any such moves. A veto that is referendum interlocked | | 4. The EU will fast track admit Turkey leading to a massive muslim immigration to the UK | While a member we have a veto over any state admission and Turkey is far far away from ever being a member | | 5. The European Court of Human Rights rules us | It is not an EU institution so we remain covered by it anyway, they only have supremacy in selected areas and have only ever ruled in line with rights agreements that we support | | | | |
| Specious and/or False 'reasons' to Remain |
|---|
| Supposed reason to Remain | Refutal |
|---|
1. Leaving adds to the risk of war and terrorism
| The EU has only a minor impact compared to partnerships like NATO, Five Eyes, the UN and peer to peer intelligence sharing | | 2. The NHS will collapse without medical staff from the EU | We can continue to give work permits, residence whatever for the specialist workers we need | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
| |
|
papasmurf
|
Feb 26 2018, 09:15 AM
Post #2
|
- Posts:
- 17,277
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #13
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
What has not been set out by anyone as far as I can determine is how the around 2300 links we have with Europe split between those that will be effected by Brexit and those that won't be.
One example being that being able to use a UK driving licence on trips with no need of an international driving permit dates back to an agreement in 1968 and will not be effected by Brexit.
|
|
|
| |
|
scorpio
|
Feb 26 2018, 09:46 AM
Post #3
|
- Posts:
- 497
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #21
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
- papasmurf
- Feb 26 2018, 09:15 AM
What has not been set out by anyone as far as I can determine is how the around 2300 links we have with Europe split between those that will be effected by Brexit and those that won't be.
One example being that being able to use a UK driving licence on trips with no need of an international driving permit dates back to an agreement in 1968 and will not be effected by Brexit. See link.. From EU.. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/transport-future-relationship_21february2018_en.pdf
Note.. Most of these scenarios are fallback (hard Brexit) scenarios.
|
|
|
| |
|
Steve K
|
Feb 27 2018, 01:53 PM
Post #4
|
- Posts:
- 33,954
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
Well no one has challenged the analysis of the OP
So here's my conclusion
IF you believe the UK can have a significantly beneficial trading future outside the EU and/or you believe that the EU migration would have continued unmitigated then you should be a Leaver
OR
IF you believe the UK will significantly lose out on beneficial trade outside the EU and/or you believe that the EU migration would decline to tolerable levels then you should be a Remainer
Just about all the rest is minor or false
|
|
|
| |
|
Deleted User
|
Feb 27 2018, 02:31 PM
Post #5
|
|
Deleted User
|
Testing testing
|
|
|
| |
|
Deleted User
|
Feb 27 2018, 02:35 PM
Post #6
|
|
Deleted User
|
Ooh good I’m back in the chat room again🙂 A lot of leavers chose to get out through emotive, cultural reasons and because they witnessed their or others wages stagnate and hope to get a decent home evaporate. If the country gets richer but you are left behind....you object and point where you think the problem is ...then get called racist and stupid ...you have nothing to lose. Ask the Americans in the rust belt who voted for Trump. The real narrative or Brexit was immigration and the objections about immigration was not addressed . It was and still is dismissed as racism. In other words objectivity is barking up the wrong tree. Let’s have a little test. If you work for a company and your wages are fair...then itinerant workers who are prepared to work cheap( dint give me BS about minimum wage) and without knowing employment law start working and your wages stagnate but your Boss gets richer. You object but your Boss tells you that you are racist and ignorant...how much motivation and loyalty would you have? That’s the essence of Brexit . Not giving yourself a slap on the back because you have discovered where the Leavers went wrong
|
|
|
| |
|
ACH1967
|
Feb 27 2018, 03:29 PM
Post #7
|
- Posts:
- 4,225
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #56
- Joined:
- Jul 24, 2014
|
- gansao
- Feb 27 2018, 02:35 PM
Ooh good I’m back in the chat room again🙂 A lot of leavers chose to get out through emotive, cultural reasons and because they witnessed their or others wages stagnate and hope to get a decent home evaporate. If the country gets richer but you are left behind....you object and point where you think the problem is ...then get called racist and stupid ...you have nothing to lose. Ask the Americans in the rust belt who voted for Trump. The real narrative or Brexit was immigration and the objections about immigration was not addressed . It was and still is dismissed as racism. In other words objectivity is barking up the wrong tree. Let’s have a little test. If you work for a company and your wages are fair...then itinerant workers who are prepared to work cheap( dint give me BS about minimum wage) and without knowing employment law start working and your wages stagnate but your Boss gets richer. You object but your Boss tells you that you are racist and ignorant...how much motivation and loyalty would you have? That’s the essence of Brexit . Not giving yourself a slap on the back because you have discovered where the Leavers went wrong Of course it’s always possible that those who got called stupid and racist were indeed stupid and racist. It’s one thing to accurately identify a thing and quite another to then use it to try and shut down debate. You are right that ONE of the issues was an objection to immigration. The government could have done something about it but neither of them did (Labour or Tory) and as you say Labour were probably worse on this front by inferring racism and ignorance on those who objected. To be fair the gap between rich and poor is not just an EU immigration thing it pretty much appears to be one of globalisation in general. There is no easy solution apart from some effective means of redistribution. I am no great fan of protectionism but I think it has its place (for example in strategic areas of the economy) There’s a lot of double think going on too. For example a certain member who thinks immigration is the root of all evil also champions our ability to make free trade agreements with poorer countries. Like that’s not going to have a negative impact on UK employment. Then I really don’t think you can dismiss the fuckwits who think that soverenity is an issue mainly because the way the EU works makes their heads hurt. Now I know all this sounds like I am looking down my nose at leavers. I am not. I am calling idiots idiots. There are remainers, who I do not agree with, who I do not think are idiots because they have actually bothered to think about and understand the situation.
|
|
|
| |
|
Deleted User
|
Feb 27 2018, 03:48 PM
Post #8
|
|
Deleted User
|
- ACH1967
- Feb 27 2018, 03:29 PM
- gansao
- Feb 27 2018, 02:35 PM
Ooh good I’m back in the chat room again🙂 A lot of leavers chose to get out through emotive, cultural reasons and because they witnessed their or others wages stagnate and hope to get a decent home evaporate. If the country gets richer but you are left behind....you object and point where you think the problem is ...then get called racist and stupid ...you have nothing to lose. Ask the Americans in the rust belt who voted for Trump. The real narrative or Brexit was immigration and the objections about immigration was not addressed . It was and still is dismissed as racism. In other words objectivity is barking up the wrong tree. Let’s have a little test. If you work for a company and your wages are fair...then itinerant workers who are prepared to work cheap( dint give me BS about minimum wage) and without knowing employment law start working and your wages stagnate but your Boss gets richer. You object but your Boss tells you that you are racist and ignorant...how much motivation and loyalty would you have? That’s the essence of Brexit . Not giving yourself a slap on the back because you have discovered where the Leavers went wrong
Of course it’s always possible that those who got called stupid and racist were indeed stupid and racist. It’s one thing to accurately identify a thing and quite another to then use it to try and shut down debate. You are right that ONE of the issues was an objection to immigration. The government could have done something about it but neither of them did (Labour or Tory) and as you say Labour were probably worse on this front by inferring racism and ignorance on those who objected. To be fair the gap between rich and poor is not just an EU immigration thing it pretty much appears to be one of globalisation in general. There is no easy solution apart from some effective means of redistribution. I am no great fan of protectionism but I think it has its place (for example in strategic areas of the economy) There’s a lot of double think going on too. For example a certain member who thinks immigration is the root of all evil also champions our ability to make free trade agreements with poorer countries. Like that’s not going to have a negative impact on UK employment. Then I really don’t think you can dismiss the fuckwits who think that soverenity is an issue mainly because the way the EU works makes their heads hurt. Now I know all this sounds like I am looking down my nose at leavers. I am not. I am calling idiots idiots. There are remainers, who I do not agree with, who I do not think are idiots because they have actually bothered to think about and understand the situation.
There are stupid and racist leavers but that doesn’t mean the leave narrative was based on stupidity and racism....and who exactly wants to stifle debate? I dint care if you look down your nose at leavers or not....but doing so would in itself stifle your ability to look at Brexit , it’s cause and implications ..objectively.
Brexit ( just as the Bogey man Trump becoming POTUS) was caused Partly because people with power looked down their noses at certain groups of people. ..Americans with problems that would have been addressed in the past by Labour organisations. The irony is that those people see a right winger as the only one cares about them....not far from the position of many Leavers
It’s too late now to claim that the migrant problem was no due to the EU. If the remainers would have been willing to make this case instead of the default ‘ racist ‘ mantra then perhaps it would of made the difference.
Some people saw ( or perceived if you want )their wages stagnate, their chances of a decent house diminished and their communities permanently altered and reacted accordingly. If you want to look down on these people it says more about you than an ‘objective’ view of the pros and cons of Brexit could Possibly say about them
|
|
|
| |
|
ACH1967
|
Feb 27 2018, 04:22 PM
Post #9
|
- Posts:
- 4,225
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #56
- Joined:
- Jul 24, 2014
|
- gansao
- Feb 27 2018, 03:48 PM
- ACH1967
- Feb 27 2018, 03:29 PM
- gansao
- Feb 27 2018, 02:35 PM
Ooh good I’m back in the chat room again🙂 A lot of leavers chose to get out through emotive, cultural reasons and because they witnessed their or others wages stagnate and hope to get a decent home evaporate. If the country gets richer but you are left behind....you object and point where you think the problem is ...then get called racist and stupid ...you have nothing to lose. Ask the Americans in the rust belt who voted for Trump. The real narrative or Brexit was immigration and the objections about immigration was not addressed . It was and still is dismissed as racism. In other words objectivity is barking up the wrong tree. Let’s have a little test. If you work for a company and your wages are fair...then itinerant workers who are prepared to work cheap( dint give me BS about minimum wage) and without knowing employment law start working and your wages stagnate but your Boss gets richer. You object but your Boss tells you that you are racist and ignorant...how much motivation and loyalty would you have? That’s the essence of Brexit . Not giving yourself a slap on the back because you have discovered where the Leavers went wrong
Of course it’s always possible that those who got called stupid and racist were indeed stupid and racist. It’s one thing to accurately identify a thing and quite another to then use it to try and shut down debate. You are right that ONE of the issues was an objection to immigration. The government could have done something about it but neither of them did (Labour or Tory) and as you say Labour were probably worse on this front by inferring racism and ignorance on those who objected. To be fair the gap between rich and poor is not just an EU immigration thing it pretty much appears to be one of globalisation in general. There is no easy solution apart from some effective means of redistribution. I am no great fan of protectionism but I think it has its place (for example in strategic areas of the economy) There’s a lot of double think going on too. For example a certain member who thinks immigration is the root of all evil also champions our ability to make free trade agreements with poorer countries. Like that’s not going to have a negative impact on UK employment. Then I really don’t think you can dismiss the fuckwits who think that soverenity is an issue mainly because the way the EU works makes their heads hurt. Now I know all this sounds like I am looking down my nose at leavers. I am not. I am calling idiots idiots. There are remainers, who I do not agree with, who I do not think are idiots because they have actually bothered to think about and understand the situation.
There are stupid and racist leavers but that doesn’t mean the leave narrative was based on stupidity and racism....and who exactly wants to stifle debate? I dint care if you look down your nose at leavers or not....but doing so would in itself stifle your ability to look at Brexit , it’s cause and implications ..objectively. Brexit ( just as the Bogey man Trump becoming POTUS) was caused Partly because people with power looked down their noses at certain groups of people. ..Americans with problems that would have been addressed in the past by Labour organisations. The irony is that those people see a right winger as the only one cares about them....not far from the position of many Leavers It’s too late now to claim that the migrant problem was no due to the EU. If the remainers would have been willing to make this case instead of the default ‘ racist ‘ mantra then perhaps it would of made the difference. Some people saw ( or perceived if you want )their wages stagnate, their chances of a decent house diminished and their communities permanently altered and reacted accordingly. If you want to look down on these people it says more about you than an ‘objective’ view of the pros and cons of Brexit could Possibly say about them I don’t disagree with any of that apart from the idea that voting leave is the solution. Once again this is where we arrive at our impasse. You contend that was all they could do I contend that they should have got off their arses and protested in a more productive fashion. Wasn’t Brown proposing british jobs for british workers? If he did that then demonstrating for british jobs for british workers could hardly be considered beyond the pale.
|
|
|
| |
|
Deleted User
|
Feb 27 2018, 04:50 PM
Post #10
|
|
Deleted User
|
- ACH1967
- Feb 27 2018, 04:22 PM
- gansao
- Feb 27 2018, 03:48 PM
- ACH1967
- Feb 27 2018, 03:29 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
There are stupid and racist leavers but that doesn’t mean the leave narrative was based on stupidity and racism....and who exactly wants to stifle debate? I dint care if you look down your nose at leavers or not....but doing so would in itself stifle your ability to look at Brexit , it’s cause and implications ..objectively. Brexit ( just as the Bogey man Trump becoming POTUS) was caused Partly because people with power looked down their noses at certain groups of people. ..Americans with problems that would have been addressed in the past by Labour organisations. The irony is that those people see a right winger as the only one cares about them....not far from the position of many Leavers It’s too late now to claim that the migrant problem was no due to the EU. If the remainers would have been willing to make this case instead of the default ‘ racist ‘ mantra then perhaps it would of made the difference. Some people saw ( or perceived if you want )their wages stagnate, their chances of a decent house diminished and their communities permanently altered and reacted accordingly. If you want to look down on these people it says more about you than an ‘objective’ view of the pros and cons of Brexit could Possibly say about them
I don’t disagree with any of that apart from the idea that voting leave is the solution. Once again this is where we arrive at our impasse. You contend that was all they could do I contend that they should have got off their arses and protested in a more productive fashion. Wasn’t Brown proposing british jobs for british workers? If he did that then demonstrating for british jobs for british workers could hardly be considered beyond the pale.
Browns ‘ British jobs for British workers ‘was rhetoric of the worst kind. He knew that it was bullshit .Imo he was worse than Johnson for hypocrisy and poor sound bites There were political groups and rallies opposing excessive immigration iirc..they were called racists and right wing looneys. Immigration control was effectively impossible within the single market. Forcing Restrictions for migrants would have bought a house for every liberal minded lawyer and the Bosses would rather hire migrant to destabilise and restrain the U.K. workers than not..imo. I spoke to a Lithuanian ( could of been a Pole) and asked him why he didn’t work in Germany. The wages are better and it’s nearer home....he said it was near impossible to get a job in Germany if you did not speak good German. I have many a useless assistant from Eastern Europe who could only speak a handful of English words. I must be a master of sign language and mime by now.
|
|
|
| |
|
Stonefish
|
Feb 27 2018, 08:56 PM
Post #11
|
- Posts:
- 4,494
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #34
- Joined:
- Jun 29, 2014
|
- Steve K
- Feb 26 2018, 09:09 AM
This is an attempt to objectively lay out the relative pluses of Leaving or Remain and the obvious counter arguments (but not the counter counter or counter counter counter arguments) As fairly as I can I've laid out: - Reasons to leave the EU - Reasons to Remain - Specious/False reasons to Leave - Specious False reasons to Remain The idea is the OP gets updated with serious omissions and error corrections but discussions about the personalities involved or negotiations stay in their relevant threads. So comments please | Reasons to Leave EU |
|---|
| Reason to Leave | Counter Argument |
|---|
1. We give the EU control of £13.1B a year (~250M a week) and net contribute £8,6B a year and we could make better use of that money
(link)
| The £13B is less than 1% of GDP and less than 2% of government spend and our farming and scientific areas benefit considerably from the £4B in grants we receive | 2. Free movement and European Citizenship means we have to allow any of 450 million Europeans come here, take our jobs, take our benefits and place difficult to manage burdens on our housing, education systems and social services
Nearly 200,000 are coming each year
| The net numbers are reducing (just 90,000 net per year now) as the Eastern nations become more convergent, we can block those who are not genuinely seeking work and many of the EU migrants are filling essential roles in the NHS and other areas | | 3. We have to accept as British law rules made in Brussels where we are outvoted by the other nations who do not care about UK needs | We only have to accept such rules in limited areas, in all key areas we have a veto and in all political areas that veto is only released IF a specific UK referendum approves the change | | 4. The EU keeps expanding with new nations that are non convergent to the UK | We can veto any new nation joining and will not make the mistakes we made in 2004 | | 5 The EU takes control of our fishing areas through the Common Fisheries Policy | Fish do not recognise borders and without some agreement with EU nations our fish resources | 6. We cannot negotiate beneficial trade deals with other countries
| There are no countries we could negotiate with that would be beneficial to UK jobs where we do not already have a substantial trade agreement through the EU (eg Australia, Canada) | | 7. The EU forces us to accept cruel animal practices such as live animal transport | There are no substantial reasons to end such practices as most people are happy with current meat supply
| | |
| Reasons to Remain in the EU |
|---|
| Reason to Remain | Counter Argument |
|---|
1. Being in the Single Market is vital to our economic position especially in these areas - Selling Financial Services to EU - Maintaining a Far East underwritten automotive manufacturing sector - Paper free goods transfer for all industries but especially Aerospace and Automotive
In the most obvious exit scenarios these will be so badly affected the country will be poorer and jobs lost
| The single market means we import more from the EU than we export to them so we have a strong hand to negotiate good trade deals for our key areas
Jobs lost will be balanced by less EU migrants working here | 2. Lack of free access to Europe's markets risks our key industries falling below critical mass so will inevitably contract or even die sucking in even more imports from more efficient large market serving competitors
| We will negotiate a trade deal with the EU that means these industries will survive and thrive | 3. Border with Ireland will be forced to be a hard border to implement WTO and EU rules. This risks NI becoming more alienated from the rest of the UK and worse it risks increased tensions in the republican dominated border areas
| Not if we negotiate a wide ranging free trade deal with the EU | 4. Border with mainland Europe will become paperwork intensive making supply less reliable and more expensive
| Not if we negotiate a wide ranging free trade deal with the EU | 5. Imports of food from Europe will become more expensive as we have to implement WTO tariffs
| Not if we negotiate a wide ranging free trade deal with the EU, we don't have to have any tariffs and anyway who doesn't like living off home grown turnips | 6. Access to European flights area, travel through Europe, access to health services, recognition of driving licences etc
| These things are easily negotiated and won't be a problem | | 7 We will lose the international negotiating muscle of being in the EU | The EU does not always negotiate in our interest and we should be bold and confident and the world will listen to us | | |
| Specious or False 'reasons' to leave the EU |
|---|
| Supposed reason to Leave | Refutal |
|---|
| 1. We have to accept asylum seekers because of the EU | No we don't, we have exemptions from the EU refugee agreements. Our obligations are from other treaties | | 2. The EU is a dictatorship | The EU is a functioning democracy via the European Parliament, the EU can only force law in limited areas and we have vetos on all really key areas | | 3. The EU will become a Federal EU Superstate | It has no such plans and as a member we have a veto over any such moves. A veto that is referendum interlocked | | 4. The EU will fast track admit Turkey leading to a massive muslim immigration to the UK | While a member we have a veto over any state admission and Turkey is far far away from ever being a member | | 5. The European Court of Human Rights rules us | It is not an EU institution so we remain covered by it anyway, they only have supremacy in selected areas and have only ever ruled in line with rights agreements that we support | | | | |
| Specious and/or False 'reasons' to Remain |
|---|
| Supposed reason to Remain | Refutal |
|---|
1. Leaving adds to the risk of war and terrorism
| The EU has only a minor impact compared to partnerships like NATO, Five Eyes, the UN and peer to peer intelligence sharing | | 2. The NHS will collapse without medical staff from the EU | We can continue to give work permits, residence whatever for the specialist workers we need | | | | | | | | | | |
Great post
I have things to say but not right now ,my pork chops are beckoning ,which I think are British ...........
|
|
|
| |
|
Stonefish
|
Feb 27 2018, 10:04 PM
Post #12
|
- Posts:
- 4,494
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #34
- Joined:
- Jun 29, 2014
|
- Steve K
- Feb 26 2018, 09:09 AM
This is an attempt to objectively lay out the relative pluses of Leaving or Remain and the obvious counter arguments (but not the counter counter or counter counter counter arguments) As fairly as I can I've laid out: - Reasons to leave the EU - Reasons to Remain - Specious/False reasons to Leave - Specious False reasons to Remain The idea is the OP gets updated with serious omissions and error corrections but discussions about the personalities involved or negotiations stay in their relevant threads. So comments please | Reasons to Leave EU |
|---|
| Reason to Leave | Counter Argument |
|---|
1. We give the EU control of £13.1B a year (~250M a week) and net contribute £8,6B a year and we could make better use of that money
(link)
| The £13B is less than 1% of GDP and less than 2% of government spend and our farming and scientific areas benefit considerably from the £4B in grants we receive | 2. Free movement and European Citizenship means we have to allow any of 450 million Europeans come here, take our jobs, take our benefits and place difficult to manage burdens on our housing, education systems and social services
Nearly 200,000 are coming each year
| The net numbers are reducing (just 90,000 net per year now) as the Eastern nations become more convergent, we can block those who are not genuinely seeking work and many of the EU migrants are filling essential roles in the NHS and other areas | | 3. We have to accept as British law rules made in Brussels where we are outvoted by the other nations who do not care about UK needs | We only have to accept such rules in limited areas, in all key areas we have a veto and in all political areas that veto is only released IF a specific UK referendum approves the change | | 4. The EU keeps expanding with new nations that are non convergent to the UK | We can veto any new nation joining and will not make the mistakes we made in 2004 | | 5 The EU takes control of our fishing areas through the Common Fisheries Policy | Fish do not recognise borders and without some agreement with EU nations our fish resources | 6. We cannot negotiate beneficial trade deals with other countries
| There are no countries we could negotiate with that would be beneficial to UK jobs where we do not already have a substantial trade agreement through the EU (eg Australia, Canada) | | 7. The EU forces us to accept cruel animal practices such as live animal transport | There are no substantial reasons to end such practices as most people are happy with current meat supply
| | |
| Reasons to Remain in the EU |
|---|
| Reason to Remain | Counter Argument |
|---|
1. Being in the Single Market is vital to our economic position especially in these areas - Selling Financial Services to EU - Maintaining a Far East underwritten automotive manufacturing sector - Paper free goods transfer for all industries but especially Aerospace and Automotive
In the most obvious exit scenarios these will be so badly affected the country will be poorer and jobs lost
| The single market means we import more from the EU than we export to them so we have a strong hand to negotiate good trade deals for our key areas
Jobs lost will be balanced by less EU migrants working here | 2. Lack of free access to Europe's markets risks our key industries falling below critical mass so will inevitably contract or even die sucking in even more imports from more efficient large market serving competitors
| We will negotiate a trade deal with the EU that means these industries will survive and thrive | 3. Border with Ireland will be forced to be a hard border to implement WTO and EU rules. This risks NI becoming more alienated from the rest of the UK and worse it risks increased tensions in the republican dominated border areas
| Not if we negotiate a wide ranging free trade deal with the EU | 4. Border with mainland Europe will become paperwork intensive making supply less reliable and more expensive
| Not if we negotiate a wide ranging free trade deal with the EU | 5. Imports of food from Europe will become more expensive as we have to implement WTO tariffs
| Not if we negotiate a wide ranging free trade deal with the EU, we don't have to have any tariffs and anyway who doesn't like living off home grown turnips | 6. Access to European flights area, travel through Europe, access to health services, recognition of driving licences etc
| These things are easily negotiated and won't be a problem | | 7 We will lose the international negotiating muscle of being in the EU | The EU does not always negotiate in our interest and we should be bold and confident and the world will listen to us | | |
| Specious or False 'reasons' to leave the EU |
|---|
| Supposed reason to Leave | Refutal |
|---|
| 1. We have to accept asylum seekers because of the EU | No we don't, we have exemptions from the EU refugee agreements. Our obligations are from other treaties | | 2. The EU is a dictatorship | The EU is a functioning democracy via the European Parliament, the EU can only force law in limited areas and we have vetos on all really key areas | | 3. The EU will become a Federal EU Superstate | It has no such plans and as a member we have a veto over any such moves. A veto that is referendum interlocked | | 4. The EU will fast track admit Turkey leading to a massive muslim immigration to the UK | While a member we have a veto over any state admission and Turkey is far far away from ever being a member | | 5. The European Court of Human Rights rules us | It is not an EU institution so we remain covered by it anyway, they only have supremacy in selected areas and have only ever ruled in line with rights agreements that we support | | | | |
| Specious and/or False 'reasons' to Remain |
|---|
| Supposed reason to Remain | Refutal |
|---|
1. Leaving adds to the risk of war and terrorism
| The EU has only a minor impact compared to partnerships like NATO, Five Eyes, the UN and peer to peer intelligence sharing | | 2. The NHS will collapse without medical staff from the EU | We can continue to give work permits, residence whatever for the specialist workers we need | | | | | | | | | | |
Okay,pork chops done
A few counter counter points.
The 4 billion we receive is of course our own money being returned.
The fall in net migration is probably more down to the £ drop ,a bonus of the drop in value,that may change. Theoretically we can return people who don't find work,reality says its hard to enforce and then of course the ECHR gets involved .We could veto a new nation joining,there is nothing that suggests we would. Govt,wether red or blue needs its nose seriously rubbing in it and look STILL they don't seem to be getting the message. Our negotiations with other countries when we Brexit can be tailor made to suit our needs and theirs ,it can be a lot more than just a free trade free movement deal. Re the ECHR we can drop it if we so wosh when we leave ,im not so sure we could do that whilst still in
Re live animal transport there are tons of substantial reasons we should drop it,not least of all being its f--g cruel,and I don't believe most people are happy with things as they are,though to be fair there are many ignorant fucktards out there who wouldn't care.doesnt make it right though.
I don't by the ascertion the EU has no eyes on a superstate it absolutely 100% does and it will almost certainly achieve it as well as an EU army,wether that is in 10,20 or thirty years.by which time we'll be so far in the f--g EU we will have no choice .
|
|
|
| |
|
Steve K
|
Feb 27 2018, 10:33 PM
Post #13
|
- Posts:
- 33,954
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
- Stonefish
- Feb 27 2018, 10:04 PM
Okay,pork chops done
A few counter counter points.
The 4 billion we receive is of course our own money being returned. Yes, have edited the OP to make that clear
- Quote:
-
The fall in net migration is probably more down to the £ drop ,a bonus of the drop in value,that may change. Theoretically we can return people who don't find work,reality says its hard to enforce and then of course the ECHR gets involved .We could veto a new nation joining,there is nothing that suggests we would. Govt,wether red or blue needs its nose seriously rubbing in it and look STILL they don't seem to be getting the message. Our negotiations with other countries when we Brexit can be tailor made to suit our needs and theirs ,it can be a lot more than just a free trade free movement deal.
Going to say they are counter counter arguments. I agree the fall in the last 18 months is much to do with the £, I'd add that fewer people want to migrate when they are less certain about their longer term prospects. The counter argument I put in is that "as the Eastern nations become more convergent" we become less relatively attractive. Frankly as of 2015 if you were a Romanian with a smattering of English and few family ties you'd have been mad not to come to the UK but with their economy growing rapidly that UK pull gets weaker every year.
- Quote:
-
Re the ECHR we can drop it if we so wosh when we leave ,im not so sure we could do that whilst still in
Nope, it's a commitment to the European Council (the one that includes Russia etc) and certainly even May has admitted we won't leave it
- Quote:
-
Re live animal transport there are tons of substantial reasons we should drop it,not least of all being its f--g cruel,and I don't believe most people are happy with things as they are,though to be fair there are many ignorant fucktards out there who wouldn't care.doesnt make it right though.
I'd like to believe most abhor it but my experience is most just want to not be aware. And that won't change anytime soon .
- Quote:
-
I don't by the ascertion the EU has no eyes on a superstate it absolutely 100% does and it will almost certainly achieve it as well as an EU army,wether that is in 10,20 or thirty years.by which time we'll be so far in the f--g EU we will have no choice . Well you are entitled to your view but the facts remain that - they have no plans for such as opposed to a few individuals like Juncker that want such (who has been put in his place on this) - we have a veto - by UK law that veto must be applied unless a specific referendum says otherwise
So I'm leaving that in the specious and/or false section
|
|
|
| |
|
Stonefish
|
Feb 28 2018, 12:05 AM
Post #14
|
- Posts:
- 4,494
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #34
- Joined:
- Jun 29, 2014
|
- Steve K
- Feb 27 2018, 10:33 PM
- Stonefish
- Feb 27 2018, 10:04 PM
Okay,pork chops done
A few counter counter points.
The 4 billion we receive is of course our own money being returned.
Yes, have edited the OP to make that clear - Quote:
-
The fall in net migration is probably more down to the £ drop ,a bonus of the drop in value,that may change. Theoretically we can return people who don't find work,reality says its hard to enforce and then of course the ECHR gets involved .We could veto a new nation joining,there is nothing that suggests we would. Govt,wether red or blue needs its nose seriously rubbing in it and look STILL they don't seem to be getting the message. Our negotiations with other countries when we Brexit can be tailor made to suit our needs and theirs ,it can be a lot more than just a free trade free movement deal.
Going to say they are counter counter arguments. I agree the fall in the last 18 months is much to do with the £, I'd add that fewer people want to migrate when they are less certain about their longer term prospects. The counter argument I put in is that "as the Eastern nations become more convergent" we become less relatively attractive. Frankly as of 2015 if you were a Romanian with a smattering of English and few family ties you'd have been mad not to come to the UK but with their economy growing rapidly that UK pull gets weaker every year. - Quote:
-
Re the ECHR we can drop it if we so wosh when we leave ,im not so sure we could do that whilst still in
Nope, it's a commitment to the European Council (the one that includes Russia etc) and certainly even May has admitted we won't leave it - Quote:
-
Re live animal transport there are tons of substantial reasons we should drop it,not least of all being its f--g cruel,and I don't believe most people are happy with things as they are,though to be fair there are many ignorant fucktards out there who wouldn't care.doesnt make it right though.
I'd like to believe most abhor it but my experience is most just want to not be aware. And that won't change anytime soon . - Quote:
-
I don't by the ascertion the EU has no eyes on a superstate it absolutely 100% does and it will almost certainly achieve it as well as an EU army,wether that is in 10,20 or thirty years.by which time we'll be so far in the f--g EU we will have no choice .
Well you are entitled to your view but the facts remain that - they have no plans for such as opposed to a few individuals like Juncker that want such (who has been put in his place on this) - we have a veto - by UK law that veto must be applied unless a specific referendum says otherwise So I'm leaving that in the specious and/or false section
- Quote:
-
Frankly as of 2015 if you were a Romanian with a smattering of English and few family ties you'd have been mad not to come to the UK but with their economy growing rapidly that UK pull gets weaker every year.
Well it might be growing rapidly but I think it would have to grow stratospherically,its economy is still teensy weensy compared to ours.
- Quote:
-
Nope, it's a commitment to the European Council (the one that includes Russia etc) and certainly even May has admitted we won't leave it
I didn't say we would,i said we could
- Quote:
-
I'd like to believe most abhor it but my experience is most just want to not be aware. And that won't change anytime soon .
Still doesn't make it right
- Quote:
-
Well you are entitled to your view but the facts remain that - they have no plans for such as opposed to a few individuals like Juncker that want such (who has been put in his place on this) - we have a veto - by UK law that veto must be applied unless a specific referendum says otherwise
Those few are high profile and not without power,and imo they're the tip of the iceberg they're just testing the water. .The shady EU heads know it is contentious especially ze Germans. A case of softly softly and they WILL tighten that noose .Forget the veto ,that will disappear soon enough and when it suits .As sure as day follows night,that superstate is coming. Hell we already have a flag,an anthem and a parliament. Join the dots.
|
|
|
| |
|
Rich
|
Feb 28 2018, 12:24 AM
Post #15
|
- Posts:
- 14,458
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #30
- Joined:
- Jun 28, 2014
|
- Stonefish
- Feb 28 2018, 12:05 AM
- Steve K
- Feb 27 2018, 10:33 PM
- Stonefish
- Feb 27 2018, 10:04 PM
Okay,pork chops done
A few counter counter points.
The 4 billion we receive is of course our own money being returned.
Yes, have edited the OP to make that clear - Quote:
-
The fall in net migration is probably more down to the £ drop ,a bonus of the drop in value,that may change. Theoretically we can return people who don't find work,reality says its hard to enforce and then of course the ECHR gets involved .We could veto a new nation joining,there is nothing that suggests we would. Govt,wether red or blue needs its nose seriously rubbing in it and look STILL they don't seem to be getting the message. Our negotiations with other countries when we Brexit can be tailor made to suit our needs and theirs ,it can be a lot more than just a free trade free movement deal.
Going to say they are counter counter arguments. I agree the fall in the last 18 months is much to do with the £, I'd add that fewer people want to migrate when they are less certain about their longer term prospects. The counter argument I put in is that "as the Eastern nations become more convergent" we become less relatively attractive. Frankly as of 2015 if you were a Romanian with a smattering of English and few family ties you'd have been mad not to come to the UK but with their economy growing rapidly that UK pull gets weaker every year. - Quote:
-
Re the ECHR we can drop it if we so wosh when we leave ,im not so sure we could do that whilst still in
Nope, it's a commitment to the European Council (the one that includes Russia etc) and certainly even May has admitted we won't leave it - Quote:
-
Re live animal transport there are tons of substantial reasons we should drop it,not least of all being its f--g cruel,and I don't believe most people are happy with things as they are,though to be fair there are many ignorant fucktards out there who wouldn't care.doesnt make it right though.
I'd like to believe most abhor it but my experience is most just want to not be aware. And that won't change anytime soon . - Quote:
-
I don't by the ascertion the EU has no eyes on a superstate it absolutely 100% does and it will almost certainly achieve it as well as an EU army,wether that is in 10,20 or thirty years.by which time we'll be so far in the f--g EU we will have no choice .
Well you are entitled to your view but the facts remain that - they have no plans for such as opposed to a few individuals like Juncker that want such (who has been put in his place on this) - we have a veto - by UK law that veto must be applied unless a specific referendum says otherwise So I'm leaving that in the specious and/or false section
- Quote:
-
Frankly as of 2015 if you were a Romanian with a smattering of English and few family ties you'd have been mad not to come to the UK but with their economy growing rapidly that UK pull gets weaker every year.
Well it might be growing rapidly but I think it would have to grow stratospherically,its economy is still teensy weensy compared to ours. - Quote:
-
Nope, it's a commitment to the European Council (the one that includes Russia etc) and certainly even May has admitted we won't leave it
I didn't say we would,i said we could - Quote:
-
I'd like to believe most abhor it but my experience is most just want to not be aware. And that won't change anytime soon .
Still doesn't make it right - Quote:
-
Well you are entitled to your view but the facts remain that - they have no plans for such as opposed to a few individuals like Juncker that want such (who has been put in his place on this) - we have a veto - by UK law that veto must be applied unless a specific referendum says otherwise
Those few are high profile and not without power,and imo they're the tip of the iceberg they're just testing the water. .The shady EU heads know it is contentious especially ze Germans. A case of softly softly and they WILL tighten that noose .Forget the veto ,that will disappear soon enough and when it suits .As sure as day follows night,that superstate is coming. Hell we already have a flag,an anthem and a parliament. Join the dots. I have to say, that is the perception that I get, it may, as you say take another 20/30 years, but I believe that German hegemony over the whole of Europe is the final aim albeit it done by softly softly stealthy means instead of waging another 2 world wars.
I repeat, that is what I perceive.
|
|
|
| |
|
Stonefish
|
Feb 28 2018, 12:56 AM
Post #16
|
- Posts:
- 4,494
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #34
- Joined:
- Jun 29, 2014
|
- Rich
- Feb 28 2018, 12:24 AM
- Stonefish
- Feb 28 2018, 12:05 AM
- Steve K
- Feb 27 2018, 10:33 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep"as the Eastern nations become more convergent"
- Quote:
-
Frankly as of 2015 if you were a Romanian with a smattering of English and few family ties you'd have been mad not to come to the UK but with their economy growing rapidly that UK pull gets weaker every year.
Well it might be growing rapidly but I think it would have to grow stratospherically,its economy is still teensy weensy compared to ours. - Quote:
-
Nope, it's a commitment to the European Council (the one that includes Russia etc) and certainly even May has admitted we won't leave it
I didn't say we would,i said we could - Quote:
-
I'd like to believe most abhor it but my experience is most just want to not be aware. And that won't change anytime soon .
Still doesn't make it right - Quote:
-
Well you are entitled to your view but the facts remain that - they have no plans for such as opposed to a few individuals like Juncker that want such (who has been put in his place on this) - we have a veto - by UK law that veto must be applied unless a specific referendum says otherwise
Those few are high profile and not without power,and imo they're the tip of the iceberg they're just testing the water. .The shady EU heads know it is contentious especially ze Germans. A case of softly softly and they WILL tighten that noose .Forget the veto ,that will disappear soon enough and when it suits .As sure as day follows night,that superstate is coming. Hell we already have a flag,an anthem and a parliament. Join the dots.
I have to say, that is the perception that I get, it may, as you say take another 20/30 years, but I believe that German hegemony over the whole of Europe is the final aim albeit it done by softly softly stealthy means instead of waging another 2 world wars. I repeat, that is what I perceive.
And I believe you show great insight
|
|
|
| |
|
Steve K
|
Feb 28 2018, 09:36 AM
Post #17
|
- Posts:
- 33,954
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
- Stonefish
- Feb 28 2018, 12:56 AM
- Rich
- Feb 28 2018, 12:24 AM
- Stonefish
- Feb 28 2018, 12:05 AM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep"as the Eastern nations become more convergent"
I have to say, that is the perception that I get, it may, as you say take another 20/30 years, but I believe that German hegemony over the whole of Europe is the final aim albeit it done by softly softly stealthy means instead of waging another 2 world wars. I repeat, that is what I perceive.
And I believe you show great insight or a total denial of what the word 'veto' means and what our 2011 legislation guarantees
Tusk, Merkel and Macron are the real players in the EU and none of them supports any move to federalisation. A big reason why they want us to remain is they know without us it could just get a little closer - in a decade or two's time
In my book this USofE is and always has been a red herring since Tony Blair left office - and that's over 10 years ago
|
|
|
| |
|
Stonefish
|
Feb 28 2018, 09:56 AM
Post #18
|
- Posts:
- 4,494
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #34
- Joined:
- Jun 29, 2014
|
- Steve K
- Feb 28 2018, 09:36 AM
- Stonefish
- Feb 28 2018, 12:56 AM
- Rich
- Feb 28 2018, 12:24 AM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep"as the Eastern nations become more convergent"
And I believe you show great insight
or a total denial of what the word 'veto' means and what our 2011 legislation guarantees Tusk, Merkel and Macron are the real players in the EU and none of them supports any move to federalisation. A big reason why they want us to remain is they know without us it could just get a little closer - in a decade or two's time In my book this USofE is and always has been a red herring since Tony Blair left office - and that's over 10 years ago
Yes we also voted to leave the EU ,hardly cast iron is it. Nothing is guaranteed ,as I sad before that veto is worth diddly squat in the grand scheme of things. As for Merkal being a non federalist ,that may be the impression she gives ,doesn't mean its correct does it. A German leader calling for federalisation would be to much right now and they know it.
|
|
|
| |
|
Steve K
|
Feb 28 2018, 10:16 AM
Post #19
|
- Posts:
- 33,954
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
- Stonefish
- Feb 28 2018, 09:56 AM
- Steve K
- Feb 28 2018, 09:36 AM
- Stonefish
- Feb 28 2018, 12:56 AM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep"as the Eastern nations become more convergent"
or a total denial of what the word 'veto' means and what our 2011 legislation guarantees Tusk, Merkel and Macron are the real players in the EU and none of them supports any move to federalisation. A big reason why they want us to remain is they know without us it could just get a little closer - in a decade or two's time In my book this USofE is and always has been a red herring since Tony Blair left office - and that's over 10 years ago
Yes we also voted to leave the EU ,hardly cast iron is it. Nothing is guaranteed ,as I sad before that veto is worth diddly squat in the grand scheme of things. As for Merkal being a non federalist ,that may be the impression she gives ,doesn't mean its correct does it. A German leader calling for federalisation would be to much right now and they know it. You are either just in denial and refusing to listen or deliberately pushing a false line
- we have a veto on any such political integration - do you understand that?
- the 2011 Act means there would have to be a specific UK referendum to approve any waiving of that veto - do you understand that?
|
|
|
| |
|
Stonefish
|
Feb 28 2018, 01:22 PM
Post #20
|
- Posts:
- 4,494
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #34
- Joined:
- Jun 29, 2014
|
- Steve K
- Feb 28 2018, 10:16 AM
- Stonefish
- Feb 28 2018, 09:56 AM
- Steve K
- Feb 28 2018, 09:36 AM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep"as the Eastern nations become more convergent"
Yes we also voted to leave the EU ,hardly cast iron is it. Nothing is guaranteed ,as I sad before that veto is worth diddly squat in the grand scheme of things. As for Merkal being a non federalist ,that may be the impression she gives ,doesn't mean its correct does it. A German leader calling for federalisation would be to much right now and they know it.
You are either just in denial and refusing to listen or deliberately pushing a false line - we have a veto on any such political integration - do you understand that? - the 2011 Act means there would have to be a specific UK referendum to approve any waiving of that veto - do you understand that?
Yep understand,worth diddly squat ,more or less meaningless. Rules are broken ,circumvented on a regular basis .If you think our poxy veto would really get in the way of a superstate forming,think again.
|
|
|
| |
|
ACH1967
|
Feb 28 2018, 02:01 PM
Post #21
|
- Posts:
- 4,225
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #56
- Joined:
- Jul 24, 2014
|
- gansao
- Feb 27 2018, 04:50 PM
- ACH1967
- Feb 27 2018, 04:22 PM
- gansao
- Feb 27 2018, 03:48 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
I don’t disagree with any of that apart from the idea that voting leave is the solution. Once again this is where we arrive at our impasse. You contend that was all they could do I contend that they should have got off their arses and protested in a more productive fashion. Wasn’t Brown proposing british jobs for british workers? If he did that then demonstrating for british jobs for british workers could hardly be considered beyond the pale.
Browns ‘ British jobs for British workers ‘was rhetoric of the worst kind. He knew that it was bullshit .Imo he was worse than Johnson for hypocrisy and poor sound bites There were political groups and rallies opposing excessive immigration iirc..they were called racists and right wing looneys. Immigration control was effectively impossible within the single market. Forcing Restrictions for migrants would have bought a house for every liberal minded lawyer and the Bosses would rather hire migrant to destabilise and restrain the U.K. workers than not..imo. I spoke to a Lithuanian ( could of been a Pole) and asked him why he didn’t work in Germany. The wages are better and it’s nearer home....he said it was near impossible to get a job in Germany if you did not speak good German. I have many a useless assistant from Eastern Europe who could only speak a handful of English words. I must be a master of sign language and mime by now. IMO people not liking immigration because of the impact it had on their lives have a genuine grievance and that the referendum was effectively the only means they had to air that grievance. As do people who are hacked off because of the increased load on public services although when considering the second group we really need to consider whether immigration has been good or bad for the treasury coffers. If we take your example of the Lithuania and extrapolate that across the piece then when some of those who voted remain bandy about the word “traitor” it seems to me that a more accurate target for that word would be “certain” British employers. Then of course we need to consider if we as consumers genuinely benefit from the cheap labour from Eastern Europe or whether all of the benefit is sucked out of the system by the employers. Then there is the question of whether our farming industry is sustainable without immigrants and if not where does that leave us? As an aside I do find it disingenuous when people argue that immigrants take the jobs that the indigenous population do not want to do. You can hardly compare a British man with a family to an eastern European immigrant prepared to live x to a house because he can send money back home. In a way the initial comment here could be considered traitorous. It isn’t that the indigenous population is not prepared to do the jobs it is that the indigenous population is not prepared to do the job at the wages on offer.
|
|
|
| |
|
Happy Hornet
|
Feb 28 2018, 03:15 PM
Post #22
|
- Posts:
- 4,765
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #16
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
- ACH1967
- Feb 28 2018, 02:01 PM
- gansao
- Feb 27 2018, 04:50 PM
- ACH1967
- Feb 27 2018, 04:22 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Browns ‘ British jobs for British workers ‘was rhetoric of the worst kind. He knew that it was bullshit .Imo he was worse than Johnson for hypocrisy and poor sound bites There were political groups and rallies opposing excessive immigration iirc..they were called racists and right wing looneys. Immigration control was effectively impossible within the single market. Forcing Restrictions for migrants would have bought a house for every liberal minded lawyer and the Bosses would rather hire migrant to destabilise and restrain the U.K. workers than not..imo. I spoke to a Lithuanian ( could of been a Pole) and asked him why he didn’t work in Germany. The wages are better and it’s nearer home....he said it was near impossible to get a job in Germany if you did not speak good German. I have many a useless assistant from Eastern Europe who could only speak a handful of English words. I must be a master of sign language and mime by now.
IMO people not liking immigration because of the impact it had on their lives have a genuine grievance and that the referendum was effectively the only means they had to air that grievance. As do people who are hacked off because of the increased load on public services although when considering the second group we really need to consider whether immigration has been good or bad for the treasury coffers. If we take your example of the Lithuania and extrapolate that across the piece then when some of those who voted remain bandy about the word “traitor” it seems to me that a more accurate target for that word would be “certain” British employers. Then of course we need to consider if we as consumers genuinely benefit from the cheap labour from Eastern Europe or whether all of the benefit is sucked out of the system by the employers. Then there is the question of whether our farming industry is sustainable without immigrants and if not where does that leave us? As an aside I do find it disingenuous when people argue that immigrants take the jobs that the indigenous population do not want to do. You can hardly compare a British man with a family to an eastern European immigrant prepared to live x to a house because he can send money back home. In a way the initial comment here could be considered traitorous. It isn’t that the indigenous population is not prepared to do the jobs it is that the indigenous population is not prepared to do the job at the wages on offer. I think there is a lot of truth in that but I also think that some supposed concern in the leave camp for the poorest in our society as a result of immigration also seems a bit disingenuous.
After all, in some cases it's the same leavers who seem entirely unconcerned about warnings that the economic impact of Brexit will hit the poorest hardest.
Of course the reverse also applies to many in the remain camp.
So it seems the poor are screwed either way, no change there then.
|
|
|
| |
|
Steve K
|
Feb 28 2018, 05:16 PM
Post #23
|
- Posts:
- 33,954
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
- Stonefish
- Feb 28 2018, 01:22 PM
Yep understand,worth diddly squat ,more or less meaningless. Rules are broken ,circumvented on a regular basis .If you think our poxy veto would really get in the way of a superstate forming,think again. And of course you can quote examples of such?
Of course you can't
The courts would absolutely shred and imprison any government minister that tried to get round that Act and certainly would just refuse to accept any attempt to impose in the UK any EU rule we had vetoed
|
|
|
| |
|
Deleted User
|
Feb 28 2018, 05:35 PM
Post #24
|
|
Deleted User
|
- Happy Hornet
- Feb 28 2018, 03:15 PM
- ACH1967
- Feb 28 2018, 02:01 PM
- gansao
- Feb 27 2018, 04:50 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
IMO people not liking immigration because of the impact it had on their lives have a genuine grievance and that the referendum was effectively the only means they had to air that grievance. As do people who are hacked off because of the increased load on public services although when considering the second group we really need to consider whether immigration has been good or bad for the treasury coffers. If we take your example of the Lithuania and extrapolate that across the piece then when some of those who voted remain bandy about the word “traitor” it seems to me that a more accurate target for that word would be “certain” British employers. Then of course we need to consider if we as consumers genuinely benefit from the cheap labour from Eastern Europe or whether all of the benefit is sucked out of the system by the employers. Then there is the question of whether our farming industry is sustainable without immigrants and if not where does that leave us? As an aside I do find it disingenuous when people argue that immigrants take the jobs that the indigenous population do not want to do. You can hardly compare a British man with a family to an eastern European immigrant prepared to live x to a house because he can send money back home. In a way the initial comment here could be considered traitorous. It isn’t that the indigenous population is not prepared to do the jobs it is that the indigenous population is not prepared to do the job at the wages on offer.
I think there is a lot of truth in that but I also think that some supposed concern in the leave camp for the poorest in our society as a result of immigration also seems a bit disingenuous. After all, in some cases it's the same leavers who seem entirely unconcerned about warnings that the economic impact of Brexit will hit the poorest hardest. Of course the reverse also applies to many in the remain camp. So it seems the poor are screwed either way, no change there then.
The poor are always screwed....by everyone...ask Oxfam
|
|
|
| |
|
Stonefish
|
Feb 28 2018, 07:12 PM
Post #25
|
- Posts:
- 4,494
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #34
- Joined:
- Jun 29, 2014
|
- Steve K
- Feb 28 2018, 05:16 PM
- Stonefish
- Feb 28 2018, 01:22 PM
Yep understand,worth diddly squat ,more or less meaningless. Rules are broken ,circumvented on a regular basis .If you think our poxy veto would really get in the way of a superstate forming,think again.
And of course you can quote examples of such? Of course you can't The courts would absolutely shred and imprison any government minister that tried to get round that Act and certainly would just refuse to accept any attempt to impose in the UK any EU rule we had vetoed
I was just wondering quite how many international laws were broken with the mass migration from Syria and north Africa ?
|
|
|
| |
|
Tigger
|
Feb 28 2018, 07:19 PM
Post #26
|
- Posts:
- 20,087
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #18
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
I've little interest in the reasons for or against Brexit, except to say it was driven by emotion and not facts.
Now the entire nation has to accept that and keep it's fingers crossed that we haven't burnt all our bridges.
|
|
|
| |
|
Steve K
|
Feb 28 2018, 07:45 PM
Post #27
|
- Posts:
- 33,954
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
- Stonefish
- Feb 28 2018, 07:12 PM
- Steve K
- Feb 28 2018, 05:16 PM
- Stonefish
- Feb 28 2018, 01:22 PM
Yep understand,worth diddly squat ,more or less meaningless. Rules are broken ,circumvented on a regular basis .If you think our poxy veto would really get in the way of a superstate forming,think again.
And of course you can quote examples of such? Of course you can't The courts would absolutely shred and imprison any government minister that tried to get round that Act and certainly would just refuse to accept any attempt to impose in the UK any EU rule we had vetoed
I was just wondering quite how many international laws were broken with the mass migration from Syria and north Africa ? By nations at treaty level none
So that whole USofE is the very crock argument I said it was.
|
|
|
| |
|
Deleted User
|
Feb 28 2018, 08:09 PM
Post #28
|
|
Deleted User
|
- Tigger
- Feb 28 2018, 07:19 PM
I've little interest in the reasons for or against Brexit, except to say it was driven by emotion and not facts.
Now the entire nation has to accept that and keep it's fingers crossed that we haven't burnt all our bridges.
If the entire nation has to keep its fingers crossed that we haven’t burnt all our bridges then it follows that the entire nation will not allow them to be easily burnt...never thought that one through did you?
|
|
|
| |
|
Tigger
|
Feb 28 2018, 08:45 PM
Post #29
|
- Posts:
- 20,087
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #18
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
- gansao
- Feb 28 2018, 08:09 PM
If the entire nation has to keep its fingers crossed that we haven’t burnt all our bridges then it follows that the entire nation will not allow them to be easily burnt...never thought that one through did you? Perhaps you hadn't noticed that the government is in the grip of it's right wing contingent and is spiralling out of control, every time the EU utters a real or perceived slight it lurches further to the right.
Rather than just try and smart arse your way out of this perhaps you should explain to us how the "entire nation" is going to stop the Tories losing the plot and wrecking the countries future prospects? Because up to now all we've had from you is provably inaccurate bluster.
|
|
|
| |
|
Deleted User
|
Feb 28 2018, 09:20 PM
Post #30
|
|
Deleted User
|
- Tigger
- Feb 28 2018, 08:45 PM
- gansao
- Feb 28 2018, 08:09 PM
If the entire nation has to keep its fingers crossed that we haven’t burnt all our bridges then it follows that the entire nation will not allow them to be easily burnt...never thought that one through did you?
Perhaps you hadn't noticed that the government is in the grip of it's right wing contingent and is spiralling out of control, every time the EU utters a real or perceived slight it lurches further to the right. Rather than just try and smart arse your way out of this perhaps you should explain to us how the "entire nation" is going to stop the Tories losing the plot and wrecking the countries future prospects? Because up to now all we've had from you is provably inaccurate bluster.
Bluster is your preserve not mine. The government is not in the grip of a right wing contingent. The Government would be in the grip of right wing contingent if the government was run by a right wing contingent that banged the desk at negotiations and dictated the terms to the EU with a real threat of the right wing contingents walking away from negotiations. Instead we have a few hard Brexiters that are regularly slapped down by reality . They may frighten you ..I can’t help you there. Inaccurate bluster..that sums up your entire case ...
|
|
|
| |
|
Stonefish
|
Feb 28 2018, 09:23 PM
Post #31
|
- Posts:
- 4,494
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #34
- Joined:
- Jun 29, 2014
|
- Steve K
- Feb 28 2018, 07:45 PM
- Stonefish
- Feb 28 2018, 07:12 PM
- Steve K
- Feb 28 2018, 05:16 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
I was just wondering quite how many international laws were broken with the mass migration from Syria and north Africa ?
By nations at treaty level none So that whole USofE is the very crock argument I said it was.
Right,and at international level ?
It would seem that if EU member states can flout International law so readily ,more localised rule breaking must be a piece of cake .
|
|
|
| |
|
Tigger
|
Feb 28 2018, 09:26 PM
Post #32
|
- Posts:
- 20,087
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #18
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
- gansao
- Feb 28 2018, 09:20 PM
Bluster is your preserve not mine. Really? Which is why I can't be arsed to read the rest of your long winded drivel.
|
|
|
| |
|
Stonefish
|
Feb 28 2018, 09:26 PM
Post #33
|
- Posts:
- 4,494
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #34
- Joined:
- Jun 29, 2014
|
- Tigger
- Feb 28 2018, 07:19 PM
I've little interest in the reasons for or against Brexit, except to say it was driven by emotion and not facts.
Now the entire nation has to accept that and keep it's fingers crossed that we haven't burnt all our bridges.
Wow,your really all over the place on this aren't you ,and your party voting appears to change monthly or not at all ,and no interest in argument for or against Brexit. Er why bother posting then ,just for a laugh ?
|
|
|
| |
|
Steve K
|
Feb 28 2018, 09:38 PM
Post #34
|
- Posts:
- 33,954
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
- Stonefish
- Feb 28 2018, 09:23 PM
- Steve K
- Feb 28 2018, 07:45 PM
- Stonefish
- Feb 28 2018, 07:12 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
By nations at treaty level none So that whole USofE is the very crock argument I said it was.
Right,and at international level ? It would seem that if EU member states can flout International law so readily ,more localised rule breaking must be a piece of cake . Utterly irrelevant
Yes Italian farmers might be fiddling their CAP claims but it hardly binds the UK, Germany etc in any way so to pretend it's some route to a USofE is really less than honest debating
|
|
|
| |
|
Tigger
|
Feb 28 2018, 09:41 PM
Post #35
|
- Posts:
- 20,087
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #18
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
- Stonefish
- Feb 28 2018, 09:26 PM
- Tigger
- Feb 28 2018, 07:19 PM
I've little interest in the reasons for or against Brexit, except to say it was driven by emotion and not facts.
Now the entire nation has to accept that and keep it's fingers crossed that we haven't burnt all our bridges.
Wow,your really all over the place on this aren't you ,and your party voting appears to change monthly or not at all ,and no interest in argument for or against Brexit. Er why bother posting then ,just for a laugh ? I'm consistent, you just can't understand...............
|
|
|
| |
|
Stonefish
|
Feb 28 2018, 09:57 PM
Post #36
|
- Posts:
- 4,494
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #34
- Joined:
- Jun 29, 2014
|
- Steve K
- Feb 28 2018, 09:38 PM
- Stonefish
- Feb 28 2018, 09:23 PM
- Steve K
- Feb 28 2018, 07:45 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Right,and at international level ? It would seem that if EU member states can flout International law so readily ,more localised rule breaking must be a piece of cake .
Utterly irrelevant Yes Italian farmers might be fiddling their CAP claims but it hardly binds the UK, Germany etc in any way so to pretend it's some route to a USofE is really less than honest debating
It is entirely relevant. VW fiddling its emissions is irrelevant ,though it does seem when Germans get involved with gases bad things happen.
But breaking international laws so easily must lend the notion that the same people can ignore more local laws when it suits them.
|
|
|
| |
|
Rich
|
Feb 28 2018, 11:39 PM
Post #37
|
- Posts:
- 14,458
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #30
- Joined:
- Jun 28, 2014
|
- Stonefish
- Feb 28 2018, 09:57 PM
- Steve K
- Feb 28 2018, 09:38 PM
- Stonefish
- Feb 28 2018, 09:23 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Utterly irrelevant Yes Italian farmers might be fiddling their CAP claims but it hardly binds the UK, Germany etc in any way so to pretend it's some route to a USofE is really less than honest debating
It is entirely relevant. VW fiddling its emissions is irrelevant ,though it does seem when Germans get involved with gases bad things happen. But breaking international laws so easily must lend the notion that the same people can ignore more local laws when it suits them. Whatever, 17.4 million of the voting electorate saw the "pro's" of leaving and acted decisively with two single strokes of a writing implement in as much to say, we are well pissed off with the status quo....we want out now fucking implement that wish.
|
|
|
| |
|
Steve K
|
Mar 1 2018, 12:44 AM
Post #38
|
- Posts:
- 33,954
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
- Stonefish
- Feb 28 2018, 09:57 PM
- Steve K
- Feb 28 2018, 09:38 PM
- Stonefish
- Feb 28 2018, 09:23 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Utterly irrelevant Yes Italian farmers might be fiddling their CAP claims but it hardly binds the UK, Germany etc in any way so to pretend it's some route to a USofE is really less than honest debating
It is entirely relevant. VW fiddling its emissions is irrelevant ,though it does seem when Germans get involved with gases bad things happen. But breaking international laws so easily must lend the notion that the same people can ignore more local laws when it suits them. Totally irrelevant
You are quite ridiculously supposing that because VW broke some rules then the UK courts would be obliged to treat UK citizens as being part of some USofE. Utter bollocks of course. The supposed USofE is just a dishonest construct used by those that know they haven't got enough honest arguments
Do raise your game
|
|
|
| |
|
Steve K
|
Mar 1 2018, 12:46 AM
Post #39
|
- Posts:
- 33,954
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
- Rich
- Feb 28 2018, 11:39 PM
- Stonefish
- Feb 28 2018, 09:57 PM
- Steve K
- Feb 28 2018, 09:38 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
It is entirely relevant. VW fiddling its emissions is irrelevant ,though it does seem when Germans get involved with gases bad things happen. But breaking international laws so easily must lend the notion that the same people can ignore more local laws when it suits them.
Whatever, 17.4 million of the voting electorate saw the "pro's" of leaving and acted decisively with two single strokes of a writing implement in as much to say, we are well pissed off with the status quo....we want out now fucking implement that wish. But we don't know it was a legal referendum campaign and we certainly know they were misinformed
This thread is about laying out the true Pros and Cons and predictably it has got mired in false Leaver arguments
|
|
|
| |
|
Stonefish
|
Mar 1 2018, 02:36 AM
Post #40
|
- Posts:
- 4,494
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #34
- Joined:
- Jun 29, 2014
|
- Steve K
- Mar 1 2018, 12:46 AM
- Rich
- Feb 28 2018, 11:39 PM
- Stonefish
- Feb 28 2018, 09:57 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Whatever, 17.4 million of the voting electorate saw the "pro's" of leaving and acted decisively with two single strokes of a writing implement in as much to say, we are well pissed off with the status quo....we want out now fucking implement that wish.
But we don't know it was a legal referendum campaign and we certainly know they were misinformed This thread is about laying out the true Pros and Cons and predictably it has got mired in false Leaver arguments
|
|
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|