Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Kendo

Eu Referendum

EU referendum   

80 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

I've seen nothing credible to suggest we'd be worse off out.

Then again, when you consider it is all coming from politicians, is it surprising that there has been nothing credible from either side?

I'm oscillating from a Remain to a Leave and then back to Remain again.

What concerns me about remaining is the combination of lack of democracy in the EU and the legislative impact on UK businesses from that undemocratic bloc. I side with Leave at this point.

I then look around me at the sea of racists, bigots, conspiracy theorists and general nutjobs advocating Leaving and I despair.

Add to that the undoubted problems of the lack of free movement of people and the impact on immigration in terms of employment (we don't have enough immigration IMO) and I swing back to Remain again.

I then remember that the same lack of immigration would make things much easier for UK scientists like myself to get access to funding and jobs without having to compete with EU scientists and I swing back to Leave again. Then again I want the freedom to move to any EU country for work and/or business without f**king around with Visas and I'm back to Remain again.

Not an easy one this TBH and I will almost certainly vote based solely on what is best for me personally.

People complain about the frustration of not knowing which politician to believe. My question is WTF are you doing expecting any politician to know the answers to any of this stuff? Make your own mind up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Free movement was all well and good when it was essentially a smaller number of countries with relatively stable economies.

Since the Eastern bloc countries with relative poverty have joined, there was obviously going to be a levelling down of economies as people moved to the richer parts to generate cash and send it home to stimulate their own economy.

If you think things are bad now... Wait for the massive influx of Turks and Albanians next.

Like I said, it's this specific attitude which disturbs me most about voting to Leave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I said, it's this specific attitude which disturbs me most about voting to Leave.

He's not wrong though Oaksoft. There was a great piece on This Week on Thursday where John Bird, founder of the Big Issue, was claiming that UK Government policies to end poverty were harming the prospects of those people the social welfare system was designed to help. Liz Kendall argued the socialist case against John Bird who seemed to be claiming that the Welfare State in the UK was too generous, and then Michael Portillo intervened with an observation that Liz Kendall was claiming that the UK poor were amongst the poorest in Europe, yet that simply wasn't true and that if you compared either benefits or the minimum wage with countries like Spain, Portugal, and Greece, never mind the Eastern Bloc countries it was quite clear that we're nowhere near the poorest in Europe, and indeed with the UK Government raising the minimum wage even higher the net effect would be even more EU migration to the UK.

If you think about it logically it's obvious that migration is damaging, not just for the UK economy where we haven't got the infrastructure to deal with such a large, sudden, influx of people, it's also damaging to the countries were these workers are leaving in their droves to work, often in low skilled jobs for far higher wages in the UK. It's where freedom of movement in the EU really hasn't been properly thought out and where it hasn't worked. If you don't have the same Employment legislation, the same minimum wages, and the same levels of income taxation across the whole of the EU then the idea of a single currency and of a large superstate doesn't really work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's not wrong though Oaksoft. There was a great piece on This Week on Thursday where John Bird, founder of the Big Issue, was claiming that UK Government policies to end poverty were harming the prospects of those people the social welfare system was designed to help. Liz Kendall argued the socialist case against John Bird who seemed to be claiming that the Welfare State in the UK was too generous, and then Michael Portillo intervened with an observation that Liz Kendall was claiming that the UK poor were amongst the poorest in Europe, yet that simply wasn't true and that if you compared either benefits or the minimum wage with countries like Spain, Portugal, and Greece, never mind the Eastern Bloc countries it was quite clear that we're nowhere near the poorest in Europe, and indeed with the UK Government raising the minimum wage even higher the net effect would be even more EU migration to the UK.

If you think about it logically it's obvious that migration is damaging, not just for the UK economy where we haven't got the infrastructure to deal with such a large, sudden, influx of people, it's also damaging to the countries were these workers are leaving in their droves to work, often in low skilled jobs for far higher wages in the UK. It's where freedom of movement in the EU really hasn't been properly thought out and where it hasn't worked. If you don't have the same Employment legislation, the same minimum wages, and the same levels of income taxation across the whole of the EU then the idea of a single currency and of a large superstate doesn't really work.

I know John Bird is a big critic of the welfare system and politician's "well meaning" attempts to solve poverty by simply throwing money at it.

I agree that the welfare state is simply too generous in this country and the fact that people can simply remain on it for life is one of the biggest social scandals we face. John is a strong advocate of people standing on their own two feet and taking personal responsibility for themselves but the people at the bottom need more direct help to allow them to do that. Simply throwing cash at people solves nothing, is intellectually bankrupt and TBH smacks of wanting maximum gain for minimum effort - pretty much like chucking £5 in a charity tin and thinking that this shows you care about the cause.

I agree about the effect of migration on the poorer countries who are seeing millions of their young people leave for foreign shores but with respect that is their problem not ours.

We are in a global market competing for the best staff and if that means raiding eastern european countries to entice their best staff then there's no chance I'll be shedding a tear for their homeland.

As for the sudden influx of migrants? That is a local problem not a national one.

I'm not interested ina single currency or a single superstate.

I'm all for small countries working together on common goals independently of each other without one of them dominating the others. On this point I'm viewing independence within the EU on the same scale as Scotland independent within the UK. No way should the EU be telling the UK who can and can't fish off the coast of the UK for example just as the UK shouldn't be telling Scotland what tax rate to set to attract business.

An alliance of equals.

How about that for a slogan?

That's where my beliefs lie.

Now I need to fathom out whether voting In or Out gives me the closest thing to that.

Edited by oaksoft

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mmmm

typo versus actually stealing money from the disabled (as you believe you are doing) to buy presents for your grandchildren.

The EU referendum campaign in Scotland is amusing.

The yesers for Scottish indepedence now using the very same arguments to remain that they campaigned against previously.

Its highlighted that the SNP and yes campaign = UKIP, the Tory right and the leave campaign.

Alex Salmond = Boris Johnson.

Its highlighted how ridiculous both positions are!

#thichasfcuk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know John Bird is a big critic of the welfare system and politician's "well meaning" attempts to solve poverty by simply throwing money at it.

I agree that the welfare state is simply too generous in this country and the fact that people can simply remain on it for life is one of the biggest social scandals we face. John is a strong advocate of people standing on their own two feet and taking personal responsibility for themselves but the people at the bottom need more direct help to allow them to do that. Simply throwing cash at people solves nothing, is intellectually bankrupt and TBH smacks of wanting maximum gain for minimum effort - pretty much like chucking £5 in a charity tin and thinking that this shows you care about the cause.

I agree about the effect of migration on the poorer countries who are seeing millions of their young people leave for foreign shores but with respect that is their problem not ours.

We are in a global market competing for the best staff and if that means raiding eastern european countries to entice their best staff then there's no chance I'll be shedding a tear for their homeland.

As for the sudden influx of migrants? That is a local problem not a national one.

I'm not interested ina single currency or a single superstate.

I'm all for small countries working together on common goals independently of each other without one of them dominating the others. On this point I'm viewing independence within the EU on the same scale as Scotland independent within the UK. No way should the EU be telling the UK who can and can't fish off the coast of the UK for example just as the UK shouldn't be telling Scotland what tax rate to set to attract business.

An alliance of equals.

How about that for a slogan?

That's where my beliefs lie.

Now I need to fathom out whether voting In or Out gives me the closest thing to that.

He's not wrong though Oaksoft. There was a great piece on This Week on Thursday where John Bird, founder of the Big Issue, was claiming that UK Government policies to end poverty were harming the prospects of those people the social welfare system was designed to help. Liz Kendall argued the socialist case against John Bird who seemed to be claiming that the Welfare State in the UK was too generous, and then Michael Portillo intervened with an observation that Liz Kendall was claiming that the UK poor were amongst the poorest in Europe, yet that simply wasn't true and that if you compared either benefits or the minimum wage with countries like Spain, Portugal, and Greece, never mind the Eastern Bloc countries it was quite clear that we're nowhere near the poorest in Europe, and indeed with the UK Government raising the minimum wage even higher the net effect would be even more EU migration to the UK.

If you think about it logically it's obvious that migration is damaging, not just for the UK economy where we haven't got the infrastructure to deal with such a large, sudden, influx of people, it's also damaging to the countries were these workers are leaving in their droves to work, often in low skilled jobs for far higher wages in the UK. It's where freedom of movement in the EU really hasn't been properly thought out and where it hasn't worked. If you don't have the same Employment legislation, the same minimum wages, and the same levels of income taxation across the whole of the EU then the idea of a single currency and of a large superstate doesn't really work.

Like I said, it's this specific attitude which disturbs me most about voting to Leave.

I'm oscillating from a Remain to a Leave and then back to Remain again.

What concerns me about remaining is the combination of lack of democracy in the EU and the legislative impact on UK businesses from that undemocratic bloc. I side with Leave at this point.

I then look around me at the sea of racists, bigots, conspiracy theorists and general nutjobs advocating Leaving and I despair.

Add to that the undoubted problems of the lack of free movement of people and the impact on immigration in terms of employment (we don't have enough immigration IMO) and I swing back to Remain again.

I then remember that the same lack of immigration would make things much easier for UK scientists like myself to get access to funding and jobs without having to compete with EU scientists and I swing back to Leave again. Then again I want the freedom to move to any EU country for work and/or business without f**king around with Visas and I'm back to Remain again.

Not an easy one this TBH and I will almost certainly vote based solely on what is best for me personally.

People complain about the frustration of not knowing which politician to believe. My question is WTF are you doing expecting any politician to know the answers to any of this stuff? Make your own mind up.

Schizophrenic? Ha! He's bloody Quadrophonic!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good. Someone will, though

I don't see what's wrong with what Oaksoft has said. He may have contradicted his stance a number of times but that's what happens when you are conflicted over an issue. I don't feel particularly strongly towards remaining in, or leaving Europe. I'm still listening to the arguments for and against and I wish the quality of the debate was far better than it has been. Seriously to claim we should leave because the EU didn't back Scottish Independence is utterly absurd but unfortunately that appears to be how base the debate has sunk in Scotland.

I recognise what Oaksoft is saying in his response to me. For me it's the biggest failing of the EU. If you can't get parity amongst members then the whole project simply cannot work in terms of Freedom of Movement or in terms of a single currency. Yet instead of restricting membership to those who are equals, the EU seems more focused on expansion than practicality. Throw in double tax laws which allow a worker to choose to pay tax through another EU country with a cheaper income tax rate than the country they work in and you can see how stupid the whole thing becomes.

I believe the EU is flawed and it's failing. I should be voting to exit, but the problem is that the case hasn't been made for exiting. If it's going to affect the value of Sterling on the international market, even for a short period of time, that wouldn't suit me personally. If it's going to increase the cost of imports then that doesn't appeal to me. If it would restrict my ability to have a cheap holiday in Europe then that doesn't appeal to me, and if it restricts my future choice to leave Scotland in the event of the country ever being persuaded to become Independent then I'm not for that either. So I'm stuck on the fence in many ways and in the absence of a credible argument as to how I'd be better off out of Europe, I've got to vote for what is familiar and for what I know....which is to remain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see what's wrong with what Oaksoft has said. He may have contradicted his stance a number of times but that's what happens when you are conflicted over an issue. I don't feel particularly strongly towards remaining in, or leaving Europe. I'm still listening to the arguments for and against and I wish the quality of the debate was far better than it has been. Seriously to claim we should leave because the EU didn't back Scottish Independence is utterly absurd but unfortunately that appears to be how base the debate has sunk in Scotland.

I recognise what Oaksoft is saying in his response to me. For me it's the biggest failing of the EU. If you can't get parity amongst members then the whole project simply cannot work in terms of Freedom of Movement or in terms of a single currency. Yet instead of restricting membership to those who are equals, the EU seems more focused on expansion than practicality. Throw in double tax laws which allow a worker to choose to pay tax through another EU country with a cheaper income tax rate than the country they work in and you can see how stupid the whole thing becomes.

I believe the EU is flawed and it's failing. I should be voting to exit, but the problem is that the case hasn't been made for exiting. If it's going to affect the value of Sterling on the international market, even for a short period of time, that wouldn't suit me personally. If it's going to increase the cost of imports then that doesn't appeal to me. If it would restrict my ability to have a cheap holiday in Europe then that doesn't appeal to me, and if it restricts my future choice to leave Scotland in the event of the country ever being persuaded to become Independent then I'm not for that either. So I'm stuck on the fence in many ways and in the absence of a credible argument as to how I'd be better off out of Europe, I've got to vote for what is familiar and for what I know....which is to remain.

Bloody good balanced and reasonable post there Sir.

I think that may have used up your monthly quota though!

Seriously though, agree on all poonts there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More scare tactics or something to be worried about, see below?

The UK could face an extra two years of austerity measures if it votes to leave the EU, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has said.

The consensus of economists was that the UK economy would shrink after a Brexit, the think tank said.

It warned ministers could react to a post-Brexit GDP fall with either deeper cuts, or by extending them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More scare tactics or something to be worried about, see below?

The UK could face an extra two years of austerity measures if it votes to leave the EU, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has said.

The consensus of economists was that the UK economy would shrink after a Brexit, the think tank said.

It warned ministers could react to a post-Brexit GDP fall with either deeper cuts, or by extending them.

Hard to fecking tell, the extreme stories coming from both camps are extremely unhelpful.

I'm going to use the well known scientific formula of "best of three" using a 10p piece. thumbup2.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More scare tactics or something to be worried about, see below?

The UK could face an extra two years of austerity measures if it votes to leave the EU, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has said.

The consensus of economists was that the UK economy would shrink after a Brexit, the think tank said.

It warned ministers could react to a post-Brexit GDP fall with either deeper cuts, or by extending them.

More scare tactics.

It's the opinion of economists, not fact. Economic forecasters are rarely right. They also admit that even if they are right it'll still be less off a downturn than Osborne has managed with his previous mistakes when forecasting at budgets etc.

The only fact they seem to have, from the headlines, is the amount that would be 'saved' by not paying it into the EU every year.

I'm still not sure how I'm voting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fairness whilst this might be scaremongering pish, commonsense should be telling us that there will be some uncertainty following brexit.

The financial markets hate uncertainty therefore we can predict some volatility.

That volatility will cause a bit of caution from investors etc.

So we can expect some sort of downturn and that will last as long as the uncertainty lasts and that could take a few years to sort out regarding trade agreements etc.

Exactly the same as with independence.

IMO people should be considering what they want 10 to 20 years down the line.

Voting based on the next 12 months is daft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fairness whilst this might be scaremongering pish, commonsense should be telling us that there will be some uncertainty following brexit.

The financial markets hate uncertainty therefore we can predict some volatility.

That volatility will cause a bit of caution from investors etc.

So we can expect some sort of downturn and that will last as long as the uncertainty lasts and that could take a few years to sort out regarding trade agreements etc.

Exactly the same as with independence.

IMO people should be considering what they want 10 to 20 years down the line.

Voting based on the next 12 months is daft.

Unless you have a crystal ball I would suggest that is all pretty much guesswork.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless you have a crystal ball I would suggest that is all pretty much guesswork.

Of course its guesswork.

Its guesswork based on experience though.

Which bit of it do you think is unreasonable?

Edited by oaksoft

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course its guesswork.

Its guesswork based on experience though.

Which bit of it do you think is unreasonable?

You expecting people to REALLY vote on the next 10 to 20 years, ya trumpet. 1eye.gif

People will, and can, only vote on what's already been their experience of being part of the EU and what might, realistically, happen in the near future.

The next 10 to 20 years, due to crystal balls being all bought by gypsies, is way off of the majority's agenda. bye1.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hard to fecking tell, the extreme stories coming from both camps are extremely unhelpful.

I'm going to use the well known scientific formula of "best of three" using a 10p piece. :thumbs2

I can help you there.

If after your first coin toss you feel compelled to go to best of three it means you really wanted the second choice so just go with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You expecting people to REALLY vote on the next 10 to 20 years, ya trumpet. :1eye

People will, and can, only vote on what's already been their experience of being part of the EU and what might, realistically, happen in the near future.

The next 10 to 20 years, due to crystal balls being all bought by gypsies, is way off of the majority's agenda. :byebye

No I dont. I expect people to vote in the short term because most people lack the commonsense to think on longer timescales.

I said they SHOULD vote on what they would like to see in the longer term.

Short termism is a virus which plagues our society.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I dont. I expect people to vote in the short term because most people lack the commonsense to think on longer timescales.

I said they SHOULD vote on what they would like to see in the longer term.

Short termism is a virus which plagues our society.

Ok so what is the credible long term case that we would all be financially better off out of Europe? If common sense suggests we would all be worse off in the short term what is the common sense argument that suggests that in 20 years we won't regret it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok so what is the credible long term case that we would all be financially better off out of Europe? If common sense suggests we would all be worse off in the short term what is the common sense argument that suggests that in 20 years we won't regret it?

Thing is Cameron said if he did not get what he wanted he would pull us out of Europe. He did not get everything it's more like maybe aye make new. For him to stand up twice in support of Turkey joining the EU only for him to say he would now use the veto to say no is laughable. The big problem through out with voters seems to be imagination if you watch people in the street being interviewed on news channels. It's not only the UK citizens that think this all over Europe right wing is growing in strength. Having lived in Holland for the past 6 month I heard the same thing from many Dutch. THE EU is undemocratic I for one want out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fairness whilst this might be scaremongering pish, commonsense should be telling us that there will be some uncertainty following brexit.

The financial markets hate uncertainty therefore we can predict some volatility.

That volatility will cause a bit of caution from investors etc.

So we can expect some sort of downturn and that will last as long as the uncertainty lasts and that could take a few years to sort out regarding trade agreements etc.

Exactly the same as with independence.

IMO people should be considering what they want 10 to 20 years down the line.

Voting based on the next 12 months is daft.

The markets are way ahead of things regardless.

When we were bounced out the ERM the market reset was swift and was very beneficial to to us. The pound found its proper level which helped exports, employment increased and our economy became more competitive. The scenario isnt the same this time. But the markets will readjust very swiftly and our economy WILL cope very well.

If anyone is genuinely wanting to know what our exit strategy would look like rather than simply parroting back shite that politicians spout then take a look through this. There is a way to remove uncertainty for markets and this is it. It keeps us with access to all the same markets and its economically neutral.

The leave campaign were going to run with this but decided to run with immigrants and other pish. Up to them, but the exit strategy IS there and its actually the only sensible way to deal with things if its an out vote.

http://www.eureferendum.com/documents/flexcit.pdf

edit to add the document.. that tends to help <_<

Edited by Reynard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...