EU Referendum

[theenglishman]

Originally Posted by Bibio

@ the englishman, i'm in the same circumstances as you but i think that if we leave the EU then it will give more power to the Government and less to the people. you just have to look at all the laws that have been passed over the last 20 years compared to the 20 years previous.

Ok - I don't want to appear 'preachy' here so please don't take offence.

The U.K. is governed not by any written constitution but by the rule of law. Why are laws such a bad thing? It's what defines us as British. the fact our legal system is independent(totally and utterly (you see what happens when the government try and interfere with a court case)) is an excellent check and balance for society as a whole. Now, the leave lot say the EU produce stupid laws. Well they just don't. People just use 'oh it's an EU law' if they don't agree with it.

Anyway, my point on what happens if we leave is that in the long term the winners will become more powerful - Boris may well become PM. The leave campaign are mainly made up of the right wing of the political establishment. The right wing prefer the power (money in most cases) to be left with the individual so they can decide what to do with their own money. IE do I buy health insurance for the family or a new 65" tv (this is a humourous example but get the drift) this is great if you have money.

The stay lot are more left wing and would prefer the government to decide how to spend your money that they receive through taxation.

Sadly, individuals just can't be trusted to spend their money on intangible things they can't see or directly benefit from. So if we leave TV sales will rocket while people in care homes will starve in their own excrement. Ok, another gross generalisation, but you get the drift?

So in the long term, staying will benefit society as a whole - we'll all lead better lives. Leaving will benefit the individual, so long as the individual has the means(money) to benefit.

Finally, however you feel, please vote. not voting in this referendum is the biggest mistake.

[Bibio]

Laws are Laws right enough but you forget that there are different types of Law in the UK. here is Scotland the law is completely different from the rest of the UK and due to this we dont have any form of legal tender yes that includes the BOE tender, none nada.

your right about consumerism but that was the plan since the end of the second world war. if you can find it there is a very interesting documentary featuring John Major spilling some of the beans.

I spent a lot of time studying the EU and a lot of what is said is either:

1. Downright incorrect and used for political emphasis
2. Based on an opinion of what may happen.

The problem is that nobody is really talking about the facts.

People say we could have an agreement like Norway or one of the 'non EU, EU countries'. Great, but most don't realise they have to pay (often nearly as much if not more than we do) just to get access to the single market. They also have to abide by all the consumer regulations because the EU will not do business with them otherwise - this is why the trans atlantic trade deal is at a standstill. America doesn't want to increase their standards to our levels.

I don't see how a leave vote can end in better things for the UK. If we want to trade with EU, we have to pay more - whether via fees to access the market, or by import and export duties.

Leave has said we can sell to the rest of the world, but nobody has explained to me why we don't do that already? If we had that possibility, business would be doing it!

I don't know why anybody would want to vote leave, unless they just buy into a very simplistic view of the world.

A lot of my thoughts are summed up here http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/john...tml?edition=uk

We deal with the rest of Europe a lot and I am firmly in, I feel that we need to be able to have European Arrest Warrants and Cameron has at least left us with the veto if we need it. I am worried that if we vote out France will just take all of those disenfranchised people in Calais and say "There you are, we have no agreement with them, off you go" and let them all across to us and the problem will be worse than ever

[Trev B]

Simplicity is the name of the game,the less moving parts equates to less friction hence reliability inproves.The EU to me is equal to one of the most over engineered water falls in the world ,it makes a simple act of making,growing ,buying and selling a task that full of disadvantages that can hinder more than assist.each to his or her own !!!.

[littleoldman2]

Just a couple of points.
I believe we should not even begin to consider the effect on our Standard of Living. We are as a nation and individuals immensely rich in both world and historical terms, the fact that virtually all on here ride motorcycles for fun shows that, we can afford to have a lifestyle well beyond the needs of warmth, food and companionship. I have not seen folk growing food in the front garden, rickets or shoeless people for decades. We should be considering our Nation, our Quality of Life and what is best our children's wellbeing not how many holidays we can afford each year.

We are part of Europe whether we like it or not. Vans and lorrys are not restricted to 60 mph, which would be sensible, they are restricted to 56 mph with is really 55.9234 mph or 90 kph. The lowest speed my cruise control can be set at is 31mph, because Europe has 50 kph limits. Lets get used to it and stop whinging and get on.

Scare mungering about trade. The trade deficit with the EU is massive just Google it and get the facts instead of opinions. This will only get bigger as new countries we have already a deficit with join. The plain fact is that if Germany wants to continue the massive export of cars to Britain then they will have to come to a reciprocal agreement. We would be very much in the driving seat with this if our politicians had any spine.

Just my addition to the forums debate.

[Red ones]

I don't think the debate should be about why we should stay in. It should be about whether there is a concrete and compelling reason to leave. Beat in mind it is not a stay in as was, but a stay in with changes that weren't explained simply when Cameron 'negotiated' them earlier this year.

Cruise control speed (and I do get it was only an example) really is a first world problem. Financial independence? With the size of banks they are these days if any country goes down then we all get affected whether we are in Europe or not. Do we need to worry about the size of the countries in Europe when in a few years time we will have a bigger population than any other country including Germany? (Germany has a shrinking population).
On immigration there is one question that no politician days ask. If we don't have immigration who pays our pensions in the next 10 to 15 years?

[Bri w]

"Norway pays more than the UK to access the EU markets." No it doesn't, it pays €884million a year to access the EU trade. We pay more than that, net, in 4 months.

And we are the second highest net contributor even though we have the fourth highest GDP...well that seems fair, NOT.

"Our laws are made and passed in Parliament." No they are not. #2 daughter is part of the legal dept that spends a fair bit of time in Brussels and Strasbourg making sure what we want includes European laws. That included things like the car scrappage scheme and the Post Office sell off that might have conflicted with EU competition rules. They are put before our Parliament to be ratified but they are an amalgamation of what we want diluted to what we can have.

"But we'll have to manufacture to EU standards to be able to sell there." Absolutely, just as we already manufacture to American standards to be able to export to there.

"We're better off than we have ever been." Our biggest growth industry since 2004 is food banks. And by 2024 our retirement age will have risen to 67 - in most cases before every other EU country.

Coincidently in 2004, 10 new countries were admitted to the EU. Not one single one of them is a net contributor, nor has ever been. Don't worry, the second biggest basket case "locally" in Turkey has already been promised unrestricted access to the EU before admission, and have already been given €3billion this year. Which means the budgets to other struggling member countries will either be cut or the wealthier countries will have to stump up more or their budgets won't balance.

Many local education authorities have, in the last year, asked the Dept of Education to be allowed to increase class sizes to 40.

I absolutely support the idea of the original Common Market, i.e. a trading bloc, but not a federal Europe that appears to be hell bent on reducing economies down to averages between the countries.

As for it being a democratic Europe, the Visigard group of Eastern European countries often vote en-bloc, a lot like the voting you see in the Eurovision Song Contest.

Ignore the rubbish put out by both camps, and do your own research. Whatever you choose will be right because you've made that choice on what you've found out, not what you've been fed.

[Red ones]

Why shouldn't rich countries help poorer ones?
The alternative is the rich ones let the poor ones struggle, fail to produce enough to support their people and become a breeding ground for unrest and civil rebellion.

Isn't this the original idea of the EU? To stop this happening?

[Bibio]

Originally Posted by Red ones

Why shouldn't rich countries help poorer ones?
The alternative is the rich ones let the poor ones struggle, fail to produce enough to support their people and become a breeding ground for unrest and civil rebellion.

Isn't this the original idea of the EU? To stop this happening?

that was my understanding. but like always greed, lawyers and politicians get in the way.