I was going to vote reamin but

[Dorset Gooner]

after this I am not so sure now:

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/alex-salmond-says-scotland-would-leave-uk-in-event-of-brexit/ar-BBtx64n?ocid=spartanntp

[Burney]

after this I am not so sure now:

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/alex-salmond-says-scotland-would-leave-uk-in-event-of-brexit/ar-BBtx64n?ocid=spartanntp

I don't think 'Reamin' is an option, dg, but ironically, that's exactly what the EU regularly gives us all.

[The Jorge]

I don't think 'Reamin' is an option, dg, but ironically, that's exactly what the EU regularly gives us all.

Despite us having literally the best deal possible of all of the EU countires, and also the affiliated ones like Iceland, Switzers and Norway who pay what we do - more or less - without even having a say.

[Sir C]

Despite us having literally the best deal possible of all of the EU countires, and also the affiliated ones like Iceland, Switzers and Norway who pay what we do - more or less - without even having a say.

Erm, despite the fact that we are nett contributors?

[The Jorge]

Erm, despite the fact that we are nett contributors?

Yes, but there's all of those things which we get back from it.

[Sir C]

Yes, but there's all of those things which we get back from it.

What are these things of which you speak?

[Luis Anaconda]

What are these things of which you speak?

Do Eastern European women count? I may be on a bit of theme today

[Ash]

Yes, but there's all of those things which we get back from it.

That you get back from it. #trough #gravytrain

[Ash]

Do Eastern European women count? I may be on a bit of theme today

In or out, there should always be room for more Eastern European women imo :nod:

[Burney]

Do Eastern European women count? I may be on a bit of theme today

Have you been answering those spam emails about Ukrainian women wanting to meet you again, la?

[Luis Anaconda]

In this place its just emails from our sales and marketing team, tbf

[Burney]

In or out, there should always be room for more Eastern European women imo :nod:

Don't fancy yours much, j. :-(

145

[The Jorge]

That you get back from it. #trough #gravytrain

:hehe: Are you honestly suggesting I'm minting it because I've done a couple of pretty small design jobs for a firm in Brussels?

[The Jorge]

What are these things of which you speak?

2m young, skilled, fit and statistically less likely to claim benefits or burden the NHS people working here and paying taxes vs 3m pensioners doing the opposite abroad. European Objective One and Two funding, EU Social funds, the Erasmus programme for universities, workers rights, civil rights, London being europe's default financial capital, I could go on.

[Sir C]

2m young, skilled, fit and statistically less likely to claim benefits or burden the NHS people working here and paying taxes vs 3m pensioners doing the opposite abroad. European Objective One and Two funding, EU Social funds, the Erasmus programme for universities, workers rights, civil rights, London being europe's default financial capital, I could go on.

These 2m are people are by no stretch of the imagination all skilled or fit.

Funding is irrelevant, we are net contributors.

We had workers' rights and civil rights before 1974.

Are you suggesting that banking is a good and useful industry? I must bookmark this thread.

I was pretty much undecided about this referendum, but thanks to your carefully reasoned argument, I have definitely decided to vote 'Out'. Thanks, j. :thumbup:

[The Jorge]

These 2m are people are by no stretch of the imagination all skilled or fit.

Funding is irrelevant, we are net contributors.

We had workers' rights and civil rights before 1974.

Are you suggesting that banking is a good and useful industry? I must bookmark this thread.

I was pretty much undecided about this referendum, but thanks to your carefully reasoned argument, I have definitely decided to vote 'Out'. Thanks, j. :thumbup:

"Funding is irrelevant, we are net contributors." Are you really saying you're purposefully ignoring all of the subsequent benefits on the basis that we're net contributors?

The LSE and the IFS have both released studies confirming that EU migrants are less likely to claim state benefits and that EU immigration provides a net benefit to the Uk.

On the banking point, I think having bailed the *******s to the tune of £850bn we're probably better off not having all of the financial sector pack up and move elsewhere.

[Burney]

"Funding is irrelevant, we are net contributors." Are you really saying you're purposefully ignoring all of the subsequent benefits on the basis that we're net contributors?

The LSE and the IFS have both released studies confirming that EU migrants are less likely to claim state benefits and that EU immigration provides a net benefit to the Uk.

On the banking point, I think having bailed the *******s to the tune of £850bn we're probably better off not having all of the financial sector pack up and move elsewhere.

Couple of things:

1/ Any benefits we receive from the EU we have already paid for and more, so those benefits are not some favours the EU does us - they are things we have bought.

2/ Your stat on EU migrants is such a short-term measure as to be meaningless given that it ignores the pressures such migration places on our society and infrastructure both now and in the future as they have children, etc, etc. It also ignores the fact that these migrants are going to get old one day, at which point we are going to be paying for them as well.

[The Jorge]

Couple of things:

1/ Any benefits we receive from the EU we have already paid for and more, so those benefits are not some favours the EU does us - they are things we have bought.

2/ Your stat on EU migrants is such a short-term measure as to be meaningless given that it ignores the pressures such migration places on our society and infrastructure both now and in the future as they have children, etc, etc. It also ignores the fact that these migrants are going to get old one day, at which point we are going to be paying for them as well.

1. Those things are the benefits of the economic co-operation and it does seem pretty widely accepted that, when you factor that sort of stuff in, that we more than come out up on the deal. I dont get what people focussed on the whole "we're a net contributor!!" argument want, should we be paid to take part in this project?

2. It's not my stat and, actually, the studies that comes from doesnt ignore the pressure migration places on infrastructure like schools and GPs because it factored those into the argument.

[PSRB]

after this I am not so sure now:

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/alex-salmond-says-scotland-would-leave-uk-in-event-of-brexit/ar-BBtx64n?ocid=spartanntp

When it comes to the crunch, most of the undecided's will vote remain. Ironically because that's the British way

[Billy Goat Sverige]

When it comes to the crunch, most of the undecided's will vote remain. Ironically because that's the British way

I wasn't going to vote but now i'm voting out. GET BRITAIN OUT OF EUROPE!!

[The Jorge]

When it comes to the crunch, most of the undecided's will vote remain. Ironically because that's the British way

I wish I were that optimistic. I tend to imagine a scenario where it's a bit rainy, people will want to get home and watch the football and the only people who will be bothered to vote will be the swivel-eyed nutjobs.

[Burney]

1. Those things are the benefits of the economic co-operation and it does seem pretty widely accepted that, when you factor that sort of stuff in, that we more than come out up on the deal. I dont get what people focussed on the whole "we're a net contributor!!" argument want, should we be paid to take part in this project?

2. It's not my stat and, actually, the studies that comes from doesnt ignore the pressure migration places on infrastructure like schools and GPs because it factored those into the argument.

1/ Well given that so many countries are effectively paid to take part in this project, why not? We are the second biggest net contributor, but take much less out than does France? How come? How is that fair or right?

In 2013 we put in €10.8bn more than we took out - this, incidentally, from a country that you and other Eurofanboys like to claim is half-hearted in its contribution to Europe. Well the numbers say different.

2/ As to your studies, I'd love to know how they've calculated what those migrants and their impact on infrastructure are likely to cost us over the next 25 years or so.

[Burney]

When it comes to the crunch, most of the undecided's will vote remain. Ironically because that's the British way


Sadly, that's probably true. However, none of it's going to make the issue go away anytime soon.

[The Jorge]

1/ Well given that so many countries are effectively paid to take part in this project, why not? We are the second biggest net contributor, but take much less out than does France? How come? How is that fair or right?

In 2013 we put in €10.8bn more than we took out - this, incidentally, from a country that you and other Eurofanboys like to claim is half-hearted in its contribution to Europe. Well the numbers say different.

2/ As to your studies, I'd love to know how they've calculated what those migrants and their impact on infrastructure are likely to cost us over the next 25 years or so.

And that 10.8bn pales into insignificance alongside the value of the EU to the Uk economy, which is thought to be around £60-£80bn, so by any measure we're still £50bn up.

I know we might differ on our views on immigration but you really have to start to wonder when an immigrant ceases to be one, dont you? Given that even the first generation ones are estimated to be less of a burden on the state than indigenous people you'd have to assume that in future generations that would they be likely to be even less so than UK nationals born here.

[redgunamo]

I wish I were that optimistic. I tend to imagine a scenario where it's a bit rainy, people will want to get home and watch the football and the only people who will be bothered to vote will be the swivel-eyed nutjobs.

Yeah, there's no point breaking sweat to vote for the status quo, I suppose. Living on an island and a' that.

[The Jorge]

Yeah, there's no point breaking sweat to vote for the status quo, I suppose. Living on an island and a' that.

Nah, I'm just done with being at all optimistic about the electoral acumen of the british public.

[redgunamo]

Nah, I'm just done with being at all optimistic about the electoral acumen of the british public.

And it's about time too, if I may say so. Not giving a stuff about such matters is the whole point of being an honest individual living in a decent country. You're supposed to have better things to get excited about.

And what about my Status Quo quip :-(

[Ash]

2m young, skilled, fit and statistically less likely to claim benefits or burden the NHS people working here and paying taxes vs 3m pensioners doing the opposite abroad. European Objective One and Two funding, EU Social funds, the Erasmus programme for universities, workers rights, civil rights, London being europe's default financial capital, I could go on.

Perhaps go on to extol the joys TTIP: Privatisation of the NHS, more power handed back to bankers, US Companies sueing Yerp governments for loss of their profits, job losses to the US where worker protection is lower, attacks on privacy - and nothing the electorate can do about it because, well, the electorate can **** right off because the EU is a dictatorship of an unelected elite who decide everything for us.

[The Jorge]

And it's about time too, if I may say so. Not giving a stuff about such matters is the whole point of being an honest individual living in a decent country. You're supposed to have better things to get excited about.

And what about my Status Quo quip :-(

I like it......I like it, I like it, I like it I la la la like it

[Sir C]

I wish I were that optimistic. I tend to imagine a scenario where it's a bit rainy, people will want to get home and watch the football and the only people who will be bothered to vote will be the swivel-eyed nutjobs.

Do you find that referring to anyone who disagrees with you as, 'swivel-eyed', or 'mouthbreathers', does much to persuade people of the validity of your argument?

[The Jorge]

Do you find that referring to anyone who disagrees with you as, 'swivel-eyed', or 'mouthbreathers', does much to persuade people of the validity of your argument?

You seem to be under the misaprehension that I want to convince you otherwise. Also, you also pepper your posts with pejoratives so I'm keen to know what your experience is with it.

[Sir C]

You seem to be under the misaprehension that I want to convince you otherwise. Also, you also pepper your posts with pejoratives so I'm keen to know what your experience is with it.

You don't want to convince me but enjoy expounding your views anyway?

Isn't that what they call 'virtue signalling'?

[The Jorge]

You don't want to convince me but enjoy expounding your views anyway?

Isn't that what they call 'virtue signalling'?

No, that's when you want to show off how right on you are and constantly bang on abo......oh.

DONT OPRESS ME!!!

[Ash]

And that 10.8bn pales into insignificance alongside the value of the EU to the Uk economy, which is thought to be around £60-£80bn, so by any measure we're still £50bn up.


Surely you don't really believe that suddenly all trade between EU and UK would suddenly cease to exist? This debate should be about political accountability, not scaremongering about the supposed envanishment of the economy. Britain can still have healthy trade agreements. EU countries aren't going to suddenly impose sanctions on Britain and refuse to trade with it. The UK is the fifth largest economy in the world, and EU countries are still going to want to trade with it.

There was all this fearmongering about how disastrous it would be to not adopt the Euro.

Same with immigration from Europe. This vote isn't about sending people home and not allowing anyone else in. We can still have healthy immigration, although we will be more able to manage the best rate of doing this.

[Sir C]

No, that's when you want to show off how right on you are and constantly bang on abo......oh.

DONT OPRESS ME!!!

One - nil to moi, I believe. :licksfingerandmarksoneupintheair:

[The Jorge]

Surely you don't really believe that suddenly all trade between EU and UK would suddenly cease to exist? This debate should be about political accountability, not scaremongering about the supposed envanishment of the economy. Britain can still have healthy trade agreements. EU countries aren't going to suddenly impose sanctions on Britain and refuse to trade with it. The UK is the fifth largest economy in the world, and EU countries are still going to want to trade with it.

There was all this fearmongering about how disastrous it would be to not adopt the Euro.

Same with immigration from Europe. This vote isn't about sending people home and not allowing anyone else in. We can still have healthy immigration, although we will be more able to manage the best rate of doing this.

No, see, the political accountability thing is your *thing*. Personally I dont get it, mostly as I've stated before that I dont believe we've got anything like a properly functional democracy here anyway. You can bang on about unelected officials all you want but when we have an unelected house of lords and a hereditary head of state it's less than pointless.

Also, I wasnt scaremongering, I was pointing out the softer and much more valuable EU benefits when set against the net contribution argument.

The thing which, more than everything else, gets me is that we actually had more immigration from outside europe than we did from the EU last year. Given that fact do we really think we'll be able to "control" it better in the future?

[The Jorge]

One - nil to moi, I believe. :licksfingerandmarksoneupintheair:

You can be right and right on at the same time, you know

[Sir C]

You can be right and right on at the same time, you know

I imagine you can. Just as you can be right and on the right at the same time.

[The Jorge]

I imagine you can. Just as you can be right and on the right at the same time.

Indeed, just ask Ken Clarke

[Burney]

No, see, the political accountability thing is your *thing*. Personally I dont get it, mostly as I've stated before that I dont believe we've got anything like a properly functional democracy here anyway. You can bang on about unelected officials all you want but when we have an unelected house of lords and a hereditary head of state it's less than pointless.

Also, I wasnt scaremongering, I was pointing out the softer and much more valuable EU benefits when set against the net contribution argument.

The thing which, more than everything else, gets me is that we actually had more immigration from outside europe than we did from the EU last year. Given that fact do we really think we'll be able to "control" it better in the future?

:rolleyes: Even if that argument weren't as utterly, pitifully flawed as it is (neither the House of Lords nor the Monarch has actual executive power - unlike the Commission), it is a strange and perverse argument to say that you believe it's right to vote for even less political accountability because you don't feel our level of political accountability at the moment is what it ought to be.

Oh, and your £60-£80 billion figure is entirely fictitious and utterly unprovable - something that ought to be obvious from the fact that there is a disparity of TWENTY - count 'em - £20 billion between the estimates :hehe:

[The Jorge]

:rolleyes: Even if that argument weren't as utterly, pitifully flawed as it is (neither the House of Lords nor the Monarch has actual executive power - unlike the Commission), it is a strange and perverse argument to say that you believe it's right to vote for even less political accountability because you don't feel our level of political accountability at the moment is what it ought to be.

Oh, and your £60-£80 billion figure is entirely fictitious and utterly unprovable - something that ought to be obvious from the fact that there is a disparity of TWENTY - count 'em - £20 billion between the estimates :hehe:

Democracy doesnt just mean the executive has power though, and that was a stat from the CBI btw, hardly the most rabidly pro-eu body I think you'll agree. http://news.cbi.org.uk/reports/our-global-future/factsheets/factsheet-2-benefits-of-eu-membership-outweigh-costs/

[Burney]

Democracy doesnt just mean the executive has power though, and that was a stat from the CBI btw, hardly the most rabidly pro-eu body I think you'll agree. http://news.cbi.org.uk/reports/our-global-future/factsheets/factsheet-2-benefits-of-eu-membership-outweigh-costs/

Well actually, the CBI (as opposed to its membership) is pretty rabidly pro-EU.
Also, have you actually read that document? It's full of vague generalities and is apparently predicated on the ridiculous assumption that Europe will effectively cease to trade with us if we're outside the EU.
And executive power is pretty important, yes. The Lords cannot create or stop legislation and neither (in anything other than theory) can the Queen. On the other hand, the unelected EU Commission decides absolutely what legislation our elected representatives are or aren't allowed to vote on. They define the EU's legislative agenda completely and are utterly unaccountable to any electorate or elected body. That is utterly antithetical to democracy, since it means EU citizens cannot ever choose the political direction of the EU, but instead have it dictated to them.

And you haven't explained why not being happy with our level of domestic democratic accountability means you're happy to vote for even less democratic accountability within the EU.

[The Jorge]

Well actually, the CBI (as opposed to its membership) is pretty rabidly pro-EU.
Also, have you actually read that document? It's full of vague generalities and is apparently predicated on the ridiculous assumption that Europe will effectively cease to trade with us if we're outside the EU.
And executive power is pretty important, yes. The Lords cannot create or stop legislation and neither (in anything other than theory) can the Queen. On the other hand, the unelected EU Commission decides absolutely what legislation our elected representatives are or aren't allowed to vote on. They define the EU's legislative agenda completely and are utterly unaccountable to any electorate or elected body. That is utterly antithetical to democracy, since it means EU citizens cannot ever choose the political direction of the EU, but instead have it dictated to them.

And you haven't explained why not being happy with our level of domestic democratic accountability means you're happy to vote for even less democratic accountability within the EU.

Our PM appoints a comissioner just the same as every other country does, your argument is the equivalent of saying that we arent democratic because the parties appoint our PM and not us. That document is on the value of the EU to britain's businesses and, as the Leave campaign has clearly demonstrated, it's virtually impossible for anyone to predict what not being part of the EU would look like, they just chose to ignore the obvious fact that it will be a lot harder and take years to sort out.

My broader point is that democracy in this country is a sham and we'd be better trying to address the democratic deficit in our own country if we were really serious about wanting a more representative democracy.

[Burney]

Our PM appoints a comissioner just the same as every other country does, your argument is the equivalent of saying that we arent democratic because the parties appoint our PM and not us. That document is on the value of the EU to britain's businesses and, as the Leave campaign has clearly demonstrated, it's virtually impossible for anyone to predict what not being part of the EU would look like, they just chose to ignore the obvious fact that it will be a lot harder and take years to sort out.

My broader point is that democracy in this country is a sham and we'd be better trying to address the democratic deficit in our own country if we were really serious about wanting a more representative democracy.

Nonsense. We get to vote for our parties knowing full well who their leaders are and thus who is likely to be the Prime Minister. We tend not to like PMs who are unelected and thus kick them out if they hang around too long without a mandate, as Gordon Brown found out. Also, 'our' commissioner is one appointee by our PM in a room full of people appointed by people we, the British people, didn't vote for and who have utterly different agendas to us, meaning that - even if he were to represent our interests - he will always be outvoted by those countries whose conception of the role of the EU is very different to ours and about whose decisions we have no say whatsoever. Equally, since there is no weighting of representation based on size of population, economy, etc, you have the absurdly undemocratic situation whereby Luxembourg has as big a say as the UK - bigger in fact, since the ****'s the Commission President at the moment.
And, of course, the real point is that one that Commissioner is appointed by the PM, he is absolutely unaccountable to anyone. He can do as he wishes and vote as he wishes and no-one can ever hold him to account for it.
The EU makes it explicit that it wants to hush the voices of individual nations and it does that by arranging its systems in such a way that the democratic wishes of entire nations can be easily overridden in pursuit of ever closer union. Try as you might, you cannot justify its anti-democratic nature by comparing it with the UK.

[The Jorge]

Nonsense. We get to vote for our parties knowing full well who their leaders are and thus who is likely to be the Prime Minister. We tend not to like PMs who are unelected and thus kick them out if they hang around too long without a mandate, as Gordon Brown found out. Also, 'our' commissioner is one appointee by our PM in a room full of people appointed by people we, the British people, didn't vote for and who have utterly different agendas to us, meaning that - even if he were to represent our interests - he will always be outvoted by those countries whose conception of the role of the EU is very different to ours and about whose decisions we have no say whatsoever. Equally, since there is no weighting of representation based on size of population, economy, etc, you have the absurdly undemocratic situation whereby Luxembourg has as big a say as the UK - bigger in fact, since the ****'s the Commission President at the moment.
And, of course, the real point is that one that Commissioner is appointed by the PM, he is absolutely unaccountable to anyone. He can do as he wishes and vote as he wishes and no-one can ever hold him to account for it.
The EU makes it explicit that it wants to hush the voices of individual nations and it does that by arranging its systems in such a way that the democratic wishes of entire nations can be easily overridden in pursuit of ever closer union. Try as you might, you cannot justify its anti-democratic nature by comparing it with the UK.

But my MP (lets leave aside the fact it's that useless **** Philip Davies) is one person in a room full of people with very different ideas about what britain is, also the boundaries populations of wards/boroughs etc isnt fairly weighted either. I'm sure Witney in Oxfordshire therefore has more of a say as their MP is also the PM, who is unelected. I simply dont see what we can gain by putting all our undemocratic eggs in one basket. And, if you've not noticed, we've got just as many systems of stymying dissent and mitigating the will of the people in this country.

[Burney]

But my MP (lets leave aside the fact it's that useless **** Philip Davies) is one person in a room full of people with very different ideas about what britain is, also the boundaries populations of wards/boroughs etc isnt fairly weighted either. I'm sure Witney in Oxfordshire therefore has more of a say as their MP is also the PM, who is unelected. I simply dont see what we can gain by putting all our undemocratic eggs in one basket. And, if you've not noticed, we've got just as many systems of stymying dissent and mitigating the will of the people in this country.

But we have an effective party system that means that our representatives have power as part of a meaningful bloc. Indeed, most of us don't really vote for individuals, but for their parties, which means we can look at the manifesto and have a good idea what we're voting for and can kick the individual out if we don't like how he votes. No such power exists within the Commission. The individual is both impotent as an individual representative and at the same time unaccountable - and that total unaccountability is the key issue here, which is why I suspect you're dodging it.

You may not like how our lives are run. That's a fair point of view. I don't agree with you but I can respect your opinion. What I cannot respect is your decision to complain about that and then to vote for even less democratic control over the way our lives are run. That seems totally contradictory and perverse to me.

[The Jorge]

But we have an effective party system that means that our representatives have power as part of a meaningful bloc. Indeed, most of us don't really vote for individuals, but for their parties, which means we can look at the manifesto and have a good idea what we're voting for and can kick the individual out if we don't like how he votes. No such power exists within the Commission. The individual is both impotent and unaccountable - and that total unaccountability is the key issue here, which is why I suspect you're dodging it.

You may not like how our lives are run. That's a fair point of view. I don't agree with you but I can respect your opinion. What I cannot respect is your decision to complain about that and then to vote for even less democratic control over the way our lives are run. That seems totally contradictory and perverse to me.

I dont get how you can be so outraged at a perceived lack of control (it is indeed all about control for the brexiters) in the EU - which is 1-2% of govt spend - whilst being totally sanguine about the lack of control we have over the 98%. The 98% would seem like the bigger issue to me.

[Burney]

I dont get how you can be so outraged at a perceived lack of control (it is indeed all about control for the brexiters) in the EU - which is 1-2% of govt spend - whilst being totally sanguine about the lack of control we have over the 98%. The 98% would seem like the bigger issue to me.

Well first of all your numbers are highly debatable in terms of the amount of legislation that comes our way and secondly we as an electorate do have some measure of control over domestic legislation, but none at all over EU legislation.

[The Jorge]

Well first of all your numbers are highly debatable in terms of the amount of legislation that comes our way and secondly we as an electorate do have some measure of control over domestic legislation, but none at all over EU legislation.

They arent as debatable to make them not germane though. I dont get the fixation on the tiny, much less significant portion and ignoring the much wider, more pertinent issue.

It's like being served a **** trifle and only getting wound up because you dont like maraschino cherries