EU Referendum - In Or Out? Page 3

Quote: DougWonnacott @ 25th January 2016, 11:18 PM GMT

In 1973 my parents got married and Bruce Lee died (unrelated incidents).

Belly button: In
Europe: In

If we leave Europe, where would we move to?

View original

Where do I start? Donald E Campbell gave me lessons on how to toss the caber, A and E Departments weren't Club Ibiza, all the Muslims in Britain drove pink sports cars and looked like they were members of Sly and the Family Stone, the power cuts provided for an authentic camping experience without having to use a tent and the lights from the grid across the valley were not only pretty but encouraged aspiration, there were so few cars on the road it was still possible to walk with a horse in the middle of the A23 and wild flowers were that tall you could bed down in them with heavy rock on a C90 and believe you were a ladybird or a bumble bee.

I liked it better.

Quote: Nogget @ 26th January 2016, 8:36 AM GMT

Those people who will vote 'no', do you never travel in the EU? I imagine that would get more difficult and expensive if we were 'out'.

View original

Even if it did (which it wouldn't), it'd be more than a fair price to pay to regain our own sovereignty, and be free of the corrupt, anti-democratic, ever diminishing and protectionism of the EU.

Quote: Nick Nockerty @ 26th January 2016, 9:31 AM GMT

Not too sure what you mean by that Aaron. Maybe I should clarify. Grease is the best example I can think of where a Nationalist party has demanded big concession from Europe. They had nothing to lose, but the UK has plenty to lose. Also they demonstrate how nationalistic parties rely on charismatic leader winning over harts, and bending the facts to suit their argument (more so that the middle ground). They threw everything at it, they incited hatred towards Germany pushed the blame away and ensured they hit the world press hard. They did this masterfully , but still Europe had them for breakfast.

And yet a vein Cameron then tried to win concessions by back room negotiation and we were eaten for breakfast , even though he had the threat of a referendum to back him up. Then Greece vote out their extreme party, which is good news for Greece. Point being, most politicians would like more control but we need Politicians that do the right thing for the country and that isn't always by slowly creeping towards total control. Hence being in Europe makes Economic sense. Playing Russian roulette with Merkel could easily end in disaster for the UK.

View original

The "Hmmm" was your brilliant argument against the oppressive EU machine, ensnaring Greece in a ludicrous economic system for which it was not suitable, then riding roughshod over any sense of democracy or accountability within the country.

You make all the arguments against Europe - "we need Politicians that do the right thing for the country and that isn't always by slowly creeping towards total control" - then conclude that we need to be in. More than a little perplexed.

Quote: Stylee TingTing @ 26th January 2016, 4:57 PM GMT

.. so we can then have our own autonomous, corrupt, anti-democratic, ever-diminishing protectionism of the middle-English monarchist W.A.S.P. cohort.

View original

And if you believe that, at least you can vote for the people in power in Britain.

Quote: Stylee TingTing @ 26th January 2016, 5:01 PM GMT

I wasn't aware that one could vote for the monarchy and the House of Lords.

View original

You think either have real substantive power?

One of the key questions is whether Donald Trump and Sarah Palin will be more in charge of Britain if we are still in the EU or out of the EU. Very unfortunately, nobody can answer it because nobody actually knows.

Quote: A Horseradish @ 26th January 2016, 5:10 PM GMT

One of the key questions is whether Donald Trump and Sarah Palin would be more in charge of Britain if we are still in the EU or out of the EU. Unfortunately, nobody can answer it because nobody actually knows.

View original

Well the US wants the UK to remain in the EU. It's in their interest for us to remain. So that should give you a pretty good answer.

Quote: Aaron @ 26th January 2016, 5:11 PM GMT

Well the US wants the UK to remain in the EU. It's in their interest for us to remain. So that should give you a pretty good answer.

View original

It could be a double bluff like when they shot down the plane from Holland over Ukraine following their funding of the 48 hour Dutch television station which encouraged everyone to force its President out.

Quote: Aaron @ 26th January 2016, 5:11 PM GMT

Well the US wants the UK to remain in the EU.

View original

Not me!

It's clear that the UK should ... nevermind, I don't live there.

Quote: DaButt @ 26th January 2016, 5:15 PM GMT

Not me!

View original

Well, the US (nation) state does, even if (some of) its populace are more liberal!

Quote: Stylee TingTing @ 26th January 2016, 5:43 PM GMT

Of course.

The monarchy is at the head of everything: they have the armed forces, the police and security services at their behest.

(Republicans are effectively barred from office in all three, by the oath of allegiance that one must swear when inducted into said services).

The House of Lords serves as the monarchy's firewall - its power of political veto supercedes any Commons initiative.

Both institutions are undemocratic.

View original

In which case, I assume you'll be voting to leave the undemocratic EU so that there's only one undemocratic front to fight, here at home, rather than multiple?

Quote: Aaron @ 26th January 2016, 5:52 PM GMT

Well, the US (nation) state does, even if (some of) its populace are more liberal!

View original

I reckon that liberal Americans would also support the idea of a nanny state EU, while conservatives and libertarians would say, "What were you guys thinking when you put a bunch of politicians in Brussels in charge?"

Different political interpretations of the term liberal, but yes. Quite.

Quote: Aaron @ 26th January 2016, 4:56 PM GMT

The "Hmmm" was your brilliant argument against the oppressive EU machine, ensnaring Greece in a ludicrous economic system

View original

Cripes my spelling is bad if that's what you picked up. I though Greece just spent money it didn't have and no one would then lend to them. But if your statement of "oppressive EU machine, ensnaring Greece in a ludicrous economic system" holds, then it also follows that the UK is an oppressive machine, ensnaring immigrants with ludicrously low paid jobs and benefits.

If no one had bailed out Greece, things would have been far worse. They got an IVA rather than being asset stripped. There was talk at the time of foreclosing on the country's assets. It would have been Armageddon for Greece without the EU bail out and the proof of this was they chose to stay in the EU, even though that meant two governments were swept aside to make this happen. If the UK left the EU our lending rate would rise, our trade links and political influence would demise. And for what ?

Quote: Nick Nockerty @ 26th January 2016, 6:34 PM GMT

it also follows that the UK is an oppressive machine, ensnaring immigrants with ludicrously low paid jobs and benefits.

View original

A very different kind of machine than the EU but yes; and hopefully we can get rid of that when we leave the EU, regain proper control of our borders, of immigration, of how and who we pay benefits to, and the rest.

Quote: Nick Nockerty @ 26th January 2016, 6:34 PM GMT

If no one had bailed out Greece, things would have been far worse. They got an IVA rather than being asset stripped. There was talk at the time of foreclosing on the country's assets. It would have been Armageddon for Greece without the EU bail out

View original

This is partially true. But it's the EU and the bonkers euro currency that put Greece in that situation in the first place, so it's hardly something to praise them for coming to Greece's rescue...

Aside: Greece would have had a much better time if it had dropped out of the euro and restored the drachma, devaluing and restructuring its economy.

Quote: Nick Nockerty @ 26th January 2016, 6:34 PM GMT

If the UK left the EU our lending rate would rise, our trade links and political influence would demise. And for what ?

View original

That's not necessarily the case. We continue to run an astronomic debt and deficit (there is no austerity), yet our lending rate is incredibly low because the markets have faith in our wider economic attitudes, plans, and long-term viability. The same would be the case if we left Europe; indeed some markets may even view us more favourably.

Trade links diminish? Pull the other one. We import WAY more than we export. Any suggestion that we'd have a difficult trade relationship with European nations is a straight-out lie designed to make you vote 'in' out of fear.

As for wider trade links, under EU law we are not allowed to reach trade deals with non-EU countries unilaterally. Leaving would allow us to do this. So quite the opposite of your assertion, our trade links would boom, and we'd be able to do much better business, and do it with countries whose economies aren't plummeting (the EU), but exploding (India, Brazil, etc).

Political influence ... I mean, similarly. We have little to no influence in the EU. We are more than good enough to stand on our own feet on the world stage. As are France, Denmark, Germany, and the rest who are currently shackled to the european corpse.

And for what? Freedom, democratic accountability, spending our money properly.

Let us not forget that the EU gravy train is so corrupt and bloated that its own accountants haven't signed off its accounts for well over 20 years.

Quote: Nick Nockerty @ 26th January 2016, 6:34 PM GMT

I though Greece just spent money it didn't have and no one would then lend to them.

View original

Far more complicated than that. They went into economic union with countries (Germany, mainly) whose economies were about as different as they could be.

They took out billions (trillions?) of euros in loans from German banks to buy German goods and services with a currency that was (and is) effectively being run in the interest of the German economy.

Of course, Greece was encouraged and assisted by the EU establishment (again, largely read: Germany) to cook its books and fudge its economy so that it was eligible to join the euro in the first place. Goldman Sachs (now, surprise surprise, advocating the UK stay in the EU) engineered this, and made billions for themselves in doing so.

It's a massive, corrupt corporatist racket.

Quote: Aaron @ 26th January 2016, 6:55 PM GMT

But it's the EU and the bonkers euro currency that put Greece in that situation in the first place
Aside: Greece would have had a much better time if it had dropped out of the euro and restored the drachma, devaluing and restructuring its economy.
That's not necessarily the case. We continue to run an astronomic debt and deficit (there is no austerity), yet our lending rate is incredibly low
It's a massive, corrupt corporatist racket.

View original

You make some very good points Aaron. However:

Lending rates are based on risk. We're currently underwritten by the world's largest single market the EU. Of course this helps our credit rating.

Totally agree with your point about the Euro, but no one was forced to join. Greece wisely decided not to follow the route of devaluation. It has some nasty side effects, consider Germany just after the war. Also there wasn't time for a soft landing. Remember Argentina when they went bust without a safety net? Good companies go to the wall, but with a soft landing it cuts out all the week players, so good companies cling on and help the recovery.

I wholeheartedly agree with your point about corruption. But isn't that more to do with human nature and the types of people that gravitate towards power ?