BREGZIT (GE 2019) - Labour - the average household spends £2k p/a on rail season tickets.

124671329

Posts

  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 43,782 Lives Here
    Anyway who's asking for rule changes? The UK.
  • mr_goomr_goo Posts: 3,616
    CaMoron must publish a concise list of all the demands/reforms that he wants to make before the referendum. Only then can he be judged on whether he is successful in fighting the cause of the UK, and only then can the UK electorate make a judgemental vote.
    Always be yourself, unless you can be Aaron Rodgers....Then always be Aaron Rodgers.
  • ballysmateballysmate Posts: 13,026
    Mr Goo wrote:
    CaMoron must publish a concise list of all the demands/reforms that he wants to make before the referendum. Only then can he be judged on whether he is successful in fighting the cause of the UK, and only then can the UK electorate make a judgemental vote.

    No one who enters into negotiations on our behalf should publish a list of demands before starting. Prior to the vote, yes by all means publish a list of any changes/reforms/limits agreed.
    BTW this is not a referendum on how successful the PM has been in negotiating, it is a referendum on Britain's future role in the EU.
    PMs come and go, we will be stuck with whatever we vote for in a referendum for years.
  • BelgianBeerGeekBelgianBeerGeek Posts: 5,230
    ballysmate wrote:
    Mr Goo wrote:
    CaMoron must publish a concise list of all the demands/reforms that he wants to make before the referendum. Only then can he be judged on whether he is successful in fighting the cause of the UK, and only then can the UK electorate make a judgemental vote.

    No one who enters into negotiations on our behalf should publish a list of demands before starting. Prior to the vote, yes by all means publish a list of any changes/reforms/limits agreed.
    BTW this is not a referendum on how successful the PM has been in negotiating, it is a referendum on Britain's future role in the EU.
    PMs come and go, we will be stuck with whatever we vote for in a referendum for years.
    There you go being objective again Bally. Yes, the referendum is about us in the EU, but Davey C will be judged on whether he "fails" or "wins" on this. This is politics, and it is a game to most of those taking part in it. Either way, he's stuffed and his own party will rip him to pieces over it.
    I doubt you will see Cameron nail his colours to the mast for that reason alone. The more dispassionate he appears, the more he appears to be the man of reason. It won't help him when the knives come out.
    Ecrasez l’infame
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 43,782 Lives Here
    pblakeney wrote:
    Tories will be trickier, since there's a fairly chunky pro-exit minority within the party, and they've got precedent for disobeying whips.
    Hence my post at the top of this page.

    They'll most likely not campaign on it formally, and let individual MPs campaign in their own constituencies.

    Broadly correct judging by the U-turn last night.

    8)
  • mr_goomr_goo Posts: 3,616
    Mr Goo wrote:
    CaMoron must publish a concise list of all the demands/reforms that he wants to make before the referendum. Only then can he be judged on whether he is successful in fighting the cause of the UK, and only then can the UK electorate make a judgemental vote.

    No one who enters into negotiations on our behalf should publish a list of demands before starting. Prior to the vote, yes by all means publish a list of any changes/reforms/limits agreed.
    BTW this is not a referendum on how successful the PM has been in negotiating, it is a referendum on Britain's future role in the EU.
    PMs come and go, we will be stuck with whatever we vote for in a referendum for years.

    The UK electorate need to know NOW what is being re-negotiated. When all his meetings with the EU gravy train are over, he can then make a statement that of the 10 key points he only managed to succeed in 5 for example. I do not see it as judging CaMoron. More a judgement on how the EU views the UK.
    Quite frankly I think he will fall flat on his face.
    Always be yourself, unless you can be Aaron Rodgers....Then always be Aaron Rodgers.
  • LookyhereLookyhere Posts: 987
    Mr Goo wrote:
    CaMoron must publish a concise list of all the demands/reforms that he wants to make before the referendum. Only then can he be judged on whether he is successful in fighting the cause of the UK, and only then can the UK electorate make a judgemental vote.

    No one who enters into negotiations on our behalf should publish a list of demands before starting. Prior to the vote, yes by all means publish a list of any changes/reforms/limits agreed.
    BTW this is not a referendum on how successful the PM has been in negotiating, it is a referendum on Britain's future role in the EU.
    PMs come and go, we will be stuck with whatever we vote for in a referendum for years.

    The UK electorate need to know NOW what is being re-negotiated. When all his meetings with the EU gravy train are over, he can then make a statement that of the 10 key points he only managed to succeed in 5 for example. I do not see it as judging CaMoron. More a judgement on how the EU views the UK.
    Quite frankly I think he will fall flat on his face.

    Do you really think most people care? we all know he ll get zilch out the EU, even if they wanted too, there simply isnt the time to renegotiate these treaties.
    DC will bitterly regret calling a referendum, it ll rip the tories apart and be bad for our nation.

    tinkering with the various benefits systems, to make them like most euro countries would have been enough, that and having an education system that produces employable young people, with suitable skills, that way we wouldnt be the magnet to the rest of the EU.
  • pliptrotpliptrot Posts: 582
    I may have missed some of the input, but what I have heard and read (including here) follows a similar pattern; those against Europe are so based on unfounded and improper fears about immigration and concern over "defence" - the idea that a country running a bigger per capita deficit than the US (incredible but true) should be able to fight wars all by itself. Who are they thinking of picking a fight with? The last time we had a scrap a bunch of conscripts from South America came uncomfortably close to beating the might of the British military.

    Of course, no-one considers that if the UK does leave the EU second homes in Europe may be much more difficult to get to, and that trade will be anything but free (i.e. to the considerable detriment of UK plc), and that any access to Europe similar to current arrangements will require us to follow the current EU treaties regarding free movement of labour......
  • morstarmorstar Posts: 2,240
    I may have missed some of the input, but what I have heard and read (including here) follows a similar pattern; those against Europe are so based on unfounded and improper fears about immigration and concern over "defence" - the idea that a country running a bigger per capita deficit than the US (incredible but true) should be able to fight wars all by itself. Who are they thinking of picking a fight with? The last time we had a scrap a bunch of conscripts from South America came uncomfortably close to beating the might of the British military.

    Of course, no-one considers that if the UK does leave the EU second homes in Europe may be much more difficult to get to, and that trade will be anything but free (i.e. to the considerable detriment of UK plc), and that any access to Europe similar to current arrangements will require us to follow the current EU treaties regarding free movement of labour......
    Well that's all well and good...
    But what about the immigrants ruining Britain, blah, blah, blah etc.etc.
    I can only see a referendum going one way and I don't think it will be a choice based on anything other than cheap rhetoric. The out campaign has popular support despite being primarily based on tub thumping tribalism. There are clearly problems with the eu but the benefits far outweigh the disadvantages imho.
    Don't see how Cameron could have avoided the referendum even in coalition so we were set on this path a long way out.
    As an aside. Can't fathom the Scots. Want out of Britain but into Europe.
  • pblakeneypblakeney Posts: 9,814
    As an aside. Can't fathom the Scots. Want out of Britain but into Europe.
    That has been explained to me by my friends north of Hadrians.
    With a deeper integration of the EU, they don't see the need for a middle man in Westminster.
    That may, or may not help.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • orraloonorraloon Posts: 5,279
    Scotland is in Europe, as is England despite Kippers protestations.

    As for this bullcrap about some fictitious homogenous Europe, I refer you to Belgium's response to French whining about a coin commemorating the 200th anniversary of Waterloo.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/belgium/11661312/Belgium-defies-France-with-euro-coin-marking-Napoleon-defeat.html
  • Sirius631Sirius631 Posts: 1,015
    Scotland is in Europe, as is England despite Kippers protestations.

    As for this bullcrap about some fictitious homogenous Europe, I refer you to Belgium's response to French whining about a coin commemorating the 200th anniversary of Waterloo.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/belgium/11661312/Belgium-defies-France-with-euro-coin-marking-Napoleon-defeat.html

    Britain should remain in Europe, if only to prevent federalists creating the conditions right for a new Napoleon.

    I also like that free health care is provided to all EU citizens, in any other EU country. It would be useful if I came off my bike in Majorca, Tenerife or any other EU foreign part.

    The negotiating weight of the EU is important when involved with trade negotiations with the US and China. The EU was able to prevent the US from backing Boeing and McDonald-Douglas with massive military development funds which would have been used for them to dominate the civil airliner market. Britain will have no weight on its own, in this respect, if we leave Europe.

    What would we do with all the ex-pat British nationals if Europe closes its borders to us? If you think we have a housing crisis now, just wait until all those pensioners come back and require suitable accommodation suddenly.

    And how many job holes in our vital services will have to be rapidly filled when EU citizens are forced to go in the opposite direction?

    You won't be able to get a full English breakfast on the Costa Del Sol, or get a pint from a proper English pub in Marbella, any more.
    To err is human, but to make a real balls up takes a super computer.
  • pblakeneypblakeney Posts: 9,814
    You won't be able to get a full English breakfast on the Costa Del Sol, or get a pint from a proper English pub in Marbella, any more.
    Well, that will be the clincher then.
    I presume you are joking?
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 43,782 Lives Here
    Not so good for Brexit advocates.

    US makes it clear it has no interest in making one-nation trade agreements and in the event of a Brexit the UK would be subject to the same US tarrifs and trade related measures as China, Brazil or India.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/11962277/Major-blow-for-Brexit-campaign-as-US-rules-out-UK-only-trade-deal.html
  • orraloonorraloon Posts: 5,279
    But...but...but...special relationship...wibble...
  • mamba80mamba80 Posts: 5,086
    Not so good for Brexit advocates.

    US makes it clear it has no interest in making one-nation trade agreements and in the event of a Brexit the UK would be subject to the same US tarrifs and trade related measures as China, Brazil or India.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/11962277/Major-blow-for-Brexit-campaign-as-US-rules-out-UK-only-trade-deal.html

    i dont think these sort of stories will matter to a strong out vote, this will sway voters minds more than anything else.
    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/29/uk-population-expected-to-rise-by-almost-10-million-in-25-years
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 43,782 Lives Here
    That may well be the case.

    However, a central tenant for the Brexit advocates is that Britain won't lose out from all the trade advantages that the EU provides, and avoid the downsides. The biggest economy in the world (the US) has made it clear that it won't extend the free trade advantages to the UK if they leave the EU, so the UK will lose out.

    Brexiters will struggle to counter the argument the UK will significantly lose out with regard to trade if it leaves.
  • mamba80mamba80 Posts: 5,086
    That may well be the case.

    However, a central tenant for the Brexit advocates is that Britain won't lose out from all the trade advantages that the EU provides, and avoid the downsides. The biggest economy in the world (the US) has made it clear that it won't extend the free trade advantages to the UK if they leave the EU, so the UK will lose out.

    Brexiters will struggle to counter the argument the UK will significantly lose out with regard to trade if it leaves.

    Yes who knows what deal the UK may/or not be able to achieve with other countries? but it will come at a massive cost.

    I think the UK will vote to leave and Cameron will go down as a failed PM - he was prepared to sacriface the UK's future, just so he could gain a few votes from UKiP.
    He should never have promised an in/out vote, the stakes are just too high.
  • 4kicks4kicks Posts: 600
    That may well be the case.

    However, a central tenant for the Brexit advocates is that Britain won't lose out from all the trade advantages that the EU provides, and avoid the downsides. The biggest economy in the world (the US) has made it clear that it won't extend the free trade advantages to the UK if they leave the EU, so the UK will lose out.

    Brexiters will struggle to counter the argument the UK will significantly lose out with regard to trade if it leaves.
    Actually the central tenant of the Brexit argument seems to be "blah blah blah Europeans stupid all smelly or Naziz blah blah blah, 900 million refugees all heading to dover blah blah blah". If ONLY the debate was centred around economics (which its pretty clear the most politically active, at least on this forum, neither understand nor wish to) as opposed to the "politics of hope and belief", whatever the heck that means.
    Fitter....healthier....more productive.....
  • Stevo_666Stevo_666 Posts: 36,244
    edited October 2015
    Not so good for Brexit advocates.

    US makes it clear it has no interest in making one-nation trade agreements and in the event of a Brexit the UK would be subject to the same US tarrifs and trade related measures as China, Brazil or India.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/11962277/Major-blow-for-Brexit-campaign-as-US-rules-out-UK-only-trade-deal.html
    UK and USA are both members of the World Trade Organisation, which obligates them the apply the Most Favoured Nation Rule to import tariffs.
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Most_favoured_nation
    As the UK is a WTO member in its own right, as well as being represented by the EU, the WTO rules would continue to apply even if the UK left the EU. So it is not correct to say that the UK would suffer higher import tariffs for goods if it left the EU. It is correct to say that the UK would be subject to the same tariffs as India, China and Brazil (also WTO members) as they get the same deal as the EU from a US perspective :wink:
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Organization

    Services of course would continue to be unaffected as they are not subject to import duty. Likewise any products that are not subject to import duty under WTO rules - which represent a substantial proportion of goods.

    Scaremongering?
    Whippet
    Bruiser
    Panzer
    Commuter

    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • ballysmateballysmate Posts: 13,026
    That may well be the case.

    However, a central tenant for the Brexit advocates is that Britain won't lose out from all the trade advantages that the EU provides, and avoid the downsides. The biggest economy in the world (the US) has made it clear that it won't extend the free trade advantages to the UK if they leave the EU, so the UK will lose out.

    Brexiters will struggle to counter the argument the UK will significantly lose out with regard to trade if it leaves.

    Yes who knows what deal the UK may/or not be able to achieve with other countries? but it will come at a massive cost.

    I think the UK will vote to leave and Cameron will go down as a failed PM - he was prepared to sacriface the UK's future, just so he could gain a few votes from UKiP.
    He should never have promised an in/out vote, the stakes are just too high.


    I find that a most extraordinary statement. Because you believe there is a risk of the result not going your way, there should be no vote. Would you have denied the Scots their referendum?
    Using your logic, can I put forward the idea that there should be no further Parliamentary elections lest we elect a dodgy lefty government? Of course not.
  • Stevo_666Stevo_666 Posts: 36,244
    That may well be the case.

    However, a central tenant for the Brexit advocates is that Britain won't lose out from all the trade advantages that the EU provides, and avoid the downsides. The biggest economy in the world (the US) has made it clear that it won't extend the free trade advantages to the UK if they leave the EU, so the UK will lose out.

    Brexiters will struggle to counter the argument the UK will significantly lose out with regard to trade if it leaves.

    Yes who knows what deal the UK may/or not be able to achieve with other countries? but it will come at a massive cost.

    I think the UK will vote to leave and Cameron will go down as a failed PM - he was prepared to sacriface the UK's future, just so he could gain a few votes from UKiP.
    He should never have promised an in/out vote, the stakes are just too high.


    I find that a most extraordinary statement. Because you believe there is a risk of the result not going your way, there should be no vote. Would you have denied the Scots their referendum?
    Using your logic, can I put forward the idea that there should be no further Parliamentary elections lest we elect a dodgy lefty government? Of course not.
    Bally, you have to remember that this is the EU way. The electorate are too thick to make important decisions so these decisions need to be left in the hands of the Euro elite :roll: Come to think of it, if they are that thick, why let them make important decisions like electing governements ?
    Whippet
    Bruiser
    Panzer
    Commuter

    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • mamba80mamba80 Posts: 5,086
    Yes who knows what deal the UK may/or not be able to achieve with other countries? but it will come at a massive cost.

    I think the UK will vote to leave and Cameron will go down as a failed PM - he was prepared to sacriface the UK's future, just so he could gain a few votes from UKiP.
    He should never have promised an in/out vote, the stakes are just too high.


    I find that a most extraordinary statement. Because you believe there is a risk of the result not going your way, there should be no vote. Would you have denied the Scots their referendum?
    Using your logic, can I put forward the idea that there should be no further Parliamentary elections lest we elect a dodgy lefty government? Of course not.

    No, your view is unrealistic, we dont have a death penalty referendum, nor do we give a vote to the communities blighted by HS2 etc - why? because governments have to look at the bigger picture or do you suggest a referendum for every controversial decision? and if no, why not? because thats the logic of your argument.
    Turn yours and stev0s views around and maybe you want a referendum because it suits your right wing agenda?

    Cameron didnt need to promise a vote, he didnt do so out of any nod to democracy or out of a great clamour to leave the EU, he did so, to skim a few votes from ukip,
    that the future well being of the uk should be decided by such short termism is what has dogged this country for decades.
    He doesnt want to leave the EU and judging by his recent actions and statements, he very much regrets giving this promise.

    Also, is Wiki a good sourse to base such an important decision on? should these wto be changed, do you ever think the EU would let us back in, not a cat in hells chance.
  • diydiy Posts: 6,680
    I think I've made my mind up. At least for today. I'm voting leave.

    - Im curious to see how it would work
    - I think Europe will get worse not better
    - There is more to lose for Europe obstructing trade
    - Europe doesn't make sense in a global economy where company's exist everywhere and nowhere
    - it will annoy the SNP wifey
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 43,782 Lives Here
    S&P will likely cut UK sovereign credit rating by one or two notches if Brexit occurs.

    Something about Brexit "undermining the predictability of UK policy" which will "likely negatively affect sustainable public finance, balanced economic growth and weakened response to economic or political shocks".


    Mark Carney, the rather dashing head of BoE is also very much in favour of staying in (and pressing for reform).
  • mamba80mamba80 Posts: 5,086
    S&P will likely cut UK sovereign credit rating by one or two notches if Brexit occurs.

    Something about Brexit "undermining the predictability of UK policy" which will "likely negatively affect sustainable public finance, balanced economic growth and weakened response to economic or political shocks".


    Mark Carney, the rather dashing head of BoE is also very much in favour of staying in (and pressing for reform).

    ^this, the referendum will bring a huge amount of uncertainty to the market and thats not good.
    with the UK still rely on services instead of manufacturing, being in the EU can only be a good thing, sure there are issues, freedom of people/labour probably being the number one concern and as politicians want to get re elected, this will no doubt be addressed.
    From what i understand Norway still pays in per head, the same as the UK to be able to trade with the EU and has to follow all the rules too but has no say.
  • diydiy Posts: 6,680
    That doesn't make sense. economic policy is set by the government of the day. I can see uncertainty during the run up to the vote, but if we leave it will be a chance to reform our policies quickly and more dynamically. I can understand a EURO debate around this, but not an EU one
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 43,782 Lives Here
    That doesn't make sense. economic policy is set by the government of the day. I can see uncertainty during the run up to the vote, but if we leave it will be a chance to reform our policies quickly and more dynamically. I can understand a EURO debate around this, but not an EU one

    As US example demonstrates there's more uncertainty around trade agreements etc.

    You lose collective bargaining power during economic negotiations and deciding broader terms of trade.
  • Yes who knows what deal the UK may/or not be able to achieve with other countries? but it will come at a massive cost.

    I think the UK will vote to leave and Cameron will go down as a failed PM - he was prepared to sacriface the UK's future, just so he could gain a few votes from UKiP.
    He should never have promised an in/out vote, the stakes are just too high.


    I find that a most extraordinary statement. Because you believe there is a risk of the result not going your way, there should be no vote. Would you have denied the Scots their referendum?
    Using your logic, can I put forward the idea that there should be no further Parliamentary elections lest we elect a dodgy lefty government? Of course not.

    No, your view is unrealistic, we dont have a death penalty referendum, nor do we give a vote to the communities blighted by HS2 etc - why? because governments have to look at the bigger picture or do you suggest a referendum for every controversial decision? and if no, why not? because thats the logic of your argument.
    Turn yours and stev0s views around and maybe you want a referendum because it suits your right wing agenda?

    Cameron didnt need to promise a vote, he didnt do so out of any nod to democracy or out of a great clamour to leave the EU, he did so, to skim a few votes from ukip,
    that the future well being of the uk should be decided by such short termism is what has dogged this country for decades.
    He doesnt want to leave the EU and judging by his recent actions and statements, he very much regrets giving this promise.

    Also, is Wiki a good sourse to base such an important decision on? should these wto be changed, do you ever think the EU would let us back in, not a cat in hells chance.
    ^This. Cameron has unnecessarily painted himself into a corner. Not just because of UKIP, but the Tories do love to have a fight over Europe. It was the price of another term, I suppose.
    As we know from previous discussions on here, politics is about "winning" and "losing" and rational, informed, balanced debate be damned. It is political suicide for a PM to offer a referendum he might "lose". When the dust settles Cameron will no doubt be the magnanimous statesman he is and claim "the people have spoken", but if he loses he is a lame duck.
    Interestingly, he doesn't even seem that bothered. He stated ages ago he wasn't doing a third term, and this bounce around the EU trying to convince them to change the rules in our favour is lacklustre to say the least.
    Ho hum. Cameron moves on, gets a seat in the Lords and makes a million a la Tony Blair.
    Ecrasez l’infame
  • mr_goomr_goo Posts: 3,616
    I really don't think it matters one jot to CaMoron which way the nation votes. Either way he will be a winner, politically and financially (most important to all MPs/PMs/Cabinet Ministers).
    Always be yourself, unless you can be Aaron Rodgers....Then always be Aaron Rodgers.
Sign In or Register to comment.