BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴

mamba80

Of course the UK 's issues are home grown, thats what i ve said in at least 2 posts but a reform to our voting system is long long way off.
Maybe more importantly, would be decent investment in our education system, so people would at least have the reasoning to think for themselves and perhaps take an interest in voting in the first place.

Its just easier to blame the Johnny Foreigner.

cycleclinic

Schools already try to teach critical thinking. It has not worked there is less critical thinking in the political debate such as it is than my cat displays. More money wont solve that problem. Voter engagement will. Currently politicans are not trying to inform. They are shouting at each other. They are preaching to the converted too deliberatley as they are trying to get there side to turn out on the 23rd in grester numbers than the other side. What is lacking and why the referendum is not creating a debate, is nuance. Both sides are making lurid claims. The latest about population growing by 5 million is new countries including turkey are admitted is more than bogus. No country in the e.u wants turkey as a member they will never join. Every eu country has a veto on new members. There laws, they way they treat the kurds e.tc simply do meet eu standards and never will. Cameron was right at current rate of progress they might be ready by the year 3000. I dont nornally think cameron is right he is a tory. Then add that people who migrate are of working age and do not use the health system much but they add to the tax base therefore making services like the nhs more affordable. Goves lack of critical thinking astounds me. However since turkey is not joining this all moot. The population of the balkan countries like bosnia, albania might get to join at some point but these are not populus countires and again every current member has a veto all britain has to do is weild it and they don't join. I suspect the u.k is not the only country who would veto new members over the next ten years or so. The eu's problems of which there are a few will not be solved by admitting new members. Many member states know that and it is member states that ultimatley control the direction of the e.u not the unelected eurocrats that thd tabliods here complain about. Britain can be good at diplomacy to contril the direction of the e.u. we have been very poor at thus since 2010 because standing at the edge of the dance floor shouting at any one who passes will you dance with me is not how you get partners. Again another lack of critical thinking.

The leaves sides arguements can be summed up as fears about things that will never come to pass. There is no appetite among member states for more intergration. An eu army will never happen. An eu foreign policy will never happen either. Germany and frqnce would oppose that not to mention britain and the other members. An eu migration policy is needed but again it will never happen as too many member states are opposed. The eu superstate will never happen ever. While each member state signed up to ever further intergration when joined but there are limits and member states have hit there limits for now and the next 20 years. If we stay in the eu in 10 years time it will have changed a bit but there wont have been any further transfer of powers. Such a teansfer requires member states to want that. They dont and that is not going to change.

If people in this country felt like they have a bit more control over there lives then many of these concerns would not manifest. It is an illusion that withdrawing from the e.u will gives more control or soverignty. If the state built houses and people in the locality had say over how many and where (and i dont just mean the nimbys but those who actually need housing) then maybe some concerns over migration would wain. If regions could invest in the services they need to provide for the migrant population properly then maybe some concerns would wain. Maybe if regions could invest in the transport infrastructure and other infrastructure then deprived areas would not be so deprived. Currently we are dependant on central government for everything and centrsl government tries to out source the job to companies. Give people control over there lives not the illusion of control by leaving the eu. That will change nothing. If we vote to leave apart from some economic volitility for a while nothing will change. So voting to leave is simply kidding ourselves that we have more control. The e.u does not mandate how member states distribute power.

I hate what the referendum has done to politics and the fact it is more about mps positiong for control in the tory party than it is about giving us the voters a say. Our say will change nothing. Depressing but true.

BelgianBeerGeek

Phew, th cycleclinic, got th

cycleclinic

Sorry i rambled a bit

Pross

Just saw the leave campaign advert. What a load of scaremongering, overly-simplistic ball locks! Apparently we could be a new hospital every week with the savings if we leave and if we stay in the entire population of 5 new member states will be arriving on our shores soon.

DeVlaeminck

Cycle Clinic, the govt has been somewhat encouraging about Turkey joining the EU. I agree there is no immediate prospect of it happening but officially it is in the process that leads to joining and there have been promises made in public about speeding up the process so it seems fair to at least consider it a possibility. Besides that whilst countries like Albania which you allow may join the EU may not be populous they are relatively poor and would undoubtedly signal another wave of immigration into the uk. You say we need to build houses but we would need a new provincial city every year to house the current rate of net immigration.

As far as the problems being the way politics works in the UK - yes there may be problems but what is certain is that being in the EU gives powers to a levelof government which people have very little engagement with - it does create a democratic deficit.

Pross - bit rich to accuse the leave campaign of scaremongering. Makes me laugh to see all these so called left wingers quite happy to quote pillars of the neo-liberal establishment as if their word was gospel.

surrey_commuter

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Cycle Clinic, the govt has been somewhat encouraging about Turkey joining the EU. I agree there is no immediate prospect of it happening but officially it is in the process that leads to joining and there have been promises made in public about speeding up the process so it seems fair to at least consider it a possibility. Besides that whilst countries like Albania which you allow may join the EU may not be populous they are relatively poor and would undoubtedly signal another wave of immigration into the uk. You say we need to build houses but we would need a new provincial city every year to house the current rate of net immigration.

As far as the problems being the way politics works in the UK - yes there may be problems but what is certain is that being in the EU gives powers to a levelof government which people have very little engagement with - it does create a democratic deficit.

Pross - bit rich to accuse the leave campaign of scaremongering. Makes me laugh to see all these so called left wingers quite happy to quote pillars of the neo-liberal establishment as if their word was gospel.

But if we left any trade deal would be conditional on free movement of labour, accepting most of their laws so our products are compliant.....oh and make a hefty donation.

So to adopt an Australian immigration model you would have to shut yourself out of the EU which currently accounts for half of our exports. But I hear you ask "could we not use the common WTO agreements?" It is a good point but a fair criticism of the EU is that it only promotes internal free trade and that if it took down trade barriers there would be price deflation - especially in food.

The only people who should vote leave are those that hate foreigners so much that nothing else matters.

cycleclinic

I dont think i have supported scaremongering by anyone. I just think looking for solutions to problems at home, abroad means the solutions wont be found. Besides migration controls can be imposed in the balkan countries if they join. It will be ten years though before they do at least because there is no appetite for them to join if they ever do. Only one country has to veto the application and that country us not admitted. This is why playing the immigration card for prospective menbers of the eu is scaremongering at its worst. The leave campaign want to rule things out completely but many if things they worry about while theoretically possible will never be a reality. Worrying over nothing. I am a pragmatist i dont worry about what might be especially when it is highly unlikely.

All the leavers obviously like higher priced cycling goods that by the way is a reality not scaremongering. What the remain camp said this morning was conjecture at best. What that tory mp said yesterday that britain could not stop turkey joining was a flat lie.

Conjecture and lies should not be allowed. Those that make them should get no air time. The express reprinted the lie on there front page like it was fact. They have the gaul to call themselves a newspaper as well.

Also who assumed i am left wing. I am actually pragmatic centre right. I dont have dogmatic tory or labour ideology. Assume the poltics of others and you are an ass.

As opinions seem to be held like religion the vote justs needs to be held this week so this thread can be closed and can all get on with our lives. Ideology always always gets in the way of good policy.

The remain camaign promotes ludicrous conjecture at best. The leave campaign is based on fear and ideology.
Neither side offer a compelling vision of the future mainly because it tories on both sides. If it where up to me i would sack every mp you state a mis truth or lie. There would not be many left.

pblakeney

thecycleclinic wrote:

....The latest about population growing by 5 million is new countries including turkey are admitted is more than bogus. No country in the e.u wants turkey as a member they will never join......

Is that a major EU* turn by David Cameron?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... fears.html

*Pun intended.

cycleclinic

Turkey is massacering kurds. Turkey simply does not meet any of the standards the eu sets for new members so it does not matter what cameron says. In fact it never seems to matter what cammeron says. First of all he is going to meeting with the turks so of course he will be warm then cooler later thats politics. Also no country in the eu want mass migration of turks. The french certainly dont neither do the eastern europeans or the germans for tyst matter. They all have a veto. If turkish membership actuall got close then turkey major abuses would get more attention. The fact they dont get attention shows how distant there application actually is.

Cammeron will be out before 2020 and there is no way acession will happen before then. Also wantkng turkey to join and letting them join are two different thinks. Nuance people nuance. Read between the lines.

I am an optimist most brexit talk is based on fear. I you fear losing something you will lose it.

Pross

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Pross - bit rich to accuse the leave campaign of scaremongering. Makes me laugh to see all these so called left wingers quite happy to quote pillars of the neo-liberal establishment as if their word was gospel.

Yeah, both sides are playing on fear but playing on fear of dirty, Johnny Foreigners flooding the country is more dangerous IMHO. They were quoting the population of Turkey, almost suggesting that 70 odd million of them will be heading to the UK if we stay in even though there's no guarantee the Turks will even get in.

News is on now and a bunch of geriatric xenophobes are going on about how 'they' are destroying our culture. Obviously, all Brits who move to Europe slip straight into the local customs and there is nowhere with British pubs, English language schools etc.

rick_chasey

It's fairly simple.

Economically the UK loses out when it leaves.

Politically it carries less clout as its not part of the biggest collective voice in the world - it becomes the equivalent of Texas.

It's a negative campaign because the result is the status quo.

If we had a debate about ending a ban on slavery the "keep the ban" group would be painting pretty bad pictures too.

The press is forced to give "balance" to each side, but there's only one side that had facts. A bit like when Russia shot down the passenger plane in Ukraine. They did, but Russian gov't said they didn't, so press was obliged to report the "other side". There wasn't one, only a lie.

Problem is, no one cares about the facts. If they did, it'd be cut and dry, and each side wouldn't be making polemics about 5 million more migrants in 5 years or WW3.

Same reason the majority of what Trump says is factually incorrect and a decent portion a flat out lie. People hear what they want to and that's that. It's irrelevant.

You just hope there are enough people who have enough logical and rational thought to see it as it is.

Just over half is good enough I guess.

rick_chasey

Head of NHS says Brexit will disrupt his work.
Governor of BoE speaks against it.
Head of IMF does too.

They're all elite stooges and puppets apaz.

I'd remind you that those politicians who say an economic downturn is a price worth paying are politicians who did not experience the last crash in their Westminster bubble. Nor will they feel the next one, self inflicted or otherwise. Insouciance is a rich man's problem.

Rockhound

Sir Humphrey Appleby had the best reasoning to stay in Europe:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lScVfwe-Rp0

verylonglegs

Polling card waiting on the mat when I got home today, hey ho, not long to wait then.

prhymeate

I just hope that most people have at least tried to educate themselves on the subject, whether they vote for in or out. I was listening to the BBC World Service the other day and they were interviewing people from Hastings about the referendum. One person said that she didn't want to be in Europe because they might force the Euro on us and even take away Easter and Christmas. I mean...

mr_goo

Rick Chasey wrote:

The press is forced to give "balance" to each side, but there's only one side that had facts. A bit like when Russia shot down the passenger plane in Ukraine. They did, but Russian gov't said they didn't, so press was obliged to report the "other side". There wasn't one, only a lie.

The BBC has been about the most unbalanced of any press/news organisation. They have been always been a proponent of the EU and naturally they are most likely to be in the loop with the Remain campaign and the Scaremongers of Doom, Cameron and Osborne.

I was at a client's yesterday who brought the EU subject up, and expressed disbelief that anyone would vote to leave. I asked him if he could actually recall any positive benefits and statement from the Remain campaign. We all know what the answer to that.

And on another note. My daughter of 23, with no influence from anyone else is voting Out. She thinks that it speaks volumes that those that voted for a Common Market and have seen what a monster the EU has grown into, are the very same people that are voting to leave. And that many of her peers are in general are voting to stay in because they don't know any different.

ballysmate

Rick Chasey wrote:

It's fairly simple.

Economically the UK loses out when it leaves.

Politically it carries less clout as its not part of the biggest collective voice in the world - it becomes the equivalent of Texas.

That is a main plank of the Brexit thinking. The EU speaks for the EU and 27 other countries, not necessarily in the interests of the 28th and the only one that matters to the people of the UK.
You have also drawn the analogy of a United States of Europe - anathema to people who want Brexit and also I would imagine to a good many who would vote to remain.

rick_chasey

You actually think UK identity will be subsumed by the EU?

UK can barely keep the Scots identity as part of Britain and they've been under rule for 300 years!

Then again, 300 historians feel Brexit would hasten Britain's international irrelevance.
http://gu.com/p/4jgqb?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

pblakeney

Rick Chasey wrote:

You actually think UK identity will be subsumed by the EU?

UK can barely keep the Scots identity as part of Britain and they've been under rule for 300 years!

Then again, 300 historians feel Brexit would hasten Britain's international irrelevance.
http://gu.com/p/4jgqb?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

That is an excellent analogy.
The Scots joined Britain much in the same way as Britain joined the Common Market.
Are you suggesting that Britain is now ruled by the EU?

rick_chasey

No they didn't, and no, the point was in a much more extreme example the identity has survived 300 years under rule. In case it wasn't clear, it was parliament in London that 'allowed' the referendum to happen. So in the soft membership of the EU, Britishness won't diminish at all.

The UK can chose to leave the EU when it wants and has veto over anything substantial. It has already repealed the 'ever closer union' clause.

We also all vote for our MEPs - something which all Brexiters seem to forget.

Either the UK has influence over the biggest community there is, or it influences nothing. That's the choice.

It's like when Gary Barlow tried to go solo after Take That. He wrote the songs, he sang most of them - why did he need the others? Because no-one listens to Gary. They listened to take that.

mamba80

Can anyone tell me which Laws the EU has forced on the UK that has proven to be detrimental to us?

oh and how does the EU take away national identity ? france still seems to drink/make wine/cheese and play boule, Belgium still make chocs and Germans still drive insanely fast on their motorways, even poor old Spain throw tomatoes and get run over by Bulls.

for me, though i dont agree with the negativity of the INs, the OUTs seem to be promising a golden future, without any evidence that the UK will do any better or how they intend to go about getting this, it just seems more a wish list, with vague promises/ideals.

pblakeney

Rick Chasey wrote:

No they didn't, and no, the point was in a much more extreme example the identity has survived 300 years .

I suggest that you check your historical facts, but yes, their identity is intact.

ballysmate

Scotland under rule? It was an act of union. No wonder some Scots feel aggrieved with patronising attitudes like that.

haydenm

Mr Goo wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

The press is forced to give "balance" to each side, but there's only one side that had facts. A bit like when Russia shot down the passenger plane in Ukraine. They did, but Russian gov't said they didn't, so press was obliged to report the "other side". There wasn't one, only a lie.

The BBC has been about the most unbalanced of any press/news organisation. They have been always been a proponent of the EU and naturally they are most likely to be in the loop with the Remain campaign and the Scaremongers of Doom, Cameron and Osborne.

The BBC said something you disagree with so they must surely be biased. In fact, they are probably sitting right now in the secret meeting hall of the Remain campaign drinking blood and plotting some more biased reporting

rick_chasey

It's that kind of criticism Goo that leads them to report in the way they do.

The focus on "bias" over factual content is the main issue. It becomes a "he said she said" summary of Westminster. They are too scared to lead with objective takes on it for fear of that criticism, so they just repeat what was said and occasionally ask people "what do you say to that?".

It's corroding democracy.

rick_chasey

PBlakeney wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

No they didn't, and no, the point was in a much more extreme example the identity has survived 300 years .

I suggest that you check your historical facts, but yes, their identity is intact.

So the Union of Scotland isn't much closer than the loose coalition of EU members?

haydenm

I've heard all of the childish tittle tattle through the BBC so it can't be that biased, I've heard very little fact either way...

In my eyes things are good but they can always be better, I'd be open to change but no one has convinced me to vote leave yet and the burden is on them. I'm actually just trying to get on with my job (as well as posting on here ) rather than hearing about who is most like Hitler so if we could stop having these bloody referendums which harm investor confidence that would be great...

pblakeney

Rick Chasey wrote:

PBlakeney wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

No they didn't, and no, the point was in a much more extreme example the identity has survived 300 years .

I suggest that you check your historical facts, but yes, their identity is intact.

So the Union of Scotland isn't much closer than the loose coalition of EU members?

Try reading this - http://www.parliament.uk/about/living-h ... nion-1707/

rick_chasey

It is like most people here can't read.

Whatever.