Shall we stay or shall we go???????

[sensible_sucker]

For those who live in the UK what are your thoughts on the country remaining in the EU?

Thoughts are more than welcome from anyone outside the UK on what implications the decision may have on you, or if you actually give a crap....

[Toots1989]

Undecided still. It just seems sadly both sides are trying to scare people and the Remain side is doing exactly the same thing as the Union side did for the Scottish Referendum.

Got to look at more information before I decide really, but only 14 days till the vote.

[chupapau]

Theres a bunch of immigrants around my corner. They all have this crazy idea that they'll make it in London, even though they hardly speak English. I'm paying loads of taxes, to prevent these guys from taking the boat/train over to your turf. I'm more than happy to give them free passage.

If you vote stay, that will also be the end of decades of "exceptions".

Either way you lose because both Tory and Labour have been using "Brussels" as excuse for everything wrong on their own governance since '91, now they'll have to come clear. What a tactician, this Cameron ;)

EU is a democracy, for crying out loud! Why did you rescind on your duty to participate in the first place? Rather than forming a "euro skeptic" faction? The only septic that works is the tank buried under my terrace.


so Darling, you got to let me know,
should you stay or should you go.

(best ever UK export product btw)

[Gillian]

I think it's wrong for elected politicians to duck difficult issues like this by holding a referendum. We're not a plebiscitary democracy and your average man in the street, and I would include myself in that description, is woefully under-qualified to make such an important decision. Surely we elect politicians so they can make informed decisions on our behalf?

Cameron called it as he was sure it would be a landslide in favour of remaining in the EU and the referendum result would become a stick with which he could clobber the Eurosceptics in his own party. Now that it's looking like a close call, I bet he wishes he'd never called it, the pillock ... :D

Vote remain for me, if anyone was wondering ... ;)

[Stavros]

http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?98809-how-would-you-vote-on-the-eu-if-were-today-for-Uk-ONLY

http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?97438-For-the-Brits-When-will-BREXIT-referendum-happen

[fab]

England has become the most overcrowded major country in Europe. Population growth is so rapid that four times as many people will soon be crammed in as France and twice as many as Germany. England has overtaken the Netherlands to become second only to tiny Malta as the most densely populated nation in the EU.

This means for me GO !!

PS I love Scotland because of many wonderful things, including lack of population.

[bruce_willy]

EU is a democracy, for crying out loud!

Really? You could have fooled me.

https://thescepticisle.com/2016/04/14/the-eu-is-not-a-democracy-and-it-never-will-be/

I'm voting out.

[Stavros]

England has become the most overcrowded major country in Europe. Population growth is so rapid that four times as many people will soon be crammed in as France and twice as many as Germany. England has overtaken the Netherlands to become second only to tiny Malta as the most densely populated nation in the EU.

This means for me GO !!

PS I love Scotland because of many wonderful things, including lack of population.

This dishonest post is lacking the quotation marks as the text I have highlighted in Bold is word for word from a report in the Daily Mail published on the 27th December 2013. The problem is that being 'overcrowded' is not the same as being 'densely populated' and England is chosen for the reason that if the UK were the subject then the UK would be ranked the 7th most densely populated country in Europe, but that would not suit the political project that the Daily Mail supports.

A more balanced assessment can be found here-
http://theconversation.com/fact-check-is-the-uk-the-most-crowded-country-in-europe-38468

[bruce_willy]

This dishonest post is lacking the quotation marks as the text I have highlighted in Bold is word for word from a report in the Daily Mail published on the 27th December 2013. The problem is that being 'overcrowded' is not the same as being 'densely populated' and England is chosen for the reason that if the UK were the subject then the UK would be ranked the 7th most densely populated country in Europe, but that would not suit the political project that the Daily Mail supports.

A more balanced assessment can be found here-
http://theconversation.com/fact-check-is-the-uk-the-most-crowded-country-in-europe-38468

The UK has to import more than half it's food needs = therefore it's overpopulated. The carrying capacity of the land has been outstripped by a factor of 2+.

No amount of 'politically correct' sophistry can get around that fact.

Vote OUT if you know what's good for you.

[Jericho]

This means for me GO !!
PS I love Scotland because of many wonderful things, including lack of population.

What makes you think the Scots will have you?
They may have a quota on immigrants! :shrug

[Lysandros]

As continental European
I am surprised at all these discussions
because all supporters of EU leaving obviously don't want to see the high risk to destroy the own British Union as consequence. And only "little England" remaining?
Scotland will use a distinct majority PRO EU in SCO in favour of a new attempt to gain independency if UK say yes to leave EU. To my mind the "Irish question" (Irish Unification) will come to life again. The demographic characteristics ( religious, ethnically etc.) in N.I. turn against the British loyalists in any case. And I'm not sure what happens in Wales?

Leaving UK = Dissoluting UK ??

[Stavros]

The UK has to import more than half it's food needs = therefore it's overpopulated. The carrying capacity of the land has been outstripped by a factor of 2+.

No amount of 'politically correct' sophistry can get around that fact.

Vote OUT if you know what's good for you.

The UK has been a net importer of food since the Corn Laws were repealed in 1846. What do you think was considered to be a benefit of the Empire if not its exotic spices and fruits, its tea and coffee? Britons eat a greater diversity of food today than they have ever done, whether that is due to immigrants from Asia and the Caribbean or Elizabeth David in the 1950s persuading Britons to cook Italian dishes at home. Indeed, the diversity of the population has increased the market for food products in both import and export terms, but time and again one finds deficiencies in the way the British make food, and market and distribute it, and not all this is anything to do with the EU. Leaving the EU does not solve any of the problems of food production and distribution in the UK.
You can read a good overview on this topic here-
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/food-gap-in-the-land-of-plenty-british-farmers-are-good-at-producing-but-the-uk-still-has-a-pounds-1445706.html

[The Piper]

EUTIN(European taxpayer identification number) has been the straw that broke the camels back for me.My postal vote has gone in,i'm for out.


http://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/fox-on-friday-the-eu-makes-a-stealthy-move-towards-common-european-taxation/

[Lysandros]

Leaving UK = Dissoluting UK ??

Sorry for error !!

Leaving EU = Dissoluting UK ??

[Stavros]

EUTIN(European taxpayer identification number) has been the straw that broke the camels back for me.My postal vote has gone in,i'm for out.


It is no surprise that Liam Fox is opposed to the European Tax Identification Number, as he is opposed on principle to most taxes, just as it is no surprise that he ignores completely the primary purpose of the tax which is to combat tax fraud in transactions made by companies across the EU and is thus primarily focused on commercial enterprises. You already have a tax identification number anyway so what is the problem?

[ElectricWoody]

If you talk about it, you'll never do it. Just like Smoking. Just looking for a shoulder to cry on maybe.

[The Piper]

the primary purpose of the tax which is to combat tax fraud

So you admit there will be a tax.
Don't be naive enough to think the money will only be used to combat tax fraud,in a few years time the money you pay will be used for other projects thru'out Europe.
Who wrote the article is irrelevant.What is relevant is the fact this has tried to be implemented without lucidity.
The EU now expect each and every one of it's 500+Million residents to pay on top of what they contribute to their own country.Some of which is passed to the EU anyway.And you can't see why i have a problem with that.
I said for me it was the straw that broke the camels back,i have numerous "problems"with the E.U,this only being one of them.

[sean1916]

As continental European
I am surprised at all these discussions
because all supporters of EU leaving obviously don't want to see the high risk to destroy the own British Union as consequence. And only "little England" remaining?
Scotland will use a distinct majority PRO EU in SCO in favour of a new attempt to gain independency if UK say yes to leave EU. To my mind the "Irish question" (Irish Unification) will come to life again. The demographic characteristics ( religious, ethnically etc.) in N.I. turn against the British loyalists in any case. And I'm not sure what happens in Wales?

Leaving UK = Dissoluting UK ??

Irish Unification has never died.

[sean1916]

Our revenge will be the laughter of our children.

- Bobby Sands

[bruce_willy]

Leaving the EU does not solve any of the problems of food production and distribution in the UK.


But it could be a step to reducing the consumers of food.

[bruce_willy]

Basil Fawlty, he say FU to the EU.


http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/john-cleese-backs-brexit-slams-8172299

[chupapau]

Really? You could have fooled me.

https://thescepticisle.com/2016/04/14/the-eu-is-not-a-democracy-and-it-never-will-be/

I'm voting out.

Using sider-liners arguments is exactly what lead to this bad situation. I fully agree with anyone who says that this EU is going in the wrong direction. And still I'll defend the notion of the EU, and will find that it is my duty to put my shoulders under it to push it in a better direction. That is the responsibility of anyone living in a democracy, including you.

For nearly three decades you guys considered it a farce and sent your worst politicians over there, and even then, you failed to look what the f*ck your representatives were doing there. I'll tell you what they did, whether they were Tory, Labour or that puppetry called UKIP : they went to fill their pockets, selling their votes to the Monsantos of the world, in complete disregard over their constituencies needs. And your own frigging media did their absolute best to hide that from you. All on behalf of the City.

Politics, and democracy, is about doing things, not about going all Jeremy Clarkson on somebodies ass. Funny for ten seconds, until you realize the consequences.

[fab]

This dishonest post is lacking the quotation marks as the text I have highlighted in Bold is word for word from a report in the Daily Mail published on the 27th December 2013. The problem is that being 'overcrowded' is not the same as being 'densely populated' and England is chosen for the reason that if the UK were the subject then the UK would be ranked the 7th most densely populated country in Europe, but that would not suit the political project that the Daily Mail supports.

A more balanced assessment can be found here-
http://theconversation.com/fact-check-is-the-uk-the-most-crowded-country-in-europe-38468

My bad, sorry & I hate quoting Daily Mail. However, I live in North London & it feels very over crowded, here in London & the South East. Before you say leave London, I cannot because of the specific type of work I do. Also I hate to say this but on quiet a few occasions when going shopping in Finchley, I have not heard English spoken. At times, I feel like a foreigner in my own country. Don't get me wrong, I love multi culture, but not when I'm in the minority on most occasions. Other countries in Europe don't have such multi cultures as the UK & they don't feel as over populated as here.

[fab]

Did I say I wanted to go to Scotland ?
I said I love Scotland NOT live.



What makes you think the Scots will have you?
They may have a quota on immigrants! :shrug

[makerandmodder]

Stay

[Stavros]

My bad, sorry & I hate quoting Daily Mail. However, I live in North London & it feels very over crowded, here in London & the South East. Before you say leave London, I cannot because of the specific type of work I do. Also I hate to say this but on quiet a few occasions when going shopping in Finchley, I have not heard English spoken. At times, I feel like a foreigner in my own country. Don't get me wrong, I love multi culture, but not when I'm in the minority on most occasions. Other countries in Europe don't have such multi cultures as the UK & they don't feel as over populated as here.

I cannot deny that the rise in immigration since the 1990s has placed a strain on social provisions such as housing, but the situation looks bad because successive British governments have implemented policies that have reduced the availability of low-rent low-cost accommodation in London, and encouraged rent and house price inflation to the extent that many long-established London residents have had to leave for somewhere else. It is not clear to me precisely how immigrants affect the NHS but in schooling it has always been the case that planning needs to factor in the growth of demand for 6-12 year olds followed by a net decline in that cohort, ditto the 12-18 year olds, it is really just a matter of planning and commitments to fund state education. Most of these problems are due to lack of investment in the infrastructure and social services by the government, not the EU.

On the other hand, British citizens do live and work in the EU and there are parts of southern Spain where you will not hear much Spanish spoken and many ex-pats don't even bother to learn Spanish, just as in parts of Bethnal Green and Shoreditch around 1900 you were most likely to hear people speaking Russian and Yiddish, with the irony in your case that many of their grandchildren ended up in Finchley, although these days London's Jewish community is in decline.

European states are indeed multi-cultural -the (West) German 'economic miracle' of the 1950s and 1960s would not have happened as it did without Marshall Aid from the US, and immigrant workers from Portugal, Yugoslavia, Greece, Italy and of course Turkey. In the Netherlands their Empire has guaranteed a multi-cultural society with immigrants from Surinam, the Caribbean and the old empire in South-East Asia. France reached an accommodation with Morocco, Tunisia and Algeria in order to embark on a major programme of industrialization -when de Gaulle became President in 1958 he was told this programme needed 100,000 immigrants a year to succeed. Belgium after the Second World War became home to thousands of Italians, many working in the mines, whereas in the UK a third wave of Italian immigrants (following the first two phases in the 19th century) came to work in the vehicle plants in Bedford and Luton areas. We have always been able to cope, to absorb and to offer opportunities to immigrants who in turn have created jobs and businesses and shoved plenty of money to the government in tax. Most of our care homes are staffed by immigrants from outside the EU such as Africa and Asia, and I do wonder who would be doing those jobs if non-Commonwealth immigrants or anyone not able to earn £35,000 a year were 'sent home'.

The problem is immigration will not change substantially whether the UK is in or out of the EU, this is a fantasy spread by UKIP types who not only want zero immigration but the next step -repatriation. Whether or not the Blacks or the Jews will be first in line is a matter of conjecture. The timetable tells us: if the UK votes Leave in 9 days time, the next step will be a series of meetings, beginning in October I expect, that will arrange another set of meetings for 2017 to work out how to negotiate the exit, when, and with reference to what sectors. A piecemeal withdrawal will thus mean many aspects of the EU relationship will continue for years, if only because contracts have been signed, orders placed for goods, and other commitments made that cannot be tossed away the day after the vote.

Crucially, if the UK wants to trade in the single market, it will have to do so on the EU's terms, and if the EU insists on retaining the four freedoms -the free movement of people, goods, services and capital- the best the UK can hope for in people is a cap, and that does not deal with non-Eu immigration. In the meantime, a fall in the value of the pound sterling will lead to a rise in interest rates, a decline in the value of housing, higher unemployment and inflation.

The UK might be better off outside the EU in 15 or 20 years time during which the EU as it is now may cease to exist anyway, but do you want to write off the next 10 years in pursuit of an economy that, inevitably, will reward -not you, but the top 5% as it always has done? The risk is all, and it is up to those who want to leave to admit that they think it is a risk worth taking. I do not.

[flabbybody]

942400
Whatever happened to those Ladbrokes odds?

[chupapau]

942400
Whatever happened to those Ladbrokes odds?

how much for a draw??? :)

[The Piper]

I do not.

What is it about the anti-democratic corrupt EU that you like?

[Stavros]

What is it about the anti-democratic corrupt EU that you like?

Not my list but one that I agree with:
Here are a few you may not have heard about .
Providing 57% of our trade;
EU-funded research and industrial collaboration;
cheaper mobile charges;
cheaper air travel;
improved consumer protection and food labelling;
better product safety;
support for democracy and human rights across Europe and beyond;
freedom to travel, live and work across Europe;
funded opportunities for young people to undertake study or work placements abroad;
access to European health services;
labour protection and enhanced social welfare;
structural funding to areas hit by industrial decline;
clean beaches and rivers;
cleaner air;
lead free petrol;
restrictions on landfill dumping;
a recycling culture;
a ban on growth hormones and other harmful food additives;
break up of monopolies;
single market competition bringing quality improvements and better industrial performance;
EU-inspired Freedom of Information Act
Europe-wide patent and copyright protection;
no paperwork or customs for exports throughout the single market;
price transparency and removal of commission on currency exchanges across the eurozone;
smoke-free workplaces;
equal pay legislation;
holiday entitlement;
the right not to work more than a 48-hour week without overtime;
strongest wildlife protection in the world;
improved animal welfare in food production;
EU representation in international forums;
Bloc EEA negotiation at the WTO;
EU diplomatic efforts to uphold the nuclear non-proliferation treaty;
European arrest warrant;
cross border policing to combat human trafficking, arms and drug smuggling; counter terrorism intelligence;
European civil and military co-operation in post-conflict zones in Europe and Africa;
investment across Europe contributing to better living standards and educational, social and cultural capital.
All of this is nothing compared with its greatest achievements:
The EU has for 60 years been the foundation of peace between European neighbours after centuries of bloodshed.
It furthermore assisted the extraordinary political, social and economic transformation of 13 former dictatorships,
now EU members, since 1980.

[Stavros]

I forgot to mention something crucial in the post I made a few days ago.
The EU referendum is not legally binding on the UK government, so that in theory if the result is Leave, the Prime Minister could ignore it. If, however, Cameron decides he must act, then a Bill must be presented to Parliament giving the Government the authority to open negotiations with the EU citing Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union, but if Parliament does not approve, then the Government cannot open such negotiations, and the UK will remain in the EU.

What will those who want to Leave the EU do if the House of Commons says No?

[Gillian]

Stavros: May I ask which part of the UK you're in?

I ask because the Scots, it seems, have a very different perspective on this issue from the English ...

[Stavros]

Stavros: May I ask which part of the UK you're in?

I ask because the Scots, it seems, have a very different perspective on this issue from the English ...

Where I live has no bearing on the vote or indeed, on my views.

[Gillian]

Where I live has no bearing on the vote or indeed, on my views.
Sorry to have bothered you.

In the absence of any information, I'll imagine it's a seedy bedsit in Deptford ... :D

[Stavros]

Sorry to have bothered you.

In the absence of any information, I'll imagine it's a seedy bedsit in Deptford ... :D

Having already said in another post somewhere I do not live in London I shall not say any more, because it is the issues that are important, not me or where I live.
I do wonder what it is that people think the Exit campaign actually want from the exit from the EU, because it is not all the same for a diverse bunch of people. Some are, quite simply, White English Nazis who see an exit from the EU as the first phase of 'taking our country back' or to paraphrase Donald Trump 'Make England White Again' not least because they couldn't care two hoots about the rest of the UK. For people like Michael Gove, an exit from the UK is a free market wet dream in which the UK leads the avant garde against trading blocs and globalisation in its present form to create a world in which private companies or free enterprise dominate the world economy even though as I write most of the world's resources and most of the world's capital is owned by states not companies, and by states that are not and if necessary will fight to the death not to become democracies. Given that even on the best Exit scenario real wealth will not change, who actually would benefit from the exit? The same 4% who own the land now will own the land if we leave; the same 100 companies that make up the Stock Exchange Index will dominate that list and the same private companies not listed will continue to be the richest companies. The majority of people will see no significant improvement in their wages or working conditions, or potentially could see them worsen as the Exit campaign is opposed to all that 'red tape' that in effect protects workers rights. They want an end to all forms of trade union representation, to repeal the Human Rights Act, and don't care if the pound loses its value because that will boost exports and anyway most of them have assets tucked away in offshore accounts precisely as a hedge against economic failure in their own country.
But as I said earlier today, if the House of Commons votes against an exit from the EU it is not going to happen.

[flabbybody]

I forgot to mention something crucial in the post I made a few days ago.
The EU referendum is not legally binding on the UK government, so that in theory if the result is Leave, the Prime Minister could ignore it. If, however, Cameron decides he must act, then a Bill must be presented to Parliament giving the Government the authority to open negotiations with the EU citing Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union, but if Parliament does not approve, then the Government cannot open such negotiations, and the UK will remain in the EU.

What will those who want to Leave the EU do if the House of Commons says No?
If Leave wins and the government chooses to legally ignore the outcome it will embolden the right-wing anti-immigrant lunatics. They'll succeed in enlisting many new supporters from the more sane elements of the population, the so-called "silent majority"....Richard Nixon's term that means most people tacitly support the government as long it acts rationally.

In a nutshell, if Leave wins and HC says No, then the U.K. is fucked.

Begs the question... Then what was the point of a conducting a referendum?

[Jericho]

Begs the question... Then what was the point of a conducting a referendum?

To give the proletariat the illusion of choice.
Meanwhile, the Illuminati profit either/both ways.

or sumfink! :shrug

[Stavros]

If Leave wins and the government chooses to legally ignore the outcome it will embolden the right-wing anti-immigrant lunatics. They'll succeed in enlisting many new supporters from the more sane elements of the population, the so-called "silent majority"....Richard Nixon's term that means most people tacitly support the government as long it acts rationally.

In a nutshell, if Leave wins and HC says No, then the U.K. is fucked.

Begs the question... Then what was the point of a conducting a referendum?

The simple reality is that our laws are made by Parliament, and nothing can happen if Parliament does not give its approval. A retired Professor of British political history has told me this campaign is Gilbert & Sullivan nonsense. If Leave win and the House votes against, it is up to those who want to leave to win the next General Election and put a new Bill before Parliament. We only give the people so much power in this country.

The UK applied to join the Common Market in the 1960s but the French vetoed the application. When Edward Heath led the Conservative Party to election victory in 1970, the party manifesto declared
If we can negotiate the right terms, we believe that it would be in the long-term interest of the British people for Britain to join the European Economic Community...Our sole commitment is to negotiate; no more, no less.
http://www.conservativemanifesto.com/1970/1970-conservative-manifesto.shtml

Because Heath believed the negotiations had reached a point where entry was justified, a Bill was presented to Parliament, the House of Commons debated it for over a week in 1971, and in 1972 the European Communities Act was passed. Since then Heath has been accused of being a liar, a traitor, and much worse, and I don't recall the issue of Europe being of major importance in the debates at the time, but the commitment was there.

In purely procedural, but legal terms, there is no need to hold a referendum on Europe, as the decision can only be made by Parliament and had he wanted to Cameron could have put a Bill before the House to take the UK out of the EU without a referendum. It is often said that the 'people must be consulted' on matters of constitutional change, but the principle is assumed to mean a General Election not a referendum. The referendum in 1975 took place barely 2 years after the UK joined, and was held by Harold Wilson to shut up his Left-wing who threatened his fragile majority in the Commons, only they lost the vote, carried on as if nothing had happened, and leaving the EU was Labour Party policy by 1981, when the party was powerless to do anything about it.

Cameron called this referendum because he believed with a working majority the Conservative party had a stronger position than Labour, and because UKIP had failed to win more than 1 seat in the Commons. His biggest gamble was that those in his own Party who want the UK to leave would remain a noisy minority and have little impact whereas he has seen Cabinet ministers join the Leave campaign and, in effect, challenge his leadership of the party so that what Cameron thought would be a 'slam dunk' may turn out to be the biggest mistake of his political career.

For the record, and setting aside the 1967 Referendum in Gibraltar that confirmed their decision to remain in the UK (rather than become part of Spain), there have been 11 other Referenda, mostly on issues related to Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland.
http://www.parliament.uk/get-involved/elections/referendums-held-in-the-uk/