EU referendum

EU referendum

  • In

    Votes: 503 47.9%
  • Out

    Votes: 547 52.1%

  • Total voters
    1,050
Status
Not open for further replies.
I noticed he could quite easily have resigned if he did not agree with it but alas no.
Anyhow, you can buy his book which no doubt is in all good book shops.
The Mail with an Outer, must be accurate.

butthurt inner in ignoring reality shocker.

The man is laying it out but because it does not suit your agenda ofc he is lying etc, fucking pathetic.
 
The rights of the individual are stronger and better protected by being in the EU. This is especially important for minorities who are disproportionately the victims of unjust laws, judicial abuse and miscarriages of justice.

The economy is more stable and a more stable economy is better for the majority of people. It is very important for the poorest because it gives them more security and the ability to plan for the future and improve their lot. Those who gain from an unstable economy are the very rich.

The supply of basic goods and foodstuffs is much more secure as a result of EU co-operation. Norway had a butter shortage a few years back and Norwegian were paying £25/lb in the supermarket. Such shortages have become a thing of the past in Britain, since joining the EEC. People no longer have to buy in essential basics in bulk. Again this benefits the poorer most.

Being a member of the EU give preferential access to foreign markets, i particular the wealthier markets who are the main targets for the types of goods and services the UK produces. The UK economy and the economies of many of the other member countries are culturally and socially similar. They are the low hanging fruit of international trade.

The top 10 richest economies in the world purchase 65% of all goods. Deliberately jeopardizing the relation with any of these markets, such as those in the EU and the USA is economic madness. In contrast, much of the remaining 35% consists of basic necessities and raw materials, neither of which Britain can supply.

UK manufacturing is so interttwined with manufacturing in other parts of the EU that leaving would cause an unnecessary, costly and potentially disasterous reorganisation:
The UK import/export sectors do not in general produce finished products from raw materails (with the exception of whisky), contarty to what many outers seem to believe. It imports components, refines and constructs larger componenets and re-exports them. It will be impossible for most UK businesses involved in these very important sectors to find comparable suppliers and customers for the same products and services outside the EU;
The expense and investment in finding new customers would drive many businesses into bankruptcy. It costs five times as much to find a new customer as to retain an existing one;
The current over capacity in other EU countries could more easily be adapted to take advantage of the opportunity to replace British industry in the supply chains. Much of the over capacity is in similar sectors to British industries;

The cost of government borrowing would rise and the British deficit would increase. The pound would be vulnerable to attack as it was attacked under Thatcher.

British financial markets would become under the de-facto jurisdiction of the US if the UK were to leave the EU.

Standardization is the future. It is inevitable that countries and economic blocks will agree on common standards to better enable trade. Britain in the EU can have it's voice heard on the issues that are important to British people and British industry. (caveat - if it elects competent politicians who are prepared to cooperate and compromise). Britain outside the EU will be insignificant on the world stage. The Outers obsession with "excess" rules and regulations from the EU are simply a lack of understanding on how trade actually works. The best thing for any producer of high volume low value products is for their product to becoma a commodity.

If the UK also left the European Court of Human Rights it would be forced to give up it's unilateral nuclear deterrent. Not only would this be a disaster for jobs and result the loss of world class expertise it would weaken Britain's defence.
 
The rights of the individual are stronger and better protected by being in the EU. This is especially important for minorities who are disproportionately the victims of unjust laws, judicial abuse and miscarriages of justice.

The economy is more stable and a more stable economy is better for the majority of people. It is very important for the poorest because it gives them more security and the ability to plan for the future and improve their lot. Those who gain from an unstable economy are the very rich.

The supply of basic goods and foodstuffs is much more secure as a result of EU co-operation. Norway had a butter shortage a few years back and Norwegian were paying £25/lb in the supermarket. Such shortages have become a thing of the past in Britain, since joining the EEC. People no longer have to buy in essential basics in bulk. Again this benefits the poorer most.

Being a member of the EU give preferential access to foreign markets, i particular the wealthier markets who are the main targets for the types of goods and services the UK produces. The UK economy and the economies of many of the other member countries are culturally and socially similar. They are the low hanging fruit of international trade.

The top 10 richest economies in the world purchase 65% of all goods. Deliberately jeopardizing the relation with any of these markets, such as those in the EU and the USA is economic madness. In contrast, much of the remaining 35% consists of basic necessities and raw materials, neither of which Britain can supply.

UK manufacturing is so interttwined with manufacturing in other parts of the EU that leaving would cause an unnecessary, costly and potentially disasterous reorganisation:
The UK import/export sectors do not in general produce finished products from raw materails (with the exception of whisky), contarty to what many outers seem to believe. It imports components, refines and constructs larger componenets and re-exports them. It will be impossible for most UK businesses involved in these very important sectors to find comparable suppliers and customers for the same products and services outside the EU;
The expense and investment in finding new customers would drive many businesses into bankruptcy. It costs five times as much to find a new customer as to retain an existing one;
The current over capacity in other EU countries could more easily be adapted to take advantage of the opportunity to replace British industry in the supply chains. Much of the over capacity is in similar sectors to British industries;

The cost of government borrowing would rise and the British deficit would increase. The pound would be vulnerable to attack as it was attacked under Thatcher.

British financial markets would become under the de-facto jurisdiction of the US if the UK were to leave the EU.

Standardization is the future. It is inevitable that countries and economic blocks will agree on common standards to better enable trade. Britain in the EU can have it's voice heard on the issues that are important to British people and British industry. (caveat - if it elects competent politicians who are prepared to cooperate and compromise). Britain outside the EU will be insignificant on the world stage. The Outers obsession with "excess" rules and regulations from the EU are simply a lack of understanding on how trade actually works. The best thing for any producer of high volume low value products is for their product to becoma a commodity.

If the UK also left the European Court of Human Rights it would be forced to give up it's unilateral nuclear deterrent. Not only would this be a disaster for jobs and result the loss of world class expertise it would weaken Britain's defence.

Thanks, that's a very interesting post.
 
Read back through this thread. Plenty of positives for remaining in the EU.
Summarise if you would please. All I have read is scare stories about why we should not leave.

Looking for the benefits if staying.

For me a the reasons to leave are:

1. Security and border control I would prefer it if that anyone in the EU did not have the automatic right to work in the UK

2. Related to 1, the threat of Turkey joining.

3. Immigration. We need to do what we believe we need to do, not be dictated to by the EU about how many and when we should take genuine migrants into this country. We just about have control right now, but if we stay I envisage that control being eroded away to nothing.

4. Net contribution, call it £8bn or £10bn, I would prefer we decide where we spend that money.

5. Bureaucracy. EU Commission (unelected) EU Parliament, EU Council of Ministers.... Way too much and way too costly.

Things like intelligence gathering and sharing and terrorist threats are nothing to do with the EU, nothing at all, Look to NATO and the FVEY to cover these issues.

Like I say, I don't agree with what Europe has become, we are drifting toward becoming the United States of Europe and that to me is simply unacceptable. I agree with the common market but not to political and financial integration.

If we stay, then we do need to be fully integrated, financially and politically and as previously stated I do not agree that that is the way to go.
 
The rights of the individual are stronger and better protected by being in the EU. This is especially important for minorities who are disproportionately the victims of unjust laws, judicial abuse and miscarriages of justice.

The economy is more stable and a more stable economy is better for the majority of people. It is very important for the poorest because it gives them more security and the ability to plan for the future and improve their lot. Those who gain from an unstable economy are the very rich.

The supply of basic goods and foodstuffs is much more secure as a result of EU co-operation. Norway had a butter shortage a few years back and Norwegian were paying £25/lb in the supermarket. Such shortages have become a thing of the past in Britain, since joining the EEC. People no longer have to buy in essential basics in bulk. Again this benefits the poorer most.

Being a member of the EU give preferential access to foreign markets, i particular the wealthier markets who are the main targets for the types of goods and services the UK produces. The UK economy and the economies of many of the other member countries are culturally and socially similar. They are the low hanging fruit of international trade.

The top 10 richest economies in the world purchase 65% of all goods. Deliberately jeopardizing the relation with any of these markets, such as those in the EU and the USA is economic madness. In contrast, much of the remaining 35% consists of basic necessities and raw materials, neither of which Britain can supply.

UK manufacturing is so interttwined with manufacturing in other parts of the EU that leaving would cause an unnecessary, costly and potentially disasterous reorganisation:
The UK import/export sectors do not in general produce finished products from raw materails (with the exception of whisky), contarty to what many outers seem to believe. It imports components, refines and constructs larger componenets and re-exports them. It will be impossible for most UK businesses involved in these very important sectors to find comparable suppliers and customers for the same products and services outside the EU;
The expense and investment in finding new customers would drive many businesses into bankruptcy. It costs five times as much to find a new customer as to retain an existing one;
The current over capacity in other EU countries could more easily be adapted to take advantage of the opportunity to replace British industry in the supply chains. Much of the over capacity is in similar sectors to British industries;

The cost of government borrowing would rise and the British deficit would increase. The pound would be vulnerable to attack as it was attacked under Thatcher.

British financial markets would become under the de-facto jurisdiction of the US if the UK were to leave the EU.

Standardization is the future. It is inevitable that countries and economic blocks will agree on common standards to better enable trade. Britain in the EU can have it's voice heard on the issues that are important to British people and British industry. (caveat - if it elects competent politicians who are prepared to cooperate and compromise). Britain outside the EU will be insignificant on the world stage. The Outers obsession with "excess" rules and regulations from the EU are simply a lack of understanding on how trade actually works. The best thing for any producer of high volume low value products is for their product to becoma a commodity.

If the UK also left the European Court of Human Rights it would be forced to give up it's unilateral nuclear deterrent. Not only would this be a disaster for jobs and result the loss of world class expertise it would weaken Britain's defence.
Pardon my ignorance,but could you please explain what influence the European Court of Human Rights has over Britain's independent nuclear weapons. I don't see any connection there at all,and don't understand how they could affect the possible deployment or use of these weapons.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.