EU referendum

EU referendum

  • In

    Votes: 503 47.9%

  • Out

    Votes: 547 52.1%
  • Total voters
    1,050
Status
Not open for further replies.
CityStu said:
Legislation comes from the EU Commission and Commissioners are not elected, they are chosen by the leader (not necessarily government) of each EU member state. I don't call a one-off decision by Cameron democratic given 35k of the UK's 60m people voted for him. I bet the majority of people couldn't name the UK's European Commissioner.
Click to expand...
Cameron is making decisions every day as PM of far more gravity and with lives at stake. If you don't accept Cameron as a democratically elected leader making decisions that he is elected to make acceptable then you have to admit you don't believe in UK democracy either.

It is deeply misleading and disingenuous to on one hand talk about Europe as almost a dictatorship and undemocratic whilst ignoring how those people get their roles IE through the decisions of the democratically elected models you are promoting . You either respect British democracy and the PMs right to make decisions or you don't. You can't oretend one decision they make is a paragon of democratic virtue and another the same person makes is illegitimate

There are legitimate out reasons , but essentially lying about things and making inconsistent proclamations isn't one
 
CityStu said:
Legislation comes from the EU Commission and Commissioners are not elected, they are chosen by the leader (not necessarily government) of each EU member state. I don't call a one-off decision by Cameron democratic given 35k of the UK's 60m people voted for him. I bet the majority of people couldn't name the UK's European Commissioner.
Click to expand...

what exactly does that k stand for? i realise 35,000 is waayy too many for him but the 35 what?

Jonathon Hill is the answer to UK guy.
 
hgblue said:
I'm offering my opinion that for me this isn't about trade. It's about restoring the primacy of the British Parliament, restoring the primacy of the British legal system, restoring the ability to control the number of people coming to this country, restoring the ability to decide which trades or skills this country needs and admitting people based on that rather than where they live, retrieving the 9 billion pounds a year that membership of this organisation costs us, and because I actually believe it's in the best interests of all the people of Europe that the EU wakes up to the fact it's heading in the wrong direction. The arguments about trade are almost a side show to me, but I do believe that there's a lot of scaremongering going on designed to intimidate a largely sceptical public into voting to stay.
Click to expand...


Fair comment, but the two are inextricably linked.

You quote GBP 9bn, and I've repeatedly posted that every academic paper I've read puts the externalities as much higher than the GBP 9bn p/a. In essence, you're saying the tangible net outflow is worth reocuping, even if that GBP 9bn is an investment that brings benefits into the UK? Trade cannot be a side-show if you take this issue seriously, nor can FDI, nor can the tax garnered from the youthful, flexible workforce that the EU offers.

Also, if you think immigration will recede by any tangible amount following brexit, you're kidding yourself, you really are.

Finally, our elected officials do have the power to influecne legislation, cast vetos, as you can see from the clobbering Johnson got by the treasury select committee, the out campaign basically functions on half truths and sometimes downright lies, looking at Hannan in particular. Maybe if we stopped voting in arseholes like farage as MEPs, we'd actually have seen some level of democracy, rather than becoming a laughing stock on a european wide stage.

I wish I had the energy to continue these debates. Maybe its because I've had a couple, but after posting two posts in this thread with some actual analysis and have them roundly ignored, its clear that most here don't have any appetite for debate whatsoever (though I think you don't necessarily fall into this campp). Its all just so tedious, the whole thing.

I honestly had some sympathy with the out campaign previously. I could understand some of their concerns, and felt that being a driving force in europe would help to facilitate the change internally. But this thread is so tiresome with people just popping up, spewing propoganda that is questionable at best, and ignoring any type of genuine analysis. I'm sure its both ways to an extent, but it troubles me. Theres a couple of prats in particular who frequent this thread, and I'm sure the nuances fly some distance above their heads.

Any how, happy easter all!
 
roaminblue said:
Fair comment, but the two are inextricably linked.

You quote GBP 9bn, and I've repeatedly posted that every academic paper I've read puts the externalities as much higher than the GBP 9bn p/a. In essence, you're saying the tangible net outflow is worth reocuping, even if that GBP 9bn is an investment that brings benefits into the UK? Trade cannot be a side-show if you take this issue seriously, nor can FDI, nor can the tax garnered from the youthful, flexible workforce that the EU offers.

Also, if you think immigration will recede by any tangible amount following brexit, you're kidding yourself, you really are.

Finally, our elected officials do have the power to influecne legislation, cast vetos, as you can see from the clobbering Johnson got by the treasury select committee, the out campaign basically functions on half truths and sometimes downright lies, looking at Hannan in particular. Maybe if we stopped voting in arseholes like farage as MEPs, we'd actually have seen some level of democracy, rather than becoming a laughing stock on a european wide stage.

I wish I had the energy to continue these debates. Maybe its because I've had a couple, but after posting two posts in this thread with some actual analysis and have them roundly ignored, its clear that most here don't have any appetite for debate whatsoever (though I think you don't necessarily fall into this campp). Its all just so tedious, the whole thing.

I honestly had some sympathy with the out campaign previously. I could understand some of their concerns, and felt that being a driving force in europe would help to facilitate the change internally. But this thread is so tiresome with people just popping up, spewing propoganda that is questionable at best, and ignoring any type of genuine analysis. I'm sure its both ways to an extent, but it troubles me. Theres a couple of prats in particular who frequent this thread, and I'm sure the nuances fly some distance above their heads.

Any how, happy easter all!
Click to expand...
They are happy in their ignorance and they will pay the price for it, I am only sad for those who actually want to go forwards not backwards but will have to suffer for the folly of others.
 
roaminblue said:
Its more than "happy", mate. Its veritable pride
Click to expand...
It will give them something else to moan about - reckon they will be calling to cast aside Wales, Scotland , the north etc before too long as they all are holding back londons desire deep down to be a city state
 
roaminblue said:
Fair comment, but the two are inextricably linked.

You quote GBP 9bn, and I've repeatedly posted that every academic paper I've read puts the externalities as much higher than the GBP 9bn p/a. In essence, you're saying the tangible net outflow is worth reocuping, even if that GBP 9bn is an investment that brings benefits into the UK? Trade cannot be a side-show if you take this issue seriously, nor can FDI, nor can the tax garnered from the youthful, flexible workforce that the EU offers.

Also, if you think immigration will recede by any tangible amount following brexit, you're kidding yourself, you really are.

Finally, our elected officials do have the power to influecne legislation, cast vetos, as you can see from the clobbering Johnson got by the treasury select committee, the out campaign basically functions on half truths and sometimes downright lies, looking at Hannan in particular. Maybe if we stopped voting in arseholes like farage as MEPs, we'd actually have seen some level of democracy, rather than becoming a laughing stock on a european wide stage.

I wish I had the energy to continue these debates. Maybe its because I've had a couple, but after posting two posts in this thread with some actual analysis and have them roundly ignored, its clear that most here don't have any appetite for debate whatsoever (though I think you don't necessarily fall into this campp). Its all just so tedious, the whole thing.

I honestly had some sympathy with the out campaign previously. I could understand some of their concerns, and felt that being a driving force in europe would help to facilitate the change internally. But this thread is so tiresome with people just popping up, spewing propoganda that is questionable at best, and ignoring any type of genuine analysis. I'm sure its both ways to an extent, but it troubles me. Theres a couple of prats in particular who frequent this thread, and I'm sure the nuances fly some distance above their heads.

Any how, happy easter all!
Click to expand...

I don't want elected officials who influence legislation, I want elected officials who introduce legislation.

Why do you think parties produce manifestos before local and national elections, but not before European elections? Just think about that for a minute.
 
Chancy Termites said:
I don't want elected officials who influence legislation, I want elected officials who introduce legislation.

Why do you think parties produce manifestos before local and national elections, but not before European elections? Just think about that for a minute.
Click to expand...

We have that also, look at the "teabag" issue that Boris discussed today.
 
EalingBlue2 said:
It will give them something else to moan about - reckon they will be calling to cast aside Wales, Scotland , the north etc before too long as they all are holding back londons desire deep down to be a city state
Click to expand...

Doesn't sound all that bad to me....

In all honesty, I should naturally be an "outer". The tories aren't trying to cap my bonuses and are traditionally in favour of deregulation in finance. Maybe I should rethink a few things
 
EalingBlue2 said:
It will give them something else to moan about - reckon they will be calling to cast aside Wales, Scotland , the north etc before too long as they all are holding back londons desire deep down to be a city state
Click to expand...

The way London has developed let it become a city state. Surround it with razor wire and introduce border controls.
 
YPhrunts said:
The way London has developed let it become a city state. Surround it with razor wire and introduce border controls.
Click to expand...
With a lot of the views on BM it won't be long before everyone is living in a Motte and Bailey with City walls mandatory for all towns.
 
EalingBlue2 said:
Cameron is making decisions every day as PM of far more gravity and with lives at stake. If you don't accept Cameron as a democratically elected leader making decisions that he is elected to make acceptable then you have to admit you don't believe in UK democracy either.

It is deeply misleading and disingenuous to on one hand talk about Europe as almost a dictatorship and undemocratic whilst ignoring how those people get their roles IE through the decisions of the democratically elected models you are promoting . You either respect British democracy and the PMs right to make decisions or you don't. You can't oretend one decision they make is a paragon of democratic virtue and another the same person makes is illegitimate

There are legitimate out reasons , but essentially lying about things and making inconsistent proclamations isn't one
Click to expand...
But you said he didn't understand how the EU commissioners are selected (note: not elected) when clearly he does.

It is not democratic, it is more akin to the House of Lords where the chosen few get selected.

I don't think it is acceptable that the Prime Minister chooses who should represent our country, Jonathan Hill (Lord Hill) in this case especially when we have elections to elect MEP's. If we were to stick to the UK electoral principles we would either ask the MEP's to elect their own leader or ask the majority UK party to elect the leader (aka commissioner).

Cameron has too much skin in the game to be trusted with such a decision, things like his well publicised dislike and distrust of Jean-Claude Junker and his own personal views on the EU and our participation which are not necessarily representative of the majority (the referendum will answer that question).

How does the UK being part of the EU affect Australia?
 
BigJoe#1 said:
But you said he didn't understand how the EU commissioners are selected (note: not elected) when clearly he does.

It is not democratic, it is more akin to the House of Lords where the chosen few get selected.

I don't think it is acceptable that the Prime Minister chooses who should represent our country, Jonathan Hill (Lord Hill) in this case especially when we have elections to elect MEP's. If we were to stick to the UK electoral principles we would either ask the MEP's to elect their own leader or ask the majority UK party to elect the leader (aka commissioner).

Cameron has too much skin in the game to be trusted with such a decision, things like his well publicised dislike and distrust of Jean-Claude Junker and his own personal views on the EU and our participation which are not necessarily representative of the majority (the referendum will answer that question).

How does the UK being part of the EU affect Australia?
Click to expand...
It would probably be very good for Australia if Britain voted out, we'd get a good deal the UK needs a lot more of what we have goods and materials wise and our main import would probably be temporary labour and tourism . Without CAP Aus would be able to export more too agriculture wise.

So you'd trust our democracy and PM to take us to war or make life and death decisions about our army, our healt our education things that are the most important things in life but you'd not trust him to pick a commissioner and have impact on far far less. that just shows how the out vote will take positions on the same thing that are entirely opposite
 
EalingBlue2 said:
It would probably be very good for Australia if Britain voted out, we'd get a good deal the UK needs a lot more of what we have goods and materials wise and our main import would probably be temporary labour and tourism . Without CAP Aus would be able to export more too agriculture wise.

So you'd trust our democracy and PM to take us to war or make life and death decisions about our army, our healt our education things that are the most important things in life but you'd not trust him to pick a commissioner and have impact on far far less. that just shows how the out vote will take positions on the same thing that are entirely opposite
Click to expand...
On the contrary, where have I suggested I trust these people? I wouldn't trust Cameron, Osborne and co to organise a piss up in a brewery and they should not be within a hundred miles of Westminster, they are nothing more than spoilt. brats playing at politics as this week has shown however, I have no individual choice over that. But please do not think because when do I have a choice you have the right to judge my opinions if they are contrary to the UK election principles.
 
Last edited:
CityStu said:
Legislation comes from the EU Commission and Commissioners are not elected, they are chosen by the leader (not necessarily government) of each EU member state. I don't call a one-off decision by Cameron democratic given 35k of the UK's 60m people voted for him. I bet the majority of people couldn't name the UK's European Commissioner.
Click to expand...

Uninformed, ignorant crap.

Only 24% of the registered voters voted Tory.

It was 35% of the turnout.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top