EU referendum

[bluethrunthru]

Serious answer? Nobody knows. Almost certainly a short term economic price. But what price sovereignty, environment and "softer" factors?

Honest serious question - I keep hearing the phrase sovereignty and that we have surrendered it or risk surrendering it - how would you as someone who appears to be in the out camp define it and what do win stand to recover by leaving?

 

[sir baconface]

Not sure where it that post I made any claim to be the fount of all knowledge on Kent? You a resident? Pray enlighten me? is Kent full of newly built unoccupied homes? Are the people of Kent clamoring for them to be built regardless of the effect on the values of their homes and any loans secured on them? Is the Kentish infrastructure up to date and fit for purpose? If so that may explain the HS2 folly....................

Maybe you should go down and take a look. Is there someone who could lend you the money for a ticket and put you on the train?

 

[smudgedj]

Honest serious question - I keep hearing the phrase sovereignty and that we have surrendered it or risk surrendering it - how would you as someone who appears to be in the out camp define it and what do win stand to recover by leaving?

Perhaps you could, as an inner, explain why you are against democratic self-government?

 

[worsleyweb]

Voting out I think.

 

[bluethrunthru]

Perhaps you could, as an inner, explain why you are against democratic self-government?

It was a serious question - but as an inner I recall voting quite a few times over the last 35 years in democratic elections where the winners made decisions as a government - it was democratic because when I didn't vote for them I still went along with it was they were the winners. I am all pro democratic self government I just really don't buy or stress out over the idea that everything is run from Brussels - in my view it clearly isn't.

This is the kind of debate we should be having in the country rather than just resorting to sound bite cheap shots and scare mongering from both sides in my opinion.

 

[bluethrunthru]

Maybe you should go down and take a look. Is there someone who could lend you the money for a ticket and put you on the train?

Your sarcasm does little to recommend your views to me. I was hoping for some informed insight for me to better understand the issue however that was wasted eh?

If I want to go to Kent by the way I have a car - a new one - and the money to pay my way there and back thanks should I wish to see for myself. I may actually go and hopefully enter into some honest and learned debate with a local.

 

[CityStu]

It was a serious question - but as an inner I recall voting quite a few times over the last 35 years in democratic elections where the winners made decisions as a government - it was democratic because when I didn't vote for them I still went along with it was they were the winners. I am all pro democratic self government I just really don't buy or stress out over the idea that everything is run from Brussels - in my view it clearly isn't.

This is the kind of debate we should be having in the country rather than just resorting to sound bite cheap shots and scare mongering from both sides in my opinion.

Even if the situation currently isn't one of EU overlords, that situation is possible. They've already overruled the results of referenda in Ireland and Greece and are likely to do so with the Netherlands. They are unaccountable too.

They aren't currently using that power, but imagine it if someone came in and did exercise its power over democratically elected governments. We've signed away too much IMO and I'd like that power back. Merkel's already tested the water to a certain extent - inviting millions of otherwise illegal immigrants into Europe and then trying to enforce EU member states taking a quota of their number. What right did she have to do such a thing, regardless of whether you agree with her or not?

 

[bluethrunthru]

Even if the situation currently isn't one of EU overlords, that situation is possible. They've already overruled the results of referenda in Ireland and Greece and are likely to do so with the Netherlands. They are unaccountable too.

They aren't currently using that power, but imagine it if someone came in and did exercise its power over democratically elected governments. We've signed away too much IMO and I'd like that power back. Merkel's already tested the water to a certain extent - inviting millions of otherwise illegal immigrants into Europe and then trying to enforce EU member states taking a quota of their number. What right did she have to do such a thing, regardless of whether you agree with her or not?

But shouldn't the debate and the vote be about what IS and not what may or may not come to pass? I'd say Mekel - mistakenly - did what she did to Germany not to Europe it was only when it started to get out of hand and become a political hot potato she bottled it and tried to pass immigrants off across Europe. If anything Cameron put his foot down and got an agreement we will take a tiny number of these people and only those we "hand pick" from refugee camps? Thats not unaccountable rule from Brussels that the govt acting in UK interests as some would see it within the EU and "standing up for Britain" ?

 

[smudgedj]

It was a serious question - but as an inner I recall voting quite a few times over the last 35 years in democratic elections where the winners made decisions as a government - it was democratic because when I didn't vote for them I still went along with it was they were the winners. I am all pro democratic self government I just really don't buy or stress out over the idea that everything is run from Brussels - in my view it clearly isn't.

This is the kind of debate we should be having in the country rather than just resorting to sound bite cheap shots and scare mongering from both sides in my opinion.

So you're happy to have no accountability towards the people who impact your lives.

 

[sir baconface]

Your sarcasm does little to recommend your views to me. I was hoping for some informed insight for me to better understand the issue however that was wasted eh?

If I want to go to Kent by the way I have a car - a new one - and the money to pay my way there and back thanks should I wish to see for myself. I may actually go and hopefully enter into some honest and learned debate with a local.

Well bully for you and bon voyage. Bear south east from Altrincham for 220 miles and you'll be there.

They do speak English, I understand, but care is advised when conversing with the locals. If you talk like you have done on here, they might just think you're a bit of a "Kent" yourself.

 

[purplenose]

Your sarcasm does little to recommend your views to me. I was hoping for some informed insight for me to better understand the issue however that was wasted eh?

If I want to go to Kent by the way I have a car - a new one - and the money to pay my way there and back thanks should I wish to see for myself. I may actually go and hopefully enter into some honest and learned debate with a local.

Ah yes "i,m all right jack" of course.....in good health I trust? Private healthcare......fair enough. An out vote may put that at risk? Now arms exports thats an interesting debate indeed......plenty of Tories living of those.

Kent, as you clearly have the money then i would recommend a visit, lovely at this time of year.

 

[CityStu]

But shouldn't the debate and the vote be about what IS and not what may or may not come to pass? I'd say Mekel - mistakenly - did what she did to Germany not to Europe it was only when it started to get out of hand and become a political hot potato she bottled it and tried to pass immigrants off across Europe. If anything Cameron put his foot down and got an agreement we will take a tiny number of these people and only those we "hand pick" from refugee camps? Thats not unaccountable rule from Brussels that the govt acting in UK interests as some would see it within the EU and "standing up for Britain" ?

I completely disagree. If the In campaign are allowed to postulate about all of the possible negatives of leaving, surely the Out campaign are allowed to postulate as to the potential negatives of staying? I've said all along that this is a once in a generation vote and thus we need to vote not on our current relationship with the EU, but on the trajectory our current relationship with the EU is on. I don't have the stats to hand, but have read that we are the nation that disagrees with the EU decision most often - do we really have that much in common with other EU states?

On that trajectory, I don't think it's at all unreasonable to suggest that Turkey will be joining the EU in the near future which will open up a land border between the EU and the likes of Syria and Iraq. Our economy is also outperforming most in the EU, so we can expect to pay more into the coffers in the future given that the amount each member pays in is dependent on how well its economy is doing. TTIP will also come into play. Within 5 years the huge number of migrants from the Middle East and North Africa and even into Pakistan will be granted citizenship in the EU states that they have 'sought refuge' in, allowing them freedom of movement across any EU state and rendering Cameron's agreement to hand pick a few from refugee camps as useless. With that will come yet more strain on our already extremely stretched resources in housing, schools, hospitals and land.

England has a population density of 419 people per square kilometre. In Germany that is 228, Poland 130, France 105 and Spain 94. To be as crowded as we are, Germany would need another 69m people, Poland 86m, France 197m and Spain 161m! Do people really not care that we live on top of one another (check out any new build housing estate) or that our greenbelt (which IMO is pretty unique and defines our country) is being eaten away to provide accommodation for people we do not necessarily need to be in this country?

A more speculative person may suggest that the EU would like to stretch its tendrils further east into the likes of Syria under the pretence of saving it from war and yet absorbing it under Western control that frankly doesn't suit the country. He might suggest that the EU would take an In vote as a sign that the UK are ready for ever closer union and will push again for us to take the Euro just as those bastions of predictive genius the IMF urged us to do. They may even take that further and create the superstate they are striving for with member countries losing all sovereignty. These aren't things that I think will happen immediately, but they definitely have to be considered as possibilities to happen before we'd be allowed another vote on EU membership.

 

[bluethrunthru]

So you're happy to have no accountability towards the people who impact your lives.

I vote for the people who represent me on the council, my MP, my MEP - they mostly and directly affect my life.

 

[bluethrunthru]

Well bully for you and bon voyage. Bear south east from Altrincham for 220 miles and you'll be there.

They do speak English, I understand, but care is advised when conversing with the locals. If you talk like you have done on here, they might just think you're a bit of a "Kent" yourself.

Your incivility does you credit - your namesake would be envious.

 

[bluethrunthru]

Ah yes "i,m all right jack" of course.....in good health I trust? Private healthcare......fair enough. An out vote may put that at risk? Now arms exports thats an interesting debate indeed......plenty of Tories living of those.

Kent, as you clearly have the money then i would recommend a visit, lovely at this time of year.

Private healthcare? Who mentioned that? BTW I don't have private healthcare provision. You don't need that much money to have a new car you know - many are available more cheaply than a used one. Dacia's start at under £6k so my "boast" doesn't mark me out as anything special. I am sure Kent is nice most times of year thanks.

 

[bluethrunthru]

I completely disagree. If the In campaign are allowed to postulate about all of the possible negatives of leaving, surely the Out campaign are allowed to postulate as to the potential negatives of staying? I've said all along that this is a once in a generation vote and thus we need to vote not on our current relationship with the EU, but on the trajectory our current relationship with the EU is on. I don't have the stats to hand, but have read that we are the nation that disagrees with the EU decision most often - do we really have that much in common with other EU states?

On that trajectory, I don't think it's at all unreasonable to suggest that Turkey will be joining the EU in the near future which will open up a land border between the EU and the likes of Syria and Iraq. Our economy is also outperforming most in the EU, so we can expect to pay more into the coffers in the future given that the amount each member pays in is dependent on how well its economy is doing. TTIP will also come into play. Within 5 years the huge number of migrants from the Middle East and North Africa and even into Pakistan will be granted citizenship in the EU states that they have 'sought refuge' in, allowing them freedom of movement across any EU state and rendering Cameron's agreement to hand pick a few from refugee camps as useless. With that will come yet more strain on our already extremely stretched resources in housing, schools, hospitals and land.

England has a population density of 419 people per square kilometre. In Germany that is 228, Poland 130, France 105 and Spain 94. To be as crowded as we are, Germany would need another 69m people, Poland 86m, France 197m and Spain 161m! Do people really not care that we live on top of one another (check out any new build housing estate) or that our greenbelt (which IMO is pretty unique and defines our country) is being eaten away to provide accommodation for people we do not necessarily need to be in this country?

A more speculative person may suggest that the EU would like to stretch its tendrils further east into the likes of Syria under the pretence of saving it from war and yet absorbing it under Western control that frankly doesn't suit the country. He might suggest that the EU would take an In vote as a sign that the UK are ready for ever closer union and will push again for us to take the Euro just as those bastions of predictive genius the IMF urged us to do. They may even take that further and create the superstate they are striving for with member countries losing all sovereignty. These aren't things that I think will happen immediately, but they definitely have to be considered as possibilities to happen before we'd be allowed another vote on EU membership.

Personally I think you are worrying way too much about a lot of stuff that may or may not come to pass but hey thats what debate is all about fella - we are all going to vote based on what we think after all. TTIP is interesting - if the EU and the US agree that then its a done deal - there will be no trade deals for us with either of them unless we sign up too. The US allowing us to stay outside TTIP and get all the trade benefits unchallenged are as slim as the EU allowing us to come out of the EU then trade back in on the same unfettered basis.

Your point about housing is probably right - where I live there are 5 new housing estates going up right now - 1200 houses in a small market town where 500 houses are already up for sale. Of course private sellers can't offer part ex. the fact that we have more houses than people here is more of an issue at the moment TBH

 

[sir baconface]

Your incivility does you credit - your namesake would be envious.

 

[YPhrunts]

I completely disagree. If the In campaign are allowed to postulate about all of the possible negatives of leaving, surely the Out campaign are allowed to postulate as to the potential negatives of staying? I've said all along that this is a once in a generation vote and thus we need to vote not on our current relationship with the EU, but on the trajectory our current relationship with the EU is on. I don't have the stats to hand, but have read that we are the nation that disagrees with the EU decision most often - do we really have that much in common with other EU states?

On that trajectory, I don't think it's at all unreasonable to suggest that Turkey will be joining the EU in the near future which will open up a land border between the EU and the likes of Syria and Iraq. Our economy is also outperforming most in the EU, so we can expect to pay more into the coffers in the future given that the amount each member pays in is dependent on how well its economy is doing. TTIP will also come into play. Within 5 years the huge number of migrants from the Middle East and North Africa and even into Pakistan will be granted citizenship in the EU states that they have 'sought refuge' in, allowing them freedom of movement across any EU state and rendering Cameron's agreement to hand pick a few from refugee camps as useless. With that will come yet more strain on our already extremely stretched resources in housing, schools, hospitals and land.

England has a population density of 419 people per square kilometre. In Germany that is 228, Poland 130, France 105 and Spain 94. To be as crowded as we are, Germany would need another 69m people, Poland 86m, France 197m and Spain 161m! Do people really not care that we live on top of one another (check out any new build housing estate) or that our greenbelt (which IMO is pretty unique and defines our country) is being eaten away to provide accommodation for people we do not necessarily need to be in this country?

A more speculative person may suggest that the EU would like to stretch its tendrils further east into the likes of Syria under the pretence of saving it from war and yet absorbing it under Western control that frankly doesn't suit the country. He might suggest that the EU would take an In vote as a sign that the UK are ready for ever closer union and will push again for us to take the Euro just as those bastions of predictive genius the IMF urged us to do. They may even take that further and create the superstate they are striving for with member countries losing all sovereignty. These aren't things that I think will happen immediately, but they definitely have to be considered as possibilities to happen before we'd be allowed another vote on EU membership.

Good post that Stu. I have yet to hear the Brexit campaign mention land mass and population density and compare each of the other 27 other countries to us. Perhaps that will come out soon and it needs to be made pretty forcibly. However I don't think we will get another chance to vote on the EU. It's now or never. And the reason is that it's the older members of our society that remember how we were conned into joining the common market in the first place and how it has morphed into political idealism and control.
When us old un's have died the young won't know any different. They will have suckled from Europe's teat all their lives and leaving for them will be like going to Mars. So it's now or never if you want to correct a huge experimental mistake and to make a stand for future generations. The only other way out (if we vote to stay) is for Europe to collapse under it's own volition. Not impossible the way it's going. I'd put my money on Hungary to start the ball rolling if we haven't got the balls to do it.

 

[Chippy_boy]

I think there are some reasons for staying in but I think yours are piss poor and that you've been taken in by a government intent on scaring its people to vote the way it would like it to. There may be some economic concerns but the assertion that each household will lose thousands is bollocks built on unsustainable assumptions.

I doubt EU fines go to the government, but rather the establishment that is flaunting their regulations. I'd imagine that a bill for a couple of grand would harm your small pub in Halesowen quite considerably. To encourage that behaviour yet be fearful of the effect that a possibly temporary unstable economy would have on yourself is, as I said, confusingly hypocritical.

You clearly have no understanding of how laws are applied nor enforced. It is up to the police force in this country to prosecute or turn a blind eye as they see fit, so turning a blind eye to ridiculous rules would be well within our grasp, as it is in France and Spain and Italy where they simply do not adhere to every nuance of EU law to the same extent that we do. And should the EU decide that we are not properly enforcing laws as we should be, it is the UK as a whole that would be fined, not a pub in Halesowen. So if we were to be fined by the EU for not upholding certain laws, the impact on individuals would be pence.

Now, having got that trivia out of the way, what are my "piss poor" reasons for staying in, pray? Seems to be very logical indeed that our not being able to freely export to the EU is very far from a piss poor reason. Do you think that Nissan and Honda and Toyota and Sony and Panasonic and everyone else are here in the UK because they like the fish and chips? And having been so wowed by the mushy peas that they will stay here, even when we aren't in the UK? Anyone thinkin this is simply in denial.

As I say, you seem full of antagonism presumably based on your outy inclinations and inability to take on board the views of others who don't agree with you.

 

[CityStu]

You clearly have no understanding of how laws are applied nor enforced. It is up to the police force in this country to prosecute or turn a blind eye as they see fit, so turning a blind eye to ridiculous rules would be well within our grasp, as it is in France and Spain and Italy where they simply do not adhere to every nuance of EU law to the same extent that we do. And should the EU decide that we are not properly enforcing laws as we should be, it is the UK as a whole that would be fined, not a pub in Halesowen. So if we were to be fined by the EU for not upholding certain laws, the impact on individuals would be pence.

Now, having got that trivia out of the way, what are my "piss poor" reasons for staying in, pray? Seems to be very logical indeed that our not being able to freely export to the EU is very far from a piss poor reason. Do you think that Nissan and Honda and Toyota and Sony and Panasonic and everyone else are here in the UK because they like the fish and chips? And having been so wowed by the mushy peas that they will stay here, even when we aren't in the UK? Anyone thinkin this is simply in denial.

As I say, you seem full of antagonism presumably based on your outy inclinations and inability to take on board the views of others who don't agree with you.

It's nigh on impossible to suggest that a police force stop enforcing a law or two though. If it's the status quo then it's much easier to ignore them (as France do) but how exactly do you think we'd go about getting a change in that area. It'd require people/places to break the law and hope the police turn a blind eye, putting them at risk of fines.

I think all of your reasons are economical and I think the economic outlook the government are forecasting is wildly unrealistic. Yes, it might change things a little bit but it's not all going to collapse. The vast majority of business is done in the UK market which shouldn't be altered at all by an exit.

On those companies, why did Ford move a plant from the UK (in the EU) to Turkey (not)? Why are they here and not somewhere much cheaper to set up in Eastern Europe? We aren't a diminutive little country - we have one of the highest economies in the world, many international trade partners and a good rep on standard of work.

I understand several of the arguments for the EU but repeating government bluster ad nauseam gets my goat.