EU Referendum

[AlistairM]

Serious question: if you're in favour of leave, do you think the huge number of experts from a wide range of disciplines who have come forward with arguments for remaining are somehow all conspiring together to pull the wool over people's eyes?

If not, how do you reconcile the fact that most evidence being put forward supports remain being the better option, and your own leave view?

In other words, is your position formed logically or instinctively?

I don't know whether this question was aimed at myself but I'll give you my answer anyway.

The huge number of experts have varying views. You can find or point out experts that say one thing and point to another that will basically say the opposite. I tend not to take everything as fact from either side, but what people say on the remain side is all about what "could" happen, and everything is assumed from a negative point of view.

If David Cameron was happy that the UK could "go it alone" if he didn't get what he wanted, which he clearly didn't, now why all the sudden doom and gloom and disaster scenarios? Do people actually believe anything David Cameron or George Osborne say?

But my view is more instinctive to be honest.

 

[gimpydog]

I'm out.

You lot make your own minds up - dictatorship, or democracy??

The legal mechanism in place for countries to theoretically leave the EU takes 2 years from when it's triggered (by the vote) until it's effective and the treaty is broken for that country......

My understanding is that the exit is triggered by us explicitly telling the EU to f*ck off, rather than by the process of balloting, but if you have a hyperlink which gives definitive support to your statement, I'd be grateful.

 

[RobM]

Foreign nationals are 13% of the population and 13% of the prison population.
The perception of both immigration and crime is often completely at odds with the reality.

Where did you get these figures from? The Prison Reform Trust has a different breakdown. Not that it matters because as we all know 73% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

 

[Mark84]

One thing I have witnessed but never gets picked up by the media is that those people who are pro EU keep mentioning that it protects workers rights, it protects all sorts of things.

Then you should ask yourself, who do they think the EU protects these rights from?

Now I as a person can't change those rights, Asda can't change those rights, Google can't change those rights - so again, just who are those rights being protected from?

The only logical conclusion is that they are protected from a democratically elected UK Government because they are the only ones.

So when a politician comes on tv and says that the EU protects certain things, well you work it out. We are not in a democracy, people can fool themselves all they want.

 

[MikeJDS]

Serious question: if you're in favour of leave, do you think the huge number of experts from a wide range of disciplines who have come forward with arguments for remaining are somehow all conspiring together to pull the wool over people's eyes?

If not, how do you reconcile the fact that most evidence being put forward supports remain being the better option, and your own leave view?

In other words, is your position formed logically or instinctively?

I try to look at history for facts.
Everything else to me is either just a viewpoint or speculation.
History tells me the EU simply should not exist in it's current form.
Also that the UK has been effectively subsidising Europe for the last few decades.
Living standards here have generally dropped - Whilst rising in other parts of the EU at our expense.
After all that was the whole idea of the EU - a leveller.

There is no doubt that a lot of people have a big personal financial interest for the UK to Remain in the EU.
And the higher up you are the more chance you have to get the privilege of having a voice & pushing you agenda.
Also, alot of those people aren't even in the UK.

Are they pulling together?
Yes, they are on the Remain side.
Is it a conspiracy?
Depends how you would define that I suppose, but you can't blame people for trying to protect their own interests.
I also appreciate that some here will have a personal interest to remain in the EU.
That's fine - I wish you all the best.

If you're here in the UK..
Generally the higher up you are - the more the EU benefits you.
quick examples:
1. Higher property prices.
2. Cheap labour.

The lower down you are, the reverse is true...
1. Higher rents.
2. Lower wages.

But for me it's not really about the economics anyway, it's about making sure my kids have a choice, just like my grandparents did for me.

Democracy is what is a stake here and you can't put a price on that.

 

[newguy]

I'm out.

You lot make your own minds up - dictatorship, or democracy??

Possibly more illusion of democracy. Plenty of laws, wars and everything in between happen in our name that are far removed from the will of the people. IN or OUT things are largely out of our control.

We could argue that within the EU we wield more power as a block and feel less push from countries outside of that, and corporations too. You could also say that it can insulate us of the behaviour of our own government.

Of course on the flip side, we could make a case that for good or bad, it's best for the people to be closer to the decisions makers, assuming that we are able to get them to listen. Clearly within the EU, depending on the direction it heads, we could as a country drift further in a direction that is against our individuals as a country.

 

[bonusmedia]

I suppose if your inclined to take the comment that way then thats your prerogative.

what i mean is the country is awash with illegal immigrants either being smuggled in by people traffickers or just simply abusing the borders that are there......................i for one have no issue with any race, religion or colour as long as immigration done correctly.

I appreciate you're not racist, sorry.

I don't think people should be called filth because they're sneaking in on the back of a lorry and working for ten quid a day at a car wash.

I'm also against illegal immigration - but it's already illegal, so how does leaving the EU change it?

 

[Edwin]

I know we're talking about a very small sample size, but it's nevertheless interesting to see that "Leave" outnumbers "Remain" on the Acorn survey by nearly 4-to-1 even though surveys in the wider world consistently show the two camps either neck and neck, or with "Remain" slightly ahead!

It makes me wonder if there's something about domaining that attracts people of a temperament particularly suited to the "Leave" argument...

 

[bonusmedia]

One thing I have witnessed but never gets picked up by the media is that those people who are pro EU keep mentioning that it protects workers rights, it protects all sorts of things.

Then you should ask yourself, who do they think the EU protects these rights from?

Now I as a person can't change those rights, Asda can't change those rights, Google can't change those rights - so again, just who are those rights being protected from?

The only logical conclusion is that they are protected from a democratically elected UK Government because they are the only ones.

So when a politician comes on tv and says that the EU protects certain things, well you work it out. We are not in a democracy, people can fool themselves all they want.

If you have certain rights across the whole of Europe, it stops any one country undercutting all the others. Without that kind of regulation it's a race to the bottom.

 

[Adam H]

I know we're talking about a very small sample size, but it's nevertheless interesting to see that "Leave" outnumbers "Remain" on the Acorn survey by nearly 4-to-1 even though surveys in the wider world consistently show the two camps either neck and neck, or with "Remain" slightly ahead!

It makes me wonder if there's something about domaining that attracts people of a temperament particularly suited to the "Leave" argument...

Ive seen similar polls on various forums, different niches, different userbase and the numbers ratio are very similar across them all, often 50% more if not greater for the leavers over the remains. Obviously forum users are a minority but across different types of people and different interests you'd think it would resemble a closer match to whats officially being claimed.

 

[spiderspider]

I know we're talking about a very small sample size, but it's nevertheless interesting to see that "Leave" outnumbers "Remain" on the Acorn survey by nearly 4-to-1 even though surveys in the wider world consistently show the two camps either neck and neck, or with "Remain" slightly ahead!

It makes me wonder if there's something about domaining that attracts people of a temperament particularly suited to the "Leave" argument...

And what did the polls say in the last general election.......

and what was the outcome.

I think that was one of the first times, where it was shown quite clearly to Milliband, that polls may tell you something, but at the end of the day, its what people vote that wins elections, not polls.

 

[MikeJDS]

If you have certain rights across the whole of Europe, it stops any one country undercutting all the others. Without that kind of regulation it's a race to the bottom.

How does that work within a global market then?
When the likes of China don't have to abide by EU rules.
Look at UK steel.

 

[bonusmedia]

How does that work within a global market then?
When the likes of China don't have to abide by EU rules.
Look at UK steel.

It doesn't work globally - it works within Europe. A lot of our current rights came from Europe - like the right not to be required to work more than 48 hrs per week (although we have an opt out).

If you would rather we undercut Chinese steel prices then you'd need workers to pay steel companies for jobs.
The EU is a fairly powerful trading bloc which has a lot more influence on global trade than individual countries.

 

[MikeJDS]

It doesn't work globally - it works within Europe. A lot of our current rights came from Europe - like the right not to be required to work more than 48 hrs per week (although we have an opt out).

If you would rather we undercut Chinese steel prices then you'd need workers to pay steel companies for jobs.
The EU is a fairly powerful trading bloc which has a lot more influence on global trade than individual countries.

Okay, yes Steel probably not the best example.
But, would it be fair to say China has the freedom to cut prices on anything - Yet we don't have the ability to take any action without permission of the EU.
No wonder they are doing so well.

 

[Edwin]

Okay, yes Steel probably not the best example.
But, would it be fair to say China has the freedom to cut prices on anything - Yet we don't have the ability to take any action without permission of the EU.
No wonder they are doing so well.

They're doing well because wages are a tiny fraction of the UK, companies cut corners and pollute like crazy, and the Party has total command of the economy. Plus there's pretty much no social security (which is a massive drag on government finances, like a sea anchor)

Is that really what the UK should be aspiring to?

 

[MikeJDS]

They're doing well because wages are a tiny fraction of the UK, companies cut corners and pollute like crazy, and the Party has total command of the economy. Plus there's pretty much no social security (which is a massive drag on government finances, like a sea anchor)

Is that really what the UK should be aspiring to?

Don't understand your point.
What has that got to do with the EU?

 

[websaway]

Actually, ALL the main parties (Conservatives, Labour and Lib Dems) are fighting to stay in Europe. However, all 3 parties have given "free rein" for individual MPs to campaign for brexit. So tories that want to leave are attacking tories that want to stay, labour MPs that want to leave are taking advantage of the situation to take pot-shots at tories, etc. BTW, the Greens are campaigning to stay in too. You can see the full list of groups on both sides of the debate here (note the overwhelmingly larger number of pro-remain groups over pro-brexit groups!)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campa...om_European_Union_membership_referendum,_2016

Basically, it is in brexit's interest to stir things up and make the situation sound as disharmonious as possible, because fights get much much more media coverage than people agreeing with each other! (It's a bit like the US elections, where Trump makes some new nonsensical statement on a daily basis which wins him another round of headlines)

Also, as an independent study today showed, the media are biased towards brexit because of the bias of their owners, so it may sound as if the two "sides" of the argument are equally strong or even that brexit has a better "case". Also, since the BBC and other institutions are required to provide "balanced" coverage, they're forced to ALWAYS put a Brexiter up against a Remainer no matter what the story.

The other issue is that many people who "hate the tories" are presenting the referendum as an opportunity to stick the boot into them by voting "against" the government - that's like somebody who doesn't like biscuits protesting by going on hunger strike.

-------------------------

As for the decision itself, well there are dozens of benefits of remaining, and virtually no benefits of leaving (though you wouldn't guess it from the media coverage).
When you dig into it, you find that the arguments always go along the same lines (one of two patterns):

PATTERN 1:
"Remain" camp brings forward a survey, report, white paper or expert in a particular field to provide fact-based data as to why leaving would be worse than staying. Brexit camp rebuffs immediately, by attacking one of:
A) The motive of the person/group behind the report (never mind that in most cases it's their JOB to provide that kind of analysis; in other words, it would be the worst possible advert for their competence if they made up porkies)
B) The "factual" nature of the report: brexit claim that "facts" are "opinions" and present a "counter opinion". Much like the people who claim that global warming doesn't exist claim that their "opinion" is as valid as the thousands of scientists who present reams of data to support the fact that it does
C) The validity of the data point itself as a consideration for remain/brexit decision-making

PATTERN 2:
"Brexit" camp make something up, quite often literally out of thin air, that doesn't stand up to fact checking. This is pointed out, often with very deep, comprehensive analysis, yet they continue to lean on the made up "fact" or "statistic" going forward.
For example, the supposed figure of £350 million a week being diverted to Brussels. That figure doesn't actually take into account:
- The value of the rebate (lots of cash is returned to the UK each week thanks to its membership of the EU)
- The value of what the UK gets for its £350 million (brexit attribute a £0 value to this when discussing the £350 million figure)
- The value of the UK being in the EU (brexit also attribute a £0 value to this when discussing the £350 million figure)
The brexit side have been called on this time and time again, dozens if not hundreds of times so far, yet they continue to repeat the figure. Why? Because in an age of near-zero attention spans, people aren't studying the issue sufficiently to be able to debunk such spurious claims.
Another example: Boris Johnson mentioned just the other day that the EU banned bananas being sold in bunches of more than 3. It takes 30s in a supermarket to debunk that notion.

What does the UK get out of being in Europe?
- Visa free travel across Europe
- Relatively strong currency
- More stable, harmonious relations with its neighbours and participation in collective defense arrangements
- Cheaper mobile roaming fees (soon to be abolished entirely across the EU)
- Better worker protection
- Stronger human rights (even if the UK's trying to wriggle out of this particular directive, that's a separate exercise from remain/brexit)
- Right to live and work in any other EU country
- Right to study in any other EU country (more and more important as the price of being a "home" student shoots up; many EU countries still have subsidised or free university education, and the number of UK citizens studying in other EU countries is shooting up as a result)
- Some say over the future political/economic/legal future of Europe (if the UK leaves it will still be subject to a mass of red tape, like Norway is, only without any say over it)
- Membership of a massive trading block, benefitting from trade agreements negotiated on a pan-European basis
- Free medical care in other EU countries with the European Health Insurance Card
- Over 100,000 trained medical staff from other EU nations boosting the ranks of the NHS (it would be a nightmare visa scenario if the UK left the EU)
- (That's just off the top of my head - I'm sure there could be another hundred bullets here)

Basically, if you never ever plan to leave the UK for the rest of your life (even to go on holiday) AND you don't have savings that could be eroded by another economic crash, AND nobody in your family or your extended family might benefit from any of the above points, AND you're old (because a recession is going to hurt growth which will affect pension and job prospects) then MAYBE just maybe brexit could be tempting.

In every other circumstance - and regardless of how much you might personally hate/loathe Cameron and the tories - the only LOGICAL decision is to vote remain.

In short, the EU referendum vote should be a reasoned choice, not a protest vote against the government of the day. The latter won't be around very long (in the grand scheme of things) but a vote to leave will hurt the UK for many generations to come.

No benefits in Brexit you say. So simply surrender our sovereignty, our right to self determination, our democracy defended over the last hundred years with the loss of millions of young lives.

 

[websaway]

My main area of interest is what it will do to inward investment in to the UK should a leave vote win the day. Would you consider investing £xmillion in to a country undergoing such a fundamental change to how they're ran?

I do also wonder what affect such infighting will have when the dust settles. Are parties going to be torn apart? How will we take things forward if we're poles apart between what each party wants amongst themselves?

We would become a safe haven in an unstable world for inward investment. We can tighten our borders increase our security and send out a message we are fortress UK don't mess with us. Or we can follow Edwin and rely on an EU army and germany telling us what to do, we get more say in the Eurovision song contest, wake up everyone. There were people who did not want to fight Germany in 1939, who were they, people who had a vested interest in Germany controlling Europe. The Eu is no better than what FIFA was.

 

[websaway]

seems a bit harsh Edwin's seems to have posted a lot of supporting evidence to support his arguments while the leavers have posted a facebook video I haven't made up my mind yet which way I'll vote but I'll want some more facts other than a video on facebook told me to leave

"Let every nation know,
whether it wishes us well or
ill, that we shall pay any
price, bear any burden, meet
any hardship, support any
friend, oppose any foe to
assure the survival and the
success of liberty."
John F Kennedy

 

[Mark84]

If you have certain rights across the whole of Europe, it stops any one country undercutting all the others. Without that kind of regulation it's a race to the bottom.

Basically I think you are saying we should suspend democracy because it encourages a race to the bottom?