BREXIT - leave or remain?

[Noradin]

Neither. I did my homework and read a lot of books about economy and about european union,

Yes, I see that from your post, I also see that you always stopped digging when you found something to feed your narrative, and never thought to check that there was no underlying reason for what you found that would rebut said narrative.

Let me give you just one example:

The beurocracy is also runining contry's business they keep on making stupid ideas (like how much bend the cucumber should be - and I'm dead serious) that are making each farmer grow pale.

So you found this one. Did you check how it came to be? No. You just assumed the EU must have come up with it.
Now just a bit more research (like reading the regulation in question) shows that this is just a case of standardisation of quality classifications. Everyone has those.
Every business, every farmer, every country, every customer. All this does is writing down the defintions of those classifications--which also is a thing countries have done for centuries--so that everyone might look them up all over the EU.
You might just as well accuse Oxford Dictionary of suppressing writers because they write down the definitions for English words. It is basically the same thing.

It seems all the "research" you did on this point was listening to someone tell a joke in a bar.
Doesn't give one much confidence in the research you did into the other points.

[DarkAmbient]

Already voted Leave, and let's be honest - anyone who's already made up their mind isn't going to have it changed by any arguments presented here. It's fun watching the ruck though

[Noradin]

Big country with lots of people.. Break down the sentence, please..

Obviously put together like this "big country" refers to having "lots of people", it is litterally spelled out for you right there in the sentence you quoted and you missed it?

- - - Updated - - -

Running out of arguments? More like the EU is running out of time. Worked out yet which countries are going to make up the £3500000 a week shortfall when the UK leaves? Gonna be hard with Turkey joining the EU as well. How the hell will you afford it? Tough times ahead for Europe.

6 days to save the UK, 6 days to Vote Leave

You seemt o get desperate if you have to rely on retelling lies already debunked in this thread.
No, Turkey is not joining the EU. You know that.

- - - Updated - - -

The leaks from TTIP are already saying a lot. Why they're doing it I don't kniw, I guess some politicians have in interest to screw everyone over money that for example Monsanto could provide. And This is also the reason why I'm against the EU, I am not for "screwing one country so another could gain". Countries should decide on their own how their market and politics should look like.

We have discussed this topic already and at length. Your point is moot and due to ignorance about how these negotiations work. Go look the thread up in this forum.

[Stacie]

Already sent my postal vote.. Voted out

[Mhyroth]

Running out of arguments? More like the EU is running out of time. Worked out yet which countries are going to make up the £3500000 a week shortfall when the UK leaves? Gonna be hard with Turkey joining the EU as well. How the hell will you afford it? Tough times ahead for Europe.

6 days to save the UK, 6 days to Vote Leave

And that arguement of: UK has to pay X amount a week to the EU is also beaten to death already. You get back 90% of it through various way, it being with trades, energy, support etc. UK has different rules even though they're part of the EU which you should be happy for, but all you people see is: they took X amount of money which I personally don't see coming back, so it must be bad ?

Edit: From the outside (journalists mainly) report that there have always been "problems" in the UK and it's been dividing the country, but just now with the referrendum those problems are way more visible and brought into attention. My girlfriend (from the UK) says this is partly true, especially since there are some very big social related problems in the UK society. I don't know what the rest of the UK thinks about that point of view ? Been visiting the UK a lot because of her and following the news since one day I want to move there, but it's hard to form an opinion on things which seem to have been luring under the surface for so long.

[Ulmita]

Please don't leave EU.

Eu needs work, a lot of work indeed. But if you leave, you will be most probably destroying EU as a whole.

[Ramz]

Yes, I see that from your post, I also see that you always stopped digging when you found something to feed your narrative, and never thought to check that there was no underlying reason for what you found that would rebut said narrative.

Let me give you just one example:

So you found this one. Did you check how it came to be? No. You just assumed the EU must have come up with it.
Now just a bit more research (like reading the regulation in question) shows that this is just a case of standardisation of quality classifications. Everyone has those.
Every business, every farmer, every country, every customer. All this does is writing down the defintions of those classifications--which also is a thing countries have done for centuries--so that everyone might look them up all over the EU.
You might just as well accuse Oxford Dictionary of suppressing writers because they write down the definitions for English words. It is basically the same thing.

It seems all the "research" you did on this point was listening to someone tell a joke in a bar.
Doesn't give one much confidence in the research you did into the other points.

I could reply to you with :

I also see that you always stopped digging when you found something to feed your narrative,

You picked one tiny adnotation from my entire post to dismiss it's message completely, it was just one thing thrown around. I know exacly about the quality standarts however the point was that it shouldn't be the job for eurocrats, hell there shouldn't be any government body there. The countries should negotiate for themseves the agreements, and leave the free market to dictate how people like the "quality" of products.

The thing I wrote was a quick summary of points why EU is bad for us all. If I'd write entire documentary it would be much longer, and I don't have time for that.
EU in this form has no right to exist, so either they'll go back to their roots when it was economic agreement between countries, or it stays as imitation of a country and will collapse eventually.

We have discussed this topic already and at length. Your point is moot and due to ignorance about how these negotiations work. Go look the thread up in this forum.

Oh so you know how TTIP will look like- have you've seen it? Have you read the agreement? I know one thing, that if this agreement is made in strict secrecy, away from the look of other people then by no means is good for the people it concerns.
But way to go to call it "moot".

What a compelling argument /facepalm

I already wrote extended version, but it's still not enough to show how eu is not working.

But if you want I can change USSR term to "imitation of super country, ruled by socialists that enforce stupid laws on countries that are furthering differences between them and follows utopian ideaologies".

[Deleted]

That £350m figure has been deemed misleading by every statistician, economist, and financial analyst there is. This is what I mean by trying to counter the lies and made up bullshit Leavers keep spouting. Even when it's 100% discredited, they just keep shouting it louder.

Take control. Take it away from your democratically elected MEP - of whom Nigel Farage is one.
Take control. Take it away from your representatives in the halls of the EU put there by your representing government.
Take control. Give it to 800 unelected peers.
Take control. Give it to a political party with absolute control on the House on the back of just 33% of the voting electorate, or perhaps recalibrate that to 25% of those eligible to vote.
Because the EU isn't democratic enough.

Take control. Stay in the common market, contributing to EU budgets, accepting continued freedom of movement, but having no voice or input on decisions.
Take control. Listen to those who would tell you they can use money being spent on EU on the NHS instead, when they have neither the authority to make that decision, nor, according to any financial analyst worth their salt, the money to do so if we did leave and not continue to spend that money anyway to stay in the EEA.
Because the EU has a specified cost in the budget; in spite of the net gain is orders of magnitude higher to the economy.

Take control. Listen to those who tell you immigrants are bad, when they contribute a significant net gain to the economy.
Take control. Listen to those who tell you immigrants are bad when they're balancing the budget that allows us to continue to pay the current pension rates in an aging population.
Take control. Listen to those who tell you EU immigrants are bad because they want to employ cheaper non-EU migrants in unskilled jobs, with less protections.
Because migrants are bad mkay. Even though many of your friends and relatives probably are them.

Take control. Listen to those who tell you they want out of the EU because they want to lower safety standards on the products they produce.
Take control. Listen to those who want to lower overheads by reducing holiday entitlement and other job and safety protections.
Take control. Listen to those bankers who don't want regulations to prevent yet another crash.
Take control. Listen to that guy who wrote a book on dismantling the NHS about how he wants to protect it.
Because vested interests in leaving don't have self interest and profits at heart.

Smashed the ball out the park with this post. Quoting for more visibility.

[Kronik85]

Edit: From the outside (journalists mainly) report that there have always been "problems" in the UK and it's been dividing the country, but just now with the referrendum those problems are way more visible and brought into attention. My girlfriend (from the UK) says this is partly true, especially since there are some very big social related problems in the UK society. I don't know what the rest of the UK thinks about that point of view ? Been visiting the UK a lot because of her and following the news since one day I want to move there, but it's hard to form an opinion on things which seem to have been luring under the surface for so long.

I'd be interested in more specifics as to "big social related problems". Apart from opinions on immigration being more pronounced I'd say our problems are about the same as any other developed country and hell there's groups which try to capitalise on the negatives of immigration and fear of the foreigner across Europe so it certainly isn't a unique issue.

The cost of living is on the high side and gets worse the further south you go. We drink too much, eat too much of the wrong foods need to exercise more and when we do start looking after ourselves there's a good chance you will turn into a filthy Cyclist (shudder). The wealth gaps getting worse and the current government thinks Zero Hours Contracts are a respectable form of employment. The NHS and Schools need more money whilst the Tories want to turn them into institutions run for profit. We aren't overtly racist but prefer to discriminate based on how much money you've got in the bank. Think that's about it....oh and it turns out a lot of people are deeply eurosceptic for whatever reason, might have something to do with receiving virtually no education on how the EU functions as a political entity and the papers constantly writing negative headlines about the EU for 50 years or so.

[Noradin]

You picked one tiny adnotation from my entire post to dismiss it's message completely, it was just one thing thrown around.

I could have picked every other part and focused on that one just as well, but others did those parts already in this thread. No need to repeat them again.
We do not have time to repeat every point everytime someone presents a gish gallop like yours. There is nothing new in your post, you just made a long list of debunked points with the intent to overwhelm any attempt to rationally adress them one by one.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh so you know how TTIP will look like- have you've seen it? Have you read the agreement? I know one thing, that if this agreement is made in strict secrecy, away from the look of other people then by no means is good for the people it concerns.
But way to go to call it "moot".

So have you looked up the other thread where this was disucssed and explained again and again. No you have not.

[Mhyroth]

oh and it turns out a lot of people are deeply eurosceptic for whatever reason, might have something to do with receiving virtually no education on how the EU functions as a political entity and the papers constantly writing negative headlines about the EU for 50 years or so.

That line made my day. Will have a chat with the girl today and see what she is talking about exactly ^^.

[Ramz]

I could have picked every other part and focused on that one just as well, but others did those parts already in this thread. No need to repeat them again.
We do not have time to repeat every point everytime someone presents a gish gallop like yours. There is nothing new in your post, you just made a long list of debunked points with the intent to overwhelm any attempt to rationally adress them one by one.

- - - Updated - - -


So have you looked up the other thread where this was disucssed and explained again and again. No you have not.

True I did not read any of those threads, I am however reading every economic reveal on websites dedicated for both politics and economy, and I also spent quite some time in library gathering materials and numbers. I also watched quite some conferences in european parliment and I read a lot of raports from MPs.

So I suppose it' s more that you simply disagree on the ideology part. Because I haven't recieved from you any specific answer on why you dismiss it all, other than "we talked about it". I don't have entire day to go through over 80 pages, I just wanted to post my support for Brexit. And if some people dislike it, then it's not my concern.

[Deleted]

Im voting leave, because the EU is a sinking ship and I want off! Open external/internal borders means a capitulation to the global cancer of Islamism.

[Knolan]

On the immigration, by numbers:



Talking about money only here. You may believe it will be positive in the long run, but right now it is not, by a long margin.

[dribbles]

Poll: Majority of Swedes want to leave EU in case of Brexit

http://www.euractiv.com/section/uk-e...ase-of-brexit/

......and 6 days to save Sweden and Denmark! Vote Leave. Is there any country remainiac enough who wants to stay in this godforsaken club? Soon the EU will consist only of Germany and Turkey

[Noradin]

So I suppose it' s more that you simply disagree on the ideology part. Because I haven't recieved from you any specific answer on why you dismiss it all, other than "we talked about it". I don't have entire day to go through over 80 pages, I just wanted to post my support for Brexit. And if some people dislike it, then it's not my concern.

It seems I do have to reapeat the whole thing yet again, but I will keep it short, look it up in this forum if you want the long version, it has been explained half a dozend times already.

It has nothing at all to do with idology, it is a matter of how different societies approach negotiations differently.
Most of the outrage about the leaked parts of the TTIP negotiations is due to the societies of both sides not understanding how the other side approaches such a thing.

How the Americans do it:
They meet and discuss in secret, then present the final result to the public for final approval, when all negotiating is done.
They go in with starting positions they know are impossible to keep, their starting positions describe what would be the most over the top outcome favouring them if they could make the other side sign whatever they want. The other side is supposed to do the same, then they argue in secret and ultimately meet in the middle.
They do this in secret as to not lose face completely, because the outcome will be nothing like their starting positions.
This approach has been used for centuries and it works--between two parties.

How the EU apporaches things:
One of the fundamental ideas that shaped the EU is to find agreements between all memberstates. Note that those are more than two.
Taking the traditional approach would simply take too long and lead nowhere so they changed it:

They each start out with positions that would favour them slightly but would--in their opinion--be still acceptable for all other sides. They expect only slight changes to those starting positions and meet in the middle. They do this in the open so noone can accuse them of just giving something away when they were outnumbered on some detail.

Now what will happen when these two meet:
The US side thinks the EU position is weak, while the EU things the US position is arrogant and impossible.
The EU is suspicious because the US negotiatiors want to prevent the EU from making their (US) positions public for being unattainable and pure fiction. The US sees such attempts as betrayal of trust, because they lose face.
The US gets upset because the EU won't meet them in the middle, the EU gets upset because the US goes in with unresonable demands and then expects them to meet in the middle instead of somewhere resonable.

The general public only sees what the media present them: Those negotiators accusing each other, distrusting each other, and acting shifty.
They leak a few (obviously unresonalbe) starting positions of the US, offset them with a few things that have been agreed upon or some EU positions and you get the kind of picture we see of the whole thing right now.

Read a bit into it, sort out the starting positions, and remember that after the negotiations are done each member state and the US need to ratify it before anything becomes binding.

- - - Updated - - -

Im voting leave, because the EU is a sinking ship and I want off! Open external/internal borders means a capitulation to the global cancer of Islamism.

Is there some conection between these two sentences? Or did you just put them next to each other because you heard them from the same place?

[Whiskeyjack WN]

That £350m figure has been deemed misleading by every statistician, economist, and financial analyst there is. This is what I mean by trying to counter the lies and made up bullshit Leavers keep spouting. Even when it's 100% discredited, they just keep shouting it louder.

Actually the £350m figure is accurate, however what may be misleading is the fact that we receive just under half of that back. The EU do in fact receive £350m from the UK, but that when you include what the UK receives back via rebates and project grants it is much less.
A more accurate figure is £35m per day that the UK does not receive back.
(this does not include the money save by companies which benefit from free trade.. however it is suggested even including a fee for trade the country would be better off keeping that £35m per day… whether that filters back to the people and business is another matter)

Take control. Take it away from your democratically elected MEP - of whom Nigel Farage is one.

Yes he is democratically elected, but when someone is basically asking you to make them redundant then there must be something badly wrong with where they work.

Take control. Take it away from your representatives in the halls of the EU put there by your representing government.

These representatives, can lobby and put a case forward, but unless they can get most of the other countries to care then they are as useful as a whisper in a tornado.

Take control. Give it to 800 unelected peers.

I assume you mean the House of Lords? Let’s be honest they do nothing and rarely interfere… paid a fortune in ‘expenses’ to do nothing basically... that will not change.

Take control. Give it to a political party with absolute control on the House on the back of just 33% of the voting electorate, or perhaps recalibrate that to 25% of those eligible to vote.
Because the EU isn't democratic enough.

Indeed the first past the post system is not great, terrible even. BUT the difference is the UK government is only interested in the UK, and we can vote them out if they are bad, and if they are really bad we can force an early election even. We cannot do this with the EU.
This is a thing people from the EU do not understand I think. The argument is not that the EU is not democratic. The argument is that the democracy of the EU does not directly benefit the UK and more often than not can block the UK. If the UK want something, they have to get others on their side, without the EU they could decide that themselves, just like a business would. At the end of the day every country should be out for its own self-interests and profit.
From a UK point of view, why should something that the UK deems in its best interest be block by another country? Or why should the UK be unable to get trade deals outside the EU just because some EU country doesn’t like/comply with it… After all Iceland (300k population) has a trade deal with China… but the EU does not… therefore the UK cannot.
While the EU is democratic, it is not democratic in the interests of the UK and that’s what matters to the UK when all is said and done.
And as I said before, we can force out our own government, we can’t force out the EU.
Imo those saying stay and help change from within are delusional… We couldn’t change anything before, why would we be able to in future, especially after the vote in which remain will tell the EU it can do what it likes with the UK.

Take control. Stay in the common market, contributing to EU budgets, accepting continued freedom of movement, but having no voice or input on decisions.

As the above, the UK’s current voice is a whisper in a tornado and it has little say on decisions. Cameron’s attempt to get a better deal from the EU shows just how little pulling power the UK has inside.
A better option in my opinion would be to set up a commonwealth market. A free trading market like the EU should have been. Shouldn’t be too hard to do in the grand scheme of things, considering the ties the UK has kept with all these countries and the fact that it had free trade with them pre joining the EU.

Take control. Listen to those who would tell you they can use money being spent on EU on the NHS instead, when they have neither the authority to make that decision, nor, according to any financial analyst worth their salt, the money to do so if we did leave and not continue to spend that money anyway to stay in the EEA.
Because the EU has a specified cost in the budget; in spite of the net gain is orders of magnitude higher to the economy.

Again I would point to the many other options than paying to remain part of the EU common market. I believe there would be better options with other markets that would prove more financially beneficial trading with them and paying to trade with the EU than vice versa.
I heard on the radio an independent study showed the job creation potential of free trade with china greatly outweighs the job loss from leaving the EU.. But I can’t find it online so don’t quote me there until I find proof 
And as above where the money gets spent depends on the government of the day, which if it fucks up we can force out. It’s up to the people to press that issue… whether they do or not is another matter.

Take control. Listen to those who tell you immigrants are bad, when they contribute a significant net gain to the economy.
Take control. Listen to those who tell you immigrants are bad when they're balancing the budget that allows us to continue to pay the current pension rates in an aging population.
Take control. Listen to those who tell you EU immigrants are bad because they want to employ cheaper non-EU migrants in unskilled jobs, with less protections.
Because migrants are bad mkay. Even though many of your friends and relatives probably are them.

Immigration is not bad at all, there are some uneducated who love to blame immigrants for everything but there is no talking to those people.
What is bad is uncontrolled immigration and social welfare immigration. I think a points based system which allows those with the needed skills and those who are willing to work in is better than just letting everyone in. Especially those with no intention of ever working. An Australian or Canadian based system would work better I think… But again it’s up to the government to fix that system properly.
As I said before I am Irish, my wife polish and 2 of my employees are from the EU. I am all for proper immigration, just not the mess that is currently in place.

Take control. Listen to those who tell you they want out of the EU because they want to lower safety standards on the products they produce.

To be honest every company worth its salt works to ISO or at least BSI standards. Anyone buying off a company not meeting these standards is more interested in cost than safety and would be held reliable in the long run. I may only have 4 employees but we are ISO accredited and that has nothing to do with the EU. And if the UK leave that will not change. Even the BSI standards alone ensure total safety.

Take control. Listen to those who want to lower overheads by reducing holiday entitlement and other job and safety protections.

Scaremongering. The UK’s worker protections far exceed those set out by the EU (some follow the EU exactly but most exceed). And that will not change after the UK leave. They will not go from exceeding the laws to being worse than them just because we left. That is political suicide if nothing else. (Also not all of us employers are bad guys looking to take away your holiday )

Take control. Listen to those bankers who don't want regulations to prevent yet another crash.
Take control. Listen to that guy who wrote a book on dismantling the NHS about how he wants to protect it.
Because vested interests in leaving don't have self-interest and profits at heart.

I can’t comment much on these last 2 points, but I don’t know of a single banker who has said we should leave to remove regulations. The UK thrives of the financial market, why would it change any laws?

I also thing the NHS is a mess. The service is fantastic but the administration is a joke. It needs to be fixed or torn down and built up properly. Again this is something our own government must fix, but we can control them if we have the will to do it. Maybe it will breed a new type of politician who actually works for the benefit of the people???

I will personally will be voting to leave…
BUT that said what I would really like to see is a UK leave vote cause the EU to either rethink and fix itself. Or for it to tear down and start over.
Short term things may be rough. But how life is in the long term is more important than how it is not or in the short term.

[Noradin]

On the immigration, by numbers:
Talking about money only here. You may believe it will be positive in the long run, but right now it is not, by a long margin.

Very well done, you really have to look as not to miss the points where he misleads the audience.
For examply how he just claims that the immigration numbers are "large" in the sense of the information he gave just before and never substanciates that claim.
He basically deflects the attention away from the single most importat point by presenting lots of unneccessarily detailed pseudo-scinence surrounding it.

He does the same again with his next point where he just implies that immigration takes money out of the system because there is the possibility for "credit" with social security numbers. Notice how he never explains what those possibilites are and what prerequisites must be met? Yes, that again is him trying to sneak the real point of interest by his audience among bouts of irrelevant but important sounding information.

So in short: He presents a lot of information and makes it sound scientific and well researched so he can overwhelm the audience and hide where his argument falls apart.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes he is democratically elected, but when someone is basically asking you to make them redundant then there must be something badly wrong with where they work.

Or he is simply gambling for a better job (in terms of payment)?

- - - Updated - - -

I can’t comment much on these last 2 points, but I don’t know of a single banker who has said we should leave to remove regulations. The UK thrives of the financial market, why would it change any laws?

Because it is about to lose a big part of what is thrieves on--due to laws the UK asked the EU to pass so they could cash in on being inside the EU where New York is not. Guess what? When they leave they won't either anymore.

[Deleted]

Im voting leave, because the EU is a sinking ship and I want off! Open external/internal borders means a capitulation to the global cancer of Islamism.

got any other arguments from the leave campign instead of just immigration?

[Mayhem]

Poll: Majority of Swedes want to leave EU in case of Brexit

http://www.euractiv.com/section/uk-e...ase-of-brexit/

......and 6 days to save Sweden and Denmark! Vote Leave. Is there any country remainiac enough who wants to stay in this godforsaken club? Soon the EU will consist only of Germany and Turkey

So a majority of swedes = 36% of swedes.

hm