PDA

View Full Version : To EU or not EU



Pages : [1] 2

Craig107
24-01-2013, 12:03 PM
Should we be looking to pull out of the European Union, or should we stay with it.
What are the for and against in this matter.

Discuss

Logun
24-01-2013, 12:06 PM
Did you forget something? ;)

Craig107
24-01-2013, 12:08 PM
Did you forget something? ;)


Doh!. Yes I forgot the question...

o2dependant
24-01-2013, 12:17 PM
I think it would be best to keep things as they are at the moment, and work on improving the terms in our favour. Can our government do that? To be continued...............

Scuttler
24-01-2013, 12:51 PM
I've heard a lot of people espousing the negative aspects of being "in" the EU and I've seen some of the quite frankly daft crap they've come out with. The idea that a criminal (someone that has chosen to ignore the rules of our society) can have an active role in determining the country's future direction quite frankly appalls me but that's just one example, there are many more.

I've sadly not heard much from the pro euro wing about what benefits membership brings. Surely it can't just be free trade links. I'd like to hear about the tangible benefits of full integration or even continued partial integration but I don't see anyone really putting a convincing argument together so far.

I'm still on the fence with this one but swaying heavily towards the out side than the in side and the fact that America keeps trying to persuade us that we need to be on the inside makes me a little nervous! America has never operated in our interests and I don't see them starting to now.

Woz
24-01-2013, 12:56 PM
I do 50% of my business with Urp. If they suddenly had to add 20% VAT and import duty to things, it would make the UK very uncompetitive.

Davedagc
24-01-2013, 01:11 PM
It would also make it more difficult for expats living within Europe to move around freely and be able to apply for benefits from other member states.

Woz
24-01-2013, 01:13 PM
Oh and I'd just like to add that I think Cameron is a complete bell-end for making his speech in the current economic climate. And he's a complete bell-end the rest of the time too.

Davedagc
24-01-2013, 01:19 PM
I think it's unfair to single out Camaron as a bell end, all politicians rate very highly on the bell end scale !!

Soggy
24-01-2013, 01:41 PM
I do 50% of my business with Urp. If they suddenly had to add 20% VAT and import duty to things, it would make the UK very uncompetitive.

Would work the same in reverse and one of Germany's biggest export markets is the UK. The idea would be to of continued with the common market or more likely adopt a free trade pact of some sort.

I vote for out of the EU and adopt free trade.

thetrickster
24-01-2013, 01:46 PM
I can't even start to think about how the UK could 'unhook' themselves from the EU.

Driving Licences, Health cards, State Pensions, Fisheries, Cross Border Taxation, Data Protection, Heath and Safety Standards - the list is way too long.

Obviously its possible to rip up the book and start again and say everything is now not valid - but what about the cost? what about the upheaval for businesses???

Chrisch
24-01-2013, 03:55 PM
I can't even start to think about how the UK could 'unhook' themselves from the EU....

They can't. The UK would be like Norway and get to eat all the shit but not choose the flavour. This is all a load of crap whipped up by the gutter press and the (not unreasonable) desire not to be ruled by foreign powers (too late, the Germans have their henchperson as head of state...) Most of what is reported in the press as "EU rules and regulations" are in a large part contributed to by UK companies and the UK government. Most multinational companies that have significant operations in the UK would reconsider the UK for any future development if the UK was outside the EU. In fact, Scotland might well stay in and leave the UK and attract much of the investment from England. That would be funny :D

All the Mail reading old farts in Spain would have to sell up their (now worthless) retirement homes and leave and I don't want them back here than you. Reason enough to stay in for ever :D

rubber chicken
24-01-2013, 03:59 PM
At least it takes your minds off the Hospitals, Schools, Roads, Railways, Police, Prisons, Environment etc etc

Diving Dude
24-01-2013, 05:37 PM
Leave and while we're at it, take back our fishing waters that we had to give away in order to join.

Rupert Bear
24-01-2013, 05:47 PM
Doesn't anybody remember that it used to be called the Common Market?

I think this is where it is going wrong, there is nothing wrong with harmonisation and free trade within a framework agreed by members.
However the European Union is way too far, the plan is for a federal Eurpoe and thats something I don't want.

The choice should be In, Out, Shake it all about with Shake it all about being a rejection of the principle of a European Union as an objective and a return to a common market policy where practicable.

Thats my tuppence anyway and its at least worth more than two euro cents!

steve6690
24-01-2013, 05:56 PM
The offer of a referendum is simply a bribe to get this lot elected next time around, because they know they're stuffed otherwise. Cameron is an idiot who's gambling that we'll vote to stay in. Leaving the EU would be a big mistake.
I would say that though, as I'm planning to retire to Germany in 6 years :D

Adrian
24-01-2013, 06:05 PM
I think it's unfair to single out Camaron as a bell end, all politicians rate very highly on the bell end scale !!I think that he is running scared of the potential voting impact of UKIP and thus trying to pander to the same people. He's doing what's best for his party, not his country. I also wonder if there's an element that the politicians want to be the biggest wheels in a tiny machine rather than smaller wheels in a bigger machine.

If we want to do business in Europe, we'd still have to meet their requirements - CE etc. Seeing as how our governments seem to gold plate EU requirements, I wonder how much difference not being in the EU would make? How much of our law is our own mess (thinking Tax in particular here), not the EU's?

jamesp
24-01-2013, 07:01 PM
Bugger all in the UK is UK owned anymore, we`ve spent most of the last fifty years selling it off and shutting it down.
Out of Europe means watch whats left vacate the premises, leaving us all up poo creek with no canoe, paddle and paying for the privallege of having someone elses sh!t in our face.

Only benefit of out would be to let the banks have a total free for all and replace Switerland and Lichtenstein as the FY capitals of dodgy dealing and tax avoidance; I can see that idea flying. Not.

Soggy
24-01-2013, 07:08 PM
If we want to do business in Europe, we'd still have to meet their requirements - CE etc. Seeing as how our governments seem to gold plate EU requirements, I wonder how much difference not being in the EU would make? How much of our law is our own mess (thinking Tax in particular here), not the EU's?

problem as i see it with the EU is the drive towards some sort of socialist super state with the individual countries identities secondary to harmonisation. The drive towards a super state run by a bunch of self serving non elected bueraucrats puts me off, we have enough problems with our own bunch of self serving twats. The fact that the EU budget has never been signed off and money gets wasted on an enormous scale (i'm sure some of it lining pockets) worse than we do at home. A free trade common market was exactly what our parents voted for which over the years was ignored as treaty after treaty changed the terms. For the french to say, you can't join a footbal club and play rugby is a bit rich, as we joined a rugby club that slowly changed to playing football.

All i can see is we're buying into something thats actually worse than what we have at home at present. I'd really like to know what the EU does for us, what do we get for our 15 billion a year?

IanB
24-01-2013, 07:42 PM
The time to leave if we were to leave was at the last chance 40 years ago and even then it was too late. Our businesses and markets are skewed towards the EU and the single market, sure it would be painful for the EU to lose the UK but not as painful as it would be for us to be on the outside pissing in. There’s a pretty good chance that if we took our ball and ran away there would be some consequences from the other 27 just out of spite because they could and “pour encourager les autres”.
Cameron is playing a dangerous game to try and placate his little englanders in the shires and on the back benches and to try and stave off the perceived threat from the racist xenophobes in UKIP. He’s banking on it never happening because he’s got to


Win the next election
Fail to do a deal with the rest of Europe
Persuade the country it’s a good idea

The only thing he’s got going for him is labour are such a useless bunch of nincompoops led by the idiot Millibean and partially responsible for continuing to dig a deeper financial hole than was necessary in 2007.

Craig107
24-01-2013, 07:54 PM
So is it being said if we "pull out" we would have nowhere to sell our goods to, and importing from europe would become more expensive and difficult.

Spirit of Guernsey
24-01-2013, 08:03 PM
The EU and single market are different thing. You could leave the EU, keep the single market and be like us.

Craig107
24-01-2013, 08:15 PM
Would we benefit from leaving the EU and taking up our seat in the WTO again.

jamesp
24-01-2013, 09:00 PM
So is it being said if we "pull out" we would have nowhere to sell our goods to, and importing from europe would become more expensive and difficult.

What goods?

The majority of foreign owned firms in the UK, not owned by EU countries are here as a doorway into Europe.
If you remove the doorway, it tends to be a little pointless for them to be here.
The likely hood of say Airbus (FrancoGerman owned) being around say 5 seconds after an out vote is fairly small. Local to me that would probably be 8k jobs direct, that again in immeadiate supply chain and probably as many again in fringe jobs.

If you run through the list of Uttilities in the UK, EoN is German, EDF French, Scottish power is Spanish, several of the water companies are French, even British Airports Authority are Spanish. There is stuff all left to earn money for UK plc.
Shell sold the Stanlow refinery to an Indian company last year, at least 500 are employed locally to me by Indian owned firms(ignoring Tata and Jaguar/Land Rover).
You could get out and wave the flag, but the bloody thing would have been made in China.

AMW
24-01-2013, 09:26 PM
To leave the EU would be an act of folly for so many reasons:

Trade/investment/free movement/better bargaining position as part of the EU and so on.

I agree Cameron made the speech at the wrong time (or at all) although he seems to be running scared of his own parties right wing and the perceived threat of ukip.

Although if we leave we can create employment but building gun boats to put Jonny foreigner in his place.

Andrew

sheesh
24-01-2013, 09:48 PM
The EU and single market are different thing. You could leave the EU, keep the single market and be like us.

We only have access to the open market by virtue of protocol 3 of the Treaty of Versaille when the UK joined. If the UK leaves then Jersey, Guernsey and IOM lose access too.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

Spirit of Guernsey
24-01-2013, 10:13 PM
The single market, then called the common market was around before the UK joined the EU. It would go back to that situation unless some muppet wanted out of that too.

AMW
24-01-2013, 10:35 PM
The single market

I would think only if the EU countries (we where no longer part of) invited us to be part of a trade agreement. We are playing a very high risk game with the leaving argument.

Andrew

Mark Chase
24-01-2013, 11:37 PM
The EU is flawed genious.

We need to get rid of the flaws, not get rid of the EU

Things that are relevent to our future should be looked at on a global scale. The EU is a step in that direction but sadly gready people in terms of both money and power are perverting the ultimate goal.

Its a growing up phase we need to go through. The EU is like an adolesent teenager at the moment.

I hope and pray it grows up.

Killing all teenagers seems a simple and efective way to solve all the problems the little shits bring to our lives, but ultimatly its not a viable option.

ATB

Mark

Hellenic Diver
25-01-2013, 12:20 AM
What annoys me about euro sceptics, is that they lose sight of the whole point of the original founding of what was then the EEC. To stop extreme nationalism, and therefore prevent the wars that had always (but particularly in the first half of the 20th century) dominated the history of Europe.

Any one want to return to 1939?


Sent from my Commodore 64 using Tapatalk

Scubee
25-01-2013, 07:10 AM
Just from the posts here, it is clear that the question of Europe is too big for a simple yes/no.

And, of course, the general public is not well enough informed to make a rational choice.

There is a lot of money that comes into the UK for regeneration. Lose that, and the crap parts of our towns and cities remain crap.

We may be a net contributor, but that contribution gives us a hell of a lot more back in other ways.

The idea of a referendum, at some undefined future date, asking an as yet undefined question, with an undefined answer is little more than a stunt.

He's got to get reelected first, and I doubt there are many in the public sector who want that.

Soggy
25-01-2013, 07:59 AM
What annoys me about euro sceptics, is that they lose sight of the whole point of the original founding of what was then the EEC. To stop extreme nationalism, and therefore prevent the wars that had always (but particularly in the first half of the 20th century) dominated the history of Europe.

Any one want to return to 1939?


Ironically enough it's been one of the drivers behind the rise of nationalism again. UKIP ride a wave of unrest with the unease of the populous over being controlled by foreign non-elected powers. The very term "foreign non-elected authority" is almost a definition of cause for nationalism.

There are growing nationalistic movements across Europe all fed by the EU.

Free trade and the common market stopped the wars. Money in your pocket is a big driver to not beating up your friends who are buying your products.

Soggy
25-01-2013, 08:06 AM
There is a lot of money that comes into the UK for regeneration. Lose that, and the crap parts of our towns and cities remain crap.

We may be a net contributor, but that contribution gives us a hell of a lot more back in other ways.


Would that regeneration money be from the same pot of money that we are a net contributor too, so if we kept the money instead of passing it through the EU, we'd actually have more to regenerate. We put in around 15 billion a year and get back around 7. Instead it's wasted on farm subsidies to the French and building motorways in Poland.

What do we get back in 'other ways'. I've yet to here a compelling argument for staying in Europe. The only arguments I hear are it would be 'bad' for the UK, which was the same argument used about the euro and the world didn't end when we kept the pound. We kept the pound and trade didn't collapse.

sheesh
25-01-2013, 08:13 AM
Would that regeneration money be from the same pot of money that we are a net contributor too, so if we kept the money instead of passing it through the EU, we'd actually have more to regenerate.

Do uou honestly believe thay money would be put into regenerating e.g. some shitty estate in Blackburn over reducing tax or subsidising yet another "landmark" project in London?

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

Soggy
25-01-2013, 08:17 AM
Do uou honestly believe thay money would be put into regenerating e.g. some shitty estate in Blackburn over reducing tax or subsidising yet another "landmark" project in London?


Who knows but it would be spent in this country rather than paying a French farmer for outdated farming practises or building a road in Eastern Europe I'll never see or use. So the building of infrastructure in this country would benefit us as a country.

Scubee
25-01-2013, 08:38 AM
Who knows but it would be spent in this country rather than paying a French farmer for outdated farming practises or building a road in Eastern Europe I'll never see or use. So the building of infrastructure in this country would benefit us as a country.

What about English, Scottish and welsh farmers?

Scuttler
25-01-2013, 08:50 AM
I've yet to here a compelling argument for staying in Europe. The only arguments I hear are it would be 'bad' for the UK,

That's my point too. If the pro euro camp believe that things are going to be bad then surely they know how they would be bad and an explain that to the populace.

We've been in this limbo of in but not in and out but not out for as long as I can remember and I can't see any real positive impact to the average man in the street. I can see many negative impacts not least that on the surface we appear to be a net contributor rather than a net recipient of the EU budget. Whilst I recognise that the stronger countries need to help the weaker countries I also see the weaker countries squandering the aid they receive. I mean how much money has Germany ploughed into Greece?

I see so many compelling arguments against membership that I appreciate may be soundbites but I hear nothing impelling for membership. I am an individual that has yet to decide and so should be a target for both camps but at the moment the only camp making any sense is the nay sayers. Am I to deduce from that there is nothing positive to be gained from membership? I not naive enough to believe that's true but that shows you what a pitiful job the pro camp are doing of promoting their cause.

It would be a shame to make the wrong choice because one side didn't reveal the strengths of their argument until too late but then it is often the way I guess.

Scuttler
25-01-2013, 08:51 AM
..dupe..

Soggy
25-01-2013, 08:57 AM
And so far on this thread all I've heard is "it will be bad" with little fact to go on.

Soggy
25-01-2013, 09:01 AM
What about English, Scottish and welsh farmers?

What about them? Under CAP they receive payments. Again from the money we pay into the EU budget and only receive 50% back.

Should be noted that's the EU budget that the accountants refuse to sign off.

To give you the figures:

CAP is 55% of the EU budget of 120billion

France takes around 10billion.
Germany 7 billion
Spain 7 billion
Italy 6 billion
Poland 4 billion
UK 4 billion
Greece 3 billion!!

By far the largest reason for us staying in and the likes of Germany saying 'stay' is they know without us the burden passes even more to Germany to fund the rest of Europe. Just look at what's happening with the Euro, Germany is already the purse everyone us dipping into to keep the plates spinning. I wonder if the German people will be willing to keep funding and increase its funding for the rest of Europe?

Figures taken from that well known bastion of right wing euro hating filth The Guardian.

Craig107
25-01-2013, 09:02 AM
The main reason for how I voted is because Im ill-informed of the benefits of being in the EU.

If 15billion goes out of the countrys coffers each year. Then where do they get these monies, is it from taxes.

If, circa 7billion comes back into the country (in subsidies). Then where does this money get put.

People pass freely through the European states heading for the northwest and ultimately Brittain. Why, if the EU is so good then why not stay in your own countries and make a better life with the EU subsidies. (No racialist phobias intended).

Why are we (the general public) ill-informed, mis-informed and un-informed about a decision we're being asked (will be asked) to make. That will impact on our lifes no matter which way the referendum** goes.

**Referendum. Its a word used for a public vote on a decision thats already been decided.

Chrisch
25-01-2013, 10:58 AM
.....
If 15billion goes out of the countrys coffers each year. Then where do they get these monies, is it from taxes.

If, circa 7billion comes back into the country (in subsidies). Then where does this money get put.....

Yes the contributions to the central EU fund are from tax, mostly VAT.

The payback goes to a variety of things like infrastructure in depressed regions (Northern Ireland for example). In addition money is paid to landowners (Prince Charles' estates gets millions) and to the fishing industry. Oddly the tory landowners seem to be the biggest "antis" even though they get the dosh. Weird.

The primary role of the EU is to facilitate free movement of goods, capital and people within the member states. The goods and capital sit well with most people but free movement of people has the usual racist drivel from the gutter press foaming at the mouth. First the Poles now the Romanians are, it would seem, "flocking" over here and getting 500 quid a week dole money, a free council house, a BMW X5 and a blow job from the queen, all at the expense of some "hard-working" UK tradesman that is fiddling his VAT :)

If we move past the tabloid world of made-up rules and regulations, non-existent hordes of immigrants and mythical fruit straightening machines the position is a bit less emotional and a bit easier to understand.

The EU is often labelled as "socialist" when it is in fact a right wing free-trade organisation. The lefty bad press is due to the small amount of redistribution of money to benefit the underdeveloped regions (like Northern Ireland) with a view to bringing prosperity, jobs and much needed infrastructure to them. Big business was very much in favour of the low wage countries like Poland and Romania joining so as to depress wages in the other member states and to give low cost production capacity within the free trade area. With a bit more protectionism this would have been a good idea and might well have seen off some of the competition from the low wage BRICS. However the obsession of the right with globalisation means the enlargement of the EU has brought little benefit to the developed economies since we continue to relocate much of the manufacturing to the far east rather than the poorer EU states.

Given how little it costs (about 0.03% of GDP) and the benefits to us as citizens - able to live and work anywhere, to retire to somewhere warm and so on, I think leaving would be about as sensible as cutting your legs off because you can't be bothered to cut your toe nails. Perhaps if the gutter press spent less time printing made-up drivel at the behest of their owners in order to distract the simpletons that read tabloids from the reality that the banks are robbing them blind we could spend less time arguing about the EU and a bit more energy creating the kind of economy we would all like to see. For sure there are plenty of things that need improvement but just quitting and walking away is a child's solution to the issue. It is the British malaise to blame the council/government/immigrants or just about anyone as long as its not the reality of the UK workforce themselves and their endless tea breaks and shit management.

Soggy
25-01-2013, 11:24 AM
Yes the contributions to the central EU fund are from tax, mostly VAT.

The payback goes to a variety of things like infrastructure in depressed regions (Northern Ireland for example). In addition money is paid to landowners (Prince Charles' estates gets millions) and to the fishing industry. Oddly the tory landowners seem to be the biggest "antis" even though they get the dosh. Weird.

The primary role of the EU is to facilitate free movement of goods, capital and people within the member states. The goods and capital sit well with most people but free movement of people has the usual racist drivel from the gutter press foaming at the mouth. First the Poles now the Romanians are, it would seem, "flocking" over here and getting 500 quid a week dole money, a free council house, a BMW X5 and a blow job from the queen, all at the expense of some "hard-working" UK tradesman that is fiddling his VAT :)

If we move past the tabloid world of made-up rules and regulations, non-existent hordes of immigrants and mythical fruit straightening machines the position is a bit less emotional and a bit easier to understand.

The EU is often labelled as "socialist" when it is in fact a right wing free-trade organisation. The lefty bad press is due to the small amount of redistribution of money to benefit the underdeveloped regions (like Northern Ireland) with a view to bringing prosperity, jobs and much needed infrastructure to them. Big business was very much in favour of the low wage countries like Poland and Romania joining so as to depress wages in the other member states and to give low cost production capacity within the free trade area. With a bit more protectionism this would have been a good idea and might well have seen off some of the competition from the low wage BRICS. However the obsession of the right with globalisation means the enlargement of the EU has brought little benefit to the developed economies since we continue to relocate much of the manufacturing to the far east rather than the poorer EU states.

Given how little it costs (about 0.03% of GDP) and the benefits to us as citizens - able to live and work anywhere, to retire to somewhere warm and so on, I think leaving would be about as sensible as cutting your legs off because you can't be bothered to cut your toe nails. Perhaps if the gutter press spent less time printing made-up drivel at the behest of their owners in order to distract the simpletons that read tabloids from the reality that the banks are robbing them blind we could spend less time arguing about the EU and a bit more energy creating the kind of economy we would all like to see. For sure there are plenty of things that need improvement but just quitting and walking away is a child's solution to the issue. It is the British malaise to blame the council/government/immigrants or just about anyone as long as its not the reality of the UK workforce themselves and their endless tea breaks and shit management.

Still not an argument in there for staying in just a lot swiping at those who wish to leave and your own version of smearing the same as the gutter press. I see you raised the usual term of "racist" again.

Was it not the common market that was created for the free movement of trade, which slowly, treaty by treaty, was morphed into the United States of Europe for which the people are told to accept with no arguments.

Chrisch
25-01-2013, 12:30 PM
....
Was it not the common market that was created for the free movement of trade, which slowly, treaty by treaty, was morphed into the United States of Europe for which the people are told to accept with no arguments.

There is no US of EU, again this is a press construction. Originally the EEC was designed as a free trade area with additional establishment but the project has grown as it's core purpose of creating a level playing field has become more bureaucratic. I don't know about whether it is fair to say people are "forced to accept the changes" without arguments, Mrs Thatcher took us into the EU and John Major ratcheted it up a stage further and I don't remember any great debate about whether we should have accepted this or not at the time. This is the democratic deficit of UK government, you effectively elect a dictator for five years and if you disagree you can only change dictator after that time period.

The reasons to leave are not more compelling than the reasons to stay in. However I would agree wholeheartedly that major changes in EU policy should be democratically decided by the EU population not ushered in by the member state governments. The real problem is that the whole agenda is driven by the needs of big business not by what the average EU citizen might or might not want.

I guess, to answer your core issue, those of us like myself that see the immense benefits of being part of this trading block are unable to fully see why anyone would possibly even contemplate, never mind want, to see an isolated UK trying to hold on to it's economic impact on the world as a lone player. I do honestly think racism plays an important part in why many people want to leave - not everyone by any means but it is a significant factor in garnering the numbers needed to swing the vote to "out". I see the same sentiment expressed by other countries as well; read some of the stuff the FN puts out in France and the "arguments" are the same, so I make no apology for bringing the subject up.

My reason to stay in is that if we do not then the gradual atrophy that the UK has experienced since the 1960s will accelerate and the decline in the UK's importance as a global player will increase until by 2050 or so we will be of no importance at all. This is, I accept, a negative rather than a positive argument, but it is nevertheless an important one. If the majority of the UK population want to leave then so be it I will carry on posting from back home in France and pop over for the odd dive now and again :D

Janos
25-01-2013, 01:23 PM
A friend of mine is big in private equity, basically investing other people's money. He tends not invest in projects in the UK, preferring Germany and the US because there is more certainty about where they're going. He thinks a decision to leave the EU would be crazy.

Me? I'm all for the EU just because I buy most of my wine in France.

Janos

Chrisch
25-01-2013, 03:42 PM
A friend of mine is big in private equity, basically investing other people's money. He tends not invest in projects in the UK, preferring Germany and the US because there is more certainty about where they're going. He thinks a decision to leave the EU would be crazy....

My missus' ex boss is a private equity chappie too. They left London for pretty much the same reason (hence the reason we lived in Italy and Luxembourg for a while). They are just now thinking about building the London presence back up but this latest guff will stop that particular expansion.

All that said I don't think private equity companies should be making the decision for the other 60 million of us :D

Digger
25-01-2013, 03:52 PM
They can only hold a referendum if the House passes it can't they?

If so, they need a majority. The Lib Dems will not vote for a referendum. Labour will not vote for a referendum. Many Tories won't vote for a referendum. Largely because the Lib Dems and Labour have no interest in appealing to the Daily Mail reading right wing buffoons that don't actually know what is good for them, and because those political parties don't have leaving the EU, or even considering it, anywhere near their manifestos.

So we are basing this on the premise that the Tories are going to get an overall majority at the next election, not a coalition, an out and out Tory government.

That, to me, smacks of arrogance. They might as well make a statement that they are going to give every child a flying pig if they win the next election - it quite simply won't happen. It is a desperate attempt to win the UKIP and BNP vote, but the reality is that by the time the election comes round most of them will have forgotten all this. And most UKIP and BNP voters are far more bothered about the 3rd or 4th generation non-white people legally working and walking their local streets than something as complicated as the EU. Instead the left wing backlash against the prospect of this kind of stupidity is likely to result in people like me actually getting out and voting for either Labour or the Lib Dems. Because we know how ridiculous it would be for them to let the UK population, who really don't understand the consequences of what they are voting on, to decide their own fate on this. Instead, we are going to see a load of ill-informed drivel from the usual right wingers with "Take back control of your country" and "Fritz can't tell us what to do" when in fact exactly that is happening already. See recent decision to ignore the ruling that prisoners should be entitled to vote. We decided not to comply. Prisoners can't vote. EU rattles sabre. MPs ignore it.

Leaving the EU would be an economic disaster. One of the main reasons why companies base themselves in the UK is because they get the advantages of free trade with Europe, the benefits of working in the UK economy, some vague sense of stability and a workforce that largely isn't too expensive. Change those things, or threaten to change those things, and those companies will find somewhere else to go. It would quite frankly be the end of manufacturing in the UK, other than for the domestic market, and even that is unlikely to be competitive. Foreign firms can be cheaper than the difference in price between buying inside or outside the EU, see what happens when you buy from the US, minus the big shipping cost to get it across the Atlantic. Stuff still works out the same price, or cheaper.

Digs.

Diving Dude
25-01-2013, 05:50 PM
l think the original OP asked the wrong question. The question most people seem to be answering is 'is it a good idea to have a referendum on leaving'
l wonder, if a massive unexpected, unprepared for migrant workforce moved into the uk IT market driving down wages would the IT workers on this site still think that staying in the EU was a good idea.

Soggy
25-01-2013, 05:56 PM
l think the original OP asked the wrong question. The question most people seem to be answering is 'is it a good idea to have a referendum on leaving'
l wonder, if a massive unexpected, unprepared for migrant workforce moved into the uk IT market driving down wages would the IT workers on this site still think that staying in the EU was a good idea.

Already beginning to happen with an influx of Eastern European graduates. I work with a few and they are great guys, highly educated and above all more motivated than their British counter parts. They are simply following the money, why work at home for a pittance when you can cross borders with no restrictions to find a better paid job for your degree.

Digger
25-01-2013, 05:57 PM
l wonder, if a massive unexpected, unprepared for migrant workforce moved into the uk IT market driving down wages would the IT workers on this site still think that staying in the EU was a good idea.

Hate to break it to you, but the threat of the EU is such that I compete with French, German, Italian and particularly Dutch companies every day, and yes, they undercut me on price all the time. If we don't win deals, and lots and lots of customers buy grey market goods from other countries, I wouldn't have a job, because we wouldn't have enough money for me to be here.

And the government is doing nothing about that either.

Digs.

jamesp
25-01-2013, 05:58 PM
l think the original OP asked the wrong question. The question most people seem to be answering is 'is it a good idea to have a referendum on leaving'
l wonder, if a massive unexpected, unprepared for migrant workforce moved into the uk IT market driving down wages would the IT workers on this site still think that staying in the EU was a good idea.

Actually I think most of the IT market Fecked off to India.
I certainly know people who got out of the game as far back as 2002 because wages were being depressed by outsourcing overseas and overseas workers coming in to the UK.
I also know a few people who did the "auf wiedersein Pet" run and worked in Germany in the late `70s and early `80s. Building and manufacturing; that cookie crumbles both ways.

Voting out is on a par with footstamping and going off in a huff in the corner; everyone else just carries on and laughs.
Too many of the out brigade are too inclined to the assumption that we are a legend in their own mind.
We really are not any more.

Craig107
25-01-2013, 06:16 PM
l think the original OP asked the wrong question. The question most people seem to be answering is 'is it a good idea to have a referendum on leaving'
l wonder, if a massive unexpected, unprepared for migrant workforce moved into the uk IT market driving down wages would the IT workers on this site still think that staying in the EU was a good idea.

I understand what you're saying Dud. I termed it like that because thats the question I feel I would be being asked. I see no valid reason to "stay in" nor by the same token reason to "come out". Either way the MPs or media put it to me it will be the same bullshit I've been fed before, unfulfilled and full of the opposite. They all to a man lie and doublecross. If they where your union reps you'd have a vote of no confidence in a hearts beat.

Re an influx in the IT market. Maybe thats what this country needs, and then with the next "industry." Then slowly the gobshite leaders might start to listen to what the public of this country are saying, (never going to happen).

All I can see is a super state growing on the ideals of the former Nazi party under the guise of a European Union.

Soggy
25-01-2013, 06:17 PM
Voting out is on a par with footstamping and going off in a huff in the corner; everyone else just carries on and laughs.
Too many of the out brigade are too inclined to the assumption that we are a legend in their own mind.
We really are not any more.

So its better to stay in something that offers us little benefit with a lot of drawbacks because generations have adopted the same attitude as yourself and admitted defeat before even stepping up to the game line.

Mikael
25-01-2013, 06:30 PM
So its better to stay in something that offers us little benefit with a lot of drawbacks because generations have adopted the same attitude as yourself and admitted defeat before even stepping up to the game line.

So its better to admit defeat and say lets get out of the EU because we don't think it works globally or locally (ie for us) then?
I like Mark Chase's analogy, the EU is like a teenager its early days but needs to some growing up.

Personally I for the EU on principal but that's not to say we can rest, if its not working we need to work on it.

As for the 'little benefit with lots of drawbacks' assessment, I feel that needs clarification.
Not all benefit can be measured in €s in vs €s out. I suspect its a bit like the Scottish independence debate, no one on either side really knows the full impact of leaving would be.

Scuttler
25-01-2013, 06:33 PM
I've got a headache and a stinking cold.

Have we reached a decision yet?

Soggy
25-01-2013, 06:38 PM
I've got a headache and a stinking cold.

Have we reached a decision yet?

Early days yet and still waiting for a decent pro-Europe argument. So far as I see it the pro-Europe argument is still "staying=good, leaving=bad" but without anything to substantiate it. Which I guess for the x-factor generation will have to make do.

Oh yeah, and anyone that doesn't like it is a little englander racist.

Adrian
25-01-2013, 06:44 PM
l wonder, if a massive unexpected, unprepared for migrant workforce moved into the uk IT market driving down wages would the IT workers on this site still think that staying in the EU was a good idea.There's a fair chunk of that already here Howard (Wipro (140,00 people worldwide), Tata (240,000)) but in IT it's often easier to move the work abroad rather than have people here. They still do have people here though. India is producing 1.2m engineering and MBA graduates each year. They are damn hard to compete with on cost. India is a huge service economy. They ought to look at the UK very carefullly, as that is what a fair bit of the UK is and it is stalled.

jamesp
25-01-2013, 06:45 PM
So its better to stay in something that offers us little benefit with a lot of drawbacks because generations have adopted the same attitude as yourself and admitted defeat before even stepping up to the game line.

Chasey has had the most coherent response so far.

I am more concerned about the alternative to being in. As the lottery says "you have to be in it to win it", I just wish we could start to play the French and Germans at their own game and get the EU run to our benefit for a change. At the end of the day we are one of the biggest Net contributors and over half the rest are either window dressing or third world charity cases. When they hold their hands out with the begging bowl it should be "yes UK, No UK and which arse cheek do you want kissing this time"

An out vote is just take the ball and put on a huff, realistically we are a bunch of opinionated independant bloody minded people with a habit of disagreeing with the rest of europe and a track record of not being wrong every time we rock the boat.

The thought of Fuck wit Farrage being elevated to serious politician depresses me beyond belief.

Soggy
25-01-2013, 06:52 PM
I am more concerned about the alternative to being in. As the lottery says "you have to be in it to win it", I just wish we could start to play the French and Germans at their own game and get the EU run to our benefit for a change. At the end of the day we are one of the biggest Net contributors and over half the rest are either window dressing or third world charity cases. When they hold their hands out with the begging bowl it should be "yes UK, No UK and which arse cheek do you want kissing this time"

Germany runs the ECB and the Bundesbank set the interest rates to bolster German Industry and France controls the CAP and snaffles 20% of that on crap farming techniques. Neither of them want Britain to leave becasue they will have to foot the bill and make up the short fall. Germany is already massively into Greece, which is why it hasn't been allowed to leave and is now little more than a vassal state. The Euro is an utter failure, with Spain, Portugal and Italy running massive debts, which they will never pay off, as they have no option to follow German interest rates. Greece has already defaulted but no one actually said the word because it couldn't devalue and make its economy and industry attractive. Spain has unemployment at 25% and climbing with Portugal following quickly behind.

and we want to join the club?

jamesp
25-01-2013, 07:04 PM
Germany runs the ECB and the Bundesbank set the interest rates to bolster German Industry and France controls the CAP and snaffles 20% of that on crap farming techniques. Neither of them want Britain to leave becasue they will have to foot the bill and make up the short fall. Germany is already massively into Greece, which is why it hasn't been allowed to leave and is now little more than a vassal state. The Euro is an utter failure, with Spain, Portugal and Italy running massive debts, which they will never pay off, as they have no option to follow German interest rates. Greece has already defaulted but no one actually said the word because it couldn't devalue and make its economy and industry attractive. Spain has unemployment at 25% and climbing with Portugal following quickly behind.

and we want to join the club?

EU not the Euro.

About the only thing Gordon did to the good was stop Tony taking us into the Euro.

Thirty years ago Spain and Portugal were barely first world countries, as were Eire and Greece. Romania, Bulgaria were merely providers of canon fodder to the Soviet Union.

I would rather have someone go in tell the above who they need to be saying thank you to and tell the French farmers to start working for a living rather than throwing tomatoes and having biannual riots.

Actually we did once, and everybody hates her.

Soggy
25-01-2013, 07:08 PM
EU not the Euro.


I'm all for a free trade common market of goods across europe its the rest of the bollocks i don't buy into and that is where further integration will take us. The EU is already the Euro.

as for Europe being a teenager, its a 40 year old teenager who's out of control.

jamesp
25-01-2013, 07:43 PM
I'm all for a free trade common market of goods across europe its the rest of the bollocks i don't buy into and that is where further integration will take us. The EU is already the Euro.

as for Europe being a teenager, its a 40 year old teenager who's out of control.

I dont disagree with any of that, I`m not for further integration.

I`m not for giving up and not steping up to the line, thats what we have been doing for the last 40 years.

Get in, punch our weight and start setting the agenda; not whine about the seating plan.

Actually I was refering to Chaseys comment about the Flaws rather than the teenager analogy.

Elvis
26-01-2013, 12:42 AM
All I can see is a super state growing on the ideals of the former Nazi party under the guise of a European Union.

If that's not a Godwins's I dunno what is!

Soggy
26-01-2013, 08:02 AM
I dont disagree with any of that, I`m not for further integration.

I`m not for giving up and not steping up to the line, thats what we have been doing for the last 40 years.

Get in, punch our weight and start setting the agenda; not whine about the seating plan.

Actually I was refering to Chaseys comment about the Flaws rather than the teenager analogy.

I'd like to think if we stayed in we'd have the option to change Europe but we won't. The Eastern European states won't want change as they make a lot from it, France doesn't want the CAP changed as its a benefit to them and Germany won't let the economics go, so where does the UK fit in? It simply doesn't, I want to change back to a common market and let the EU continue to rule a disintegrating Europe with their unelected political elite.

JPTaylor
26-01-2013, 10:13 AM
Like us "voters" will get a choice!!!

Democracy is an illusion/con......

Voted to leave, the the European johnnies will still trade with us, we should just join the European free trade zone. That was what my father thought he was joining when he voted yes in the referendums in the 70's. But politicians using "foot in the door" salesman techniques.....

cotochris
26-01-2013, 11:14 AM
The sad fact that however you look at at 'Great Britain' is not so great economically; it's bark is louder than the bite. It needs to work with Europe because sure as hell USA can not be relied on - Obama is no fan of UK for one. The Uk doesn't carry enough punch to go out alone.

There is a lot wrong with the EU but there has been a lot of good of which UK benefited. By raising the standards of living in other EU countries and increasing wealth it increases trade which the UK benefited. As for UK not being in the single currency is another issue altogether.

What is needed is a change in EU with greater transparency and make it more efficient. FFS make it decide Brussels or Strasbourgh but not both, that is a classic example of waste.

Chrisch
26-01-2013, 11:23 AM
....France controls the CAP and snaffles 20% of that on crap farming techniques. ...

There's a job for you as a journalist at the Mail any time. WTF are you on about? What are these "crap farming techniques" that you talk about? Do you think they plough with bullocks and harrow with horses? The French farming industry is way ahead of what is here by a long way. Both France and Poland gain from the CAP as they are geographically large countries and the subsidies are paid on the size of the farmer's land - hence Charles Windsor's millions handout from the EU. The CAP badly needs reform as here in the UK a lot of it is paid to look after Prunella's pony rather than provide food.

This is the problem with this debate in the UK, it's full of bullshit by those little Englander types that just have their arse out of synch because the Polish plumber is more financially successful than them because he can be bothered to get out of bed in the morning and stop drinking tea and moaning about the council.

IanB
26-01-2013, 11:30 AM
That was what my father thought he was joining when he voted yes in the referendums in the 70's. That was an stay or go referendum not one on joining. Heath took the UK in in 1971 IIRC, he was determined to score the deal at any cost and that's perhaps where it went wrong. Again IIRC the torygraph had an article saying the french would bleed our economy white, maybe that was the time to have got it right. The referendum was when Heath's nemesis Wilson was returned to power in the again IIRC 1974 election it was an electoral promise which the labour party kept. By then most people thought the damage of leaving would be greater than staying, pretty much the same as now only now it would be many times worse.

Soggy
26-01-2013, 11:34 AM
This is the problem with this debate in the UK, it's full of bullshit by those little Englander types that just have their arse out of synch because the Polish plumber is more financially successful than them because he can be bothered to get out of bed in the morning and stop drinking tea and moaning about the council.

there we go don't actaully come up with any kind of rational argument for staying in the EU, if there is one, just label anyone who disagrees with you as a 'little englander' or 'racist'.

Jackdiver
26-01-2013, 12:22 PM
See, I don't get this.

What is racist about not wanting to be part of a United States of Europe?

:confused:

Soggy
26-01-2013, 12:33 PM
What is racist about not wanting to be part of a United States of Europe?


There is nothing racist about it, its just a technique used to make you think you would be racist and so feel guilty and thus withdraw your opinion. Used most often when the other side has run out of facts to use in a debate or in this case hasn't yet presented any facts to debate.


and heres a cracking bit of EU lunacy.
BBC News - Farm double payments clear hurdle (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-21171472)

jamesp
26-01-2013, 02:32 PM
The sad fact that however you look at at 'Great Britain' is not so great economically; it's bark is louder than the bite. It needs to work with Europe because sure as hell USA can not be relied on - Obama is no fan of UK for one. The Uk doesn't carry enough punch to go out alone.

There is a lot wrong with the EU but there has been a lot of good of which UK benefited. By raising the standards of living in other EU countries and increasing wealth it increases trade which the UK benefited. As for UK not being in the single currency is another issue altogether.

What is needed is a change in EU with greater transparency and make it more efficient. FFS make it decide Brussels or Strasbourgh but not both, that is a classic example of waste.


Didnt Portugal have an attempted coup in the early `80s.
Britain, Great or otherwise may have more bark than bite and not be that great economically; however it does make it into the G8 and G20.
Realistically Portugal is not even in the car park for those events.
What pisses a lot of people off is being told how out of wack we are by people who can only afford to have an opinion because we gave them the money. I am led to believe there is asimilar view in Germany, the EU paymasters.
Its just time that it was pointed out that its our money your pissing up the wall, if you want an opinion, we will give it to you.

ChrisCH:
French crap farming rules were more to do with inheritence laws and the equal division of familly farms, hence farms got smaller. Generally British farmers were victims of being to good at the job from what I pick up from friends and relatives in agriculture.

AxeMan
26-01-2013, 07:24 PM
What are these "crap farming techniques" that you talk about? Do you think they plough with bullocks and harrow with horses? The French farming industry is way ahead of what is here by a long way. Both France and Poland gain from the CAP as they are geographically large countries and the subsidies are paid on the size of the farmer's land


The sort of crap farming techniques that require 9 billion euros of subsidies to keep going? i.e. producing food at vastly uncompetitive prices on the world market. The import duties on garlic are so high, people are actually risking prison to smuggle it. Ridiculous.

Poland receives nothing like as much as France, or at least didn't in 2008 2.5bn vs 9 bn euros. I doubt it's changed much since.

Why do we need a common agricultural policy at all? Why should they be subsidised? My job isn't.

Soggy
26-01-2013, 07:32 PM
The sort of crap farming techniques that require 9 billion euros of subsidies to keep going? i.e. producing food at vastly uncompetitive prices on the world market. The import duties on garlic are so high, people are actually risking prison to smuggle it. Ridiculous.

Poland receives nothing like as much as France, or at least didn't in 2008 2.5bn vs 9 bn euros. I doubt it's changed much since.

CAP is 55% of the EU budget of 120billion

France takes around 10billion.
Germany 7 billion
Spain 7 billion
Italy 6 billion
Poland 4 billion
UK 4 billion
Greece 3 billion!!

from 2011 and taken from the Guardian.

Chrisch
27-01-2013, 12:12 PM
.....and heres a cracking bit of EU lunacy.
BBC News - Farm double payments clear hurdle (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-21171472)

Why is it "EU lunacy" Did you read it? It's a typical political argument by rich landowners with a vested interest in bleeding dry the taxpayer. Look at the article and all the people saying how silly it is to pay these rich landowners (like Charles Windsor) more money.

You are trying to suggest that every aspect of modem politics - the corruption of the lobbyist system that benefits the rich - is the somehow the EU when in fact it is simply the way society is organised. Governments are corrupt and the more power they have (as is the case with trans-national government) the more corrupt they are. It's not a problem of the EU it's a problem of crony capitalism. Leaving the EU will not change this.


....
ChrisCH:
French crap farming rules were more to do with inheritence laws and the equal division of familly farms, hence farms got smaller. Generally British farmers were victims of being to good at the job from what I pick up from friends and relatives in agriculture.

This is "Napoleon's law". It's an issue of land ownership and a problem France had with the inheritance laws for a long time. It is not, in any way shape or form, "crap farming rules". There are no "farming rules" crap or otherwise. This inheritance issue, to be fair, did destroy a lot of small family farms (the opposite I'm sure of what Nappy would have wanted). The legacy of it is there are many small parcels of land that once supported a family that have been sold off for below market value to large landowning organisations.

French farms, much as farms everywhere are large, modern efficient and generally owned by companies. Smallholdings are generally sold through a governmental body, in much the same away as the Notaires like to kipper up the residential market. Thus there are problems with transfer of ownership. The biggest problem for France has been the lack of interest in Farming by young people and I would suggest most of the intervention has been well intentioned.

Notwithstanding, none of these observations about the issues of transfer of and existing ownership of the agricultural land is in any way evidence of "crap farming laws", "crap farming techniques" or other fictional inefficiencies in French agriculture.


The sort of crap farming techniques that require 9 billion euros of subsidies to keep going? i.e. producing food at vastly uncompetitive prices on the world market. The import duties on garlic are so high, people are actually risking prison to smuggle it. Ridiculous......
Why do we need a common agricultural policy at all? Why should they be subsidised? My job isn't.

The CAP was introduced to preserve the food security of the citizens of the EU. Farming does not "require" €9Bn to keep it going, but if you owned a few thousand hectares of land (like Charles Windsor) and the dumbass taxpayer threw money at you would you say "no thanks mate I'm rich as fuck already"?

If you feel that the time has come to scrap the CAP then that is a reasonable argument and you may well be right about it. It is not an argument against the EU or a reason to leave it. I would wager a fair bet that if it actually comes to it you will see a good few of the rich landowners in the Tory party doing their best to scupper the referendum. Dave is offering it because he knows he will lose the next election.


CAP is 55% of the EU budget of 120billion

France takes around 10billion.
Germany 7 billion
Spain 7 billion
Italy 6 billion
Poland 4 billion
UK 4 billion
Greece 3 billion!!

from 2011 and taken from the Guardian.

Reason enough to have the debate about the CAP. Zero evidence of "crap farming in France" though.

Soggy
27-01-2013, 12:18 PM
Why is it "EU lunacy" Did you read it? It's a typical political argument by rich landowners with a vested interest in bleeding dry the taxpayer. Look at the article and all the people saying how silly it is to pay these rich landowners (like Charles Windsor) more money.


i'll quote the opening passage for you to read as you obviously didn't read the rest of it.

"Farmers could be paid twice for measures to protect the environment under a European Parliament deal.

The Agriculture Committee agreed that EU rules forbidding double payments should be waived to help farmers.

Green campaigners say the vote is a scandal and must be over-turned by the full Parliament and member states.

The motion was passed because many MEPs want to shield farmers’ incomes from the Commission's planned reform of the costly Common Agricultural Policy."

We as a nation are trying to vote against it but its already passed and we are trying to block it. So yes it is EU lunacy, for paying farmers twice for doing nothing. Can it be any clearer than that for you?

Janos
27-01-2013, 10:38 PM
Get in, punch our weight and start setting the agenda; not whine about the seating plan.

The thing is, the Brits in the EU have been punching above their weight for years. Ever since the accession countries (Poland, Hungary etc) joined the EU, the working language of the EU has been English. French, German etc have fallen out of favour. And English is such a nuanced language that you really want a decent speaker of the language on your team if you're working on these complicated negotiations.

I don't think people realise how much influence the UK actually has in the EU. We've got a huge advantage just because we wrote the rule book.

Janos

Scubee
27-01-2013, 10:51 PM
CAP was introduced to ensure that farmers stayed farming.

Why would anyone remain in an industry that is insecure, relies on things we have no control over and, these days, allows supermarket chains to control how much they will be paid, often only marginally above what it costs to produce?

CAP benefits aren't means tested, if a farmer qualifies, s/he qualifies.

jamesp
28-01-2013, 07:00 AM
CAP was introduced to ensure that farmers stayed farming.

Why would anyone remain in an industry that is insecure, relies on things we have no control over and, these days, allows supermarket chains to control how much they will be paid, often only marginally above what it costs to produce?

CAP benefits aren't means tested, if a farmer qualifies, s/he qualifies.

Just like manufacturing then, but without the handouts.

Soggy
28-01-2013, 07:49 AM
CAP was introduced to ensure that farmers stayed farming.

Why would anyone remain in an industry that is insecure, relies on things we have no control over and, these days, allows supermarket chains to control how much they will be paid, often only marginally above what it costs to produce?

CAP benefits aren't means tested, if a farmer qualifies, s/he qualifies.


Go and check who gets the CAP payments in France. The top recipient in France doesn't even farm, they have a turnover of 1.6 billion euros and are basically a wholesaler for chicken produced for them. Most of the top 20 recipients aren't actually farmers but companies and charities.

Chrisch
28-01-2013, 08:18 AM
i'll quote the opening passage for you to read as you obviously didn't read the rest of it.

"Farmers could be paid twice for measures to protect the environment under a European Parliament deal.

The Agriculture Committee agreed that EU rules forbidding double payments should be waived to help farmers.

Green campaigners say the vote is a scandal and must be over-turned by the full Parliament and member states.

The motion was passed because many MEPs want to shield farmers’ incomes from the Commission's planned reform of the costly Common Agricultural Policy."

We as a nation are trying to vote against it but its already passed and we are trying to block it. So yes it is EU lunacy, for paying farmers twice for doing nothing. Can it be any clearer than that for you?

https://sites.google.com/site/englishgrammarguide/Home/the-verb-tenses-in-english

Scubee
28-01-2013, 08:33 AM
Go and check who gets the CAP payments in France. The top recipient in France doesn't even farm, they have a turnover of 1.6 billion euros and are basically a wholesaler for chicken produced for them. Most of the top 20 recipients aren't actually farmers but companies and charities.

I'm not saying it doesn't need reform- clearly it does, but it needs to be reformed in such a way that it doesn't mean people will stop food production because it is financially better for them to grow houses than corn.

Soggy
28-01-2013, 08:37 AM
https://sites.google.com/site/englishgrammarguide/Home/the-verb-tenses-in-english

So from racists to little englanders to grammar correction.

Hot Totty
28-01-2013, 08:37 AM
CAP was introduced to ensure that farmers stayed farming.

Why would anyone remain in an industry that is insecure, relies on things we have no control over and, these days, allows supermarket chains to control how much they will be paid, often only marginally above what it costs to produce?

CAP benefits aren't means tested, if a farmer qualifies, s/he qualifies.

Sorry but that's the fault of the farmers for getting into bed with the supermarkets, I'm frequently approached by ' boiler service' companies to contract for them- I read there contract look at what there expecting me to do for the rates there paying and tell them to get real. It may work in a large metropolis but not in a rural environment were large distances between jobs are concerned. It's my choice to take the easy route and have work supplied to me but agree to work at such a low return I'd be better off being a wage slave or take the gamble that I can generate enough work to keep me in food and sofnolime. I don't get any subsidies, I get a burgeoning beurocracy which is affecting the kind of business I get involved in. :(

Scubee
28-01-2013, 08:38 AM
So from racists to little englanders to grammar correction.

The sign of a failed argument!!

Diving Dude
28-01-2013, 09:00 AM
So from racists to little englanders to grammar correction.

If you had kids, worked in the building trade, were a landlord and drove a 4 x 4 you'd have the full set of insults.

Spirit of Guernsey
28-01-2013, 09:07 AM
If you had kids, worked in the building trade, were a landlord and drove a 4 x 4 you'd have the full set of insults.

Bingo!

Soggy
28-01-2013, 09:20 AM
I'm not saying it doesn't need reform- clearly it does, but it needs to be reformed in such a way that it doesn't mean people will stop food production because it is financially better for them to grow houses than corn.

That's the problem as I see the EU, it's a mess and they want to take us further into the farce.

Chrisch
28-01-2013, 10:12 AM
So from racists to little englanders to grammar correction.

Lazy of me, sorry. Let's go back to it.

Your post suggested it was a law - it wasn't it's a proposal by someone at the commission. (Future tense as opposed to present)

Your post said this country is fighting it, there was no evidence of which country the MEPs came from.

You put it forward as an example of "EU lunacy" but it is actually an example of what I am talking about - misinterpretation of something to make a case that doesn't exist. In reality it's actually a very good example of democracy working in the EU. Some big cheese at the commission is being lobbied by rich landowners and the elected MEPs are having none of it. Far from EU lunacy it's a news item about the rich vested interests of big landowners trying to get more taxpayers' money.

The CAP is in need of reform and is being reformed. As with national government its the lobby group with the deepest pockets that tends to get it's way. In this case the big corporate landowners and the super-rich land owning individuals (like Charles Windsor) that are making millions out of a subsidy intended to help small farmers stay viable and produce some of the best food the world has to offer like Welsh mountain lamb or salt lamb off the Romney marsh. If UK farmers want to address this problem they need to get the NFU to lobby and join forces with other farmer's representatives in other member states. Sadly the NFU is too busy slagging off GM protesters and trying to kill badgers to do it's real job.

There are some important issue to be debated. They are overshadowed by the gutter press full of scare stories of hoards of Romanians coming over for their free council house, BMW 7 series and 800 quid a week dole money or whatever bullshit is being printed this week. Let's be honest, that the real reason so many (not all I agree) people are so anti-EU isn't it?

Soggy
28-01-2013, 10:35 AM
"But the MEPs insisted that farmers who are already gaining extra payments for green activities should be entitled to keep them – on top of the money they will get from the direct payment - but without doing any more to earn the cash."

Which MEPs? The ones who've passed the motion to allow double payments.

As to the open borders policy. I can see exactly why it's an issue to some. Across the road from me is Domino's pizza, it used to be filled with Brits working the low paid jobs of making and delivering pizza. Not high earners, just run of the mill kids making money. Now it's run solely by Eastern Europeans. All the Brit kids can't get work there cos these guys work for less. So the Brit kids feel frustrated that they can't work where as the Eastern Europeans have come along and are doing the work. That's an issue to these Brit kids but I guess living so detached from what really happening gives you such perspective of these things. So I can see why some might take the stance if being anti-EU solely from a migration stance.

Chrisch
28-01-2013, 11:04 AM
....
As to the open borders policy. I can see exactly why it's an issue to some. ...

Yes, me too. I think that it is the main driver of the whole debate. The problem is if you are UK based you see all the low paid jobs filled by (usually) East Europeans. If you are like me you will wonder why. Primarily why so few people in the UK are prepared to do these jobs. My opinion is it is mainly about high housing costs. The young Poles come over and work then go home. The young Brits cannot leave Mum and Dad and live on their own or with their partner if they are on 6 quid an hour. Jobs simply don't pay enough to stand on your own two feet any more. Youngsters working behind the bar will often be students (or Ozzies) or other people "topping up". The Ozzies work here as more or less a working holiday. If young UK citizens were prepared to take these jobs then there wouldn't be any vacancies for the Poles/Ozzies to fill. It's a bit rich to blame the foreign people taking these jobs and providing the service the businesses customers need simply because our own kids will not get off their backside and take the job.

Of course if you are based in Spain you will see all the elderly Brits and may well have the same view of why do all these old foreigners come here, they don't make any effort to speak Spanish and then want to import Heinz baked beans and don't go to the local bar or the tapas place and they don't contribute to the local economy or take part in the local culture. You might well develop the same anti-EU viewpoint for the same reasons. The French in the Dordogne feel much the same too. I would guess a lot of Greeks feel much the same about the elderly Germans there.

The whole point of the EEC and now the EU was and is to promote free movement of goods, capital and people. Those people who do not want to see the free movement of people have an inalienable democratic right to vote to leave. Just remember they are also voting to have back all the Brits currently living elsewhere too. The "in but not run by" option is a fantasy - the debate is in or out - stay in and play by the rules or leave. Assuming that the EU doesn't send all our old farts back they we must assume that their workforce will still be free to come here even if we drop to EFTA or other part-membership. Out, I'm afraid, means out, right out and that means you cannot retire to Spain/Greece/Portugal/France unless they want you. Why would they?

Soggy
28-01-2013, 11:15 AM
So the notion of being 'in' the EU to most is that it's there only to benefit the rich and the corporations. So it'll be very hard sell to the masses who only see the downside of no jobs and mass migration.

Couple the above with the failure of the Euro and the CAP being corrupt and not fit for purpose and it becomes an ever bigger farce.

And we should be going ever further towards integrating into this?

Digger
28-01-2013, 11:50 AM
So the notion of being 'in' the EU to most is that it's there only to benefit the rich and the corporations. So it'll be very hard sell to the masses who only see the downside of no jobs and mass migration.


This is one of the reasons why a referendum is not a good idea. Most people don't realise that if the big corporations start leaving, which leaving the EU would do (as an example, one of the key reasons why car manufacturers invest in the UK is the combination of reasonably cheap, reasonably skilled workers and the ability to export into Europe from here) and if you remove the EU link you are competing with lots and lots of very cheap, reasonably skilled workers that have the same ability to export into Europe that we would - not a lot.

You can't just have all the free trade and lovely fluffy stuff that we want without a bit of the bureacracy and some of the rules that we don't like very much coming along with it. They are two sides of the same coin. What you want is the best of both worlds - and that doesn't exist.

We are all in favour of not being told what to do, at not paying billions of pounds into an organisation that doesn't always give us billions of pounds back, but the simple reality is that us leaving the EU is about as sensible as Scottish devolution. Too much is tied in to leave, and for the Tories to push the nuclear button (threatening to leave) with 5 years of uncertainty beforehand, combined with the danger of a badly implemented referendum for millions of people who do not understand the consequences of their choice, means that only a buffoon would invest in a country with a future as uncertain as that.

I don't mind self determination for people who understand what they are deciding. I also don't mind it over matters that don't have the significant potential of sending us firmly into a triple dip recession (a phrase that bothers me a bit, because it just feels like one really really long recession now, the previous signs of growth were really just blips) and keeping that going for another 5 years is just awful timing. Get it agreed, have a debate, include it in a referendum. Maybe 3 or 4 months of uncertainty and campaigning with a vote at the end. This way seems like madness - the chances of us actually having a referendum on this seems tiny, yet we are going to get all the negatives from the decision going the wrong way for businesses without any of the bureacratic benefit.

Digs.

Chrisch
28-01-2013, 12:28 PM
.... millions of people who do not understand the consequences of their choice, ....

Well I am pleased to see healthy debate here. Lots of people who are understanding the issues....

Sadly the negative and incorrect platitudes are still coming thick and fast. It always appears to me to be a loser's argument to leave just because there are things wrong. It is difficult to fix stuff but then if the UK public keep electing UKIP MEPs what do you expect?

Soggy
28-01-2013, 12:33 PM
Well I am pleased to see healthy debate here. Lots of people who are understanding the issues....

Sadly the negative and incorrect platitudes are still coming thick and fast. It always appears to me to be a loser's argument to leave just because there are things wrong. It is difficult to fix stuff but then if the UK public keep electing UKIP MEPs what do you expect?

Much better to elect someone who represents your views than be a subject of an unelected political elite.

Soggy
28-01-2013, 12:48 PM
I don't mind self determination for people who understand what they are deciding. I also don't mind it over matters that don't have the significant potential of sending us firmly into a triple dip recession (a phrase that bothers me a bit, because it just feels like one really really long recession now, the previous signs of growth were really just blips) and keeping that going for another 5 years is just awful timing. Get it agreed, have a debate, include it in a referendum. Maybe 3 or 4 months of uncertainty and campaigning with a vote at the end. This way seems like madness - the chances of us actually having a referendum on this seems tiny, yet we are going to get all the negatives from the decision going the wrong way for businesses without any of the bureacratic benefit.

Sounds like the logic of 'too stupid to understand so you're not allowed a vote'. With that line of thinking your only a step or 2 away from dictatorship.

Everyone has a right of self determination and if you can't make the argument so everyone can understand and you lose the vote then your argument wasn't convincing enough.

Everyone can see the EU from their perspective so they have their worries. The issue of migration to one person is irrelevant to a CEO benefitting from it. So who's right or at you saying money talks and is the only consideration?

I don't buy the bollocks about the big companies moving, it's been used time and again as an argument to scare people with but they are still here. The premise of the UK as a gate to Europe is rubbish, if it were true they'd simply set up in the EU, so something must be keeping them here.

Chrisch
28-01-2013, 12:52 PM
Much better to elect someone who represents your views than be a subject of an unelected political elite.

I agree. That's why we need proportional representation or a similar way of voting. The UK system is the antithesis of representing people's views. If you live in the home counties you have a Tory MP and if you live in Liverpool you have a Labour MP. It's the swing seats that elect the winning team. Then the party returned is in control for 5 years and nothing you can do about it. The lies they told you to get elected are thrown away with the unused voting slips.

The most laughable is the UKIP bods who are making 160 grand a year each of my tax money to make childish insults in a parliament they want to scrap. They really don't want to leave or they would all have to go back on the dole. If we had PR then those people that seriously want out could have that view represented in the national parliament where it would carry some weight as opposed to electing the idiots to the European Parliament where they just make the UK look twattish.

Soggy
28-01-2013, 01:19 PM
I agree. That's why we need proportional representation or a similar way of voting. The UK system is the antithesis of representing people's views. If you live in the home counties you have a Tory MP and if you live in Liverpool you have a Labour MP. It's the swing seats that elect the winning team. Then the party returned is in control for 5 years and nothing you can do about it. The lies they told you to get elected are thrown away with the unused voting slips.

The most laughable is the UKIP bods who are making 160 grand a year each of my tax money to make childish insults in a parliament they want to scrap. They really don't want to leave or they would all have to go back on the dole. If we had PR then those people that seriously want out could have that view represented in the national parliament where it would carry some weight as opposed to electing the idiots to the European Parliament where they just make the UK look twattish.



And PR would give voice to the likes of the nationalists such as BNP who would likely get seats. The old adage of be careful of what you wish for.......

I'd like to hear rational argument for being in the EU. I've still heard nothing better than it would be 'bad'. The same argument has been used for staying out of the Euro but we dodged a bullet there. Much the same argument as was given the ERM and we saw how that ended.

I thinks many would accept being in the EU if the being 'in' didn't constantly change to further integration. After all the last option put to the people was the common market which morphed into the monster of the EU.

Digger
28-01-2013, 02:41 PM
And PR would give voice to the likes of the nationalists such as BNP who would likely get seats. The old adage of be careful of what you wish for.......

I'd like to hear rational argument for being in the EU. I've still heard nothing better than it would be 'bad'. The same argument has been used for staying out of the Euro but we dodged a bullet there. Much the same argument as was given the ERM and we saw how that ended.

I thinks many would accept being in the EU if the being 'in' didn't constantly change to further integration. After all the last option put to the people was the common market which morphed into the monster of the EU.

Is there something wrong with the argument "because we are desperate for overseas investment to keep UK unemployment as low as possible, and spending a few billion is actually peanuts by comparison to the hundreds of thousands of jobs that rely on our relationship with the rest of Europe"?

That, for me, is reason enough. What is amusing is that the people voting to leave will probably be those with the least understanding of how dependent we really are, and these are usually people who are working in low paid jobs in industries created by overseas investment - the middle class professionals and public sector workers will be fine, but they are not the people who will be voting for us to go, it will be the UKIP/BNP supporting people who have the most to lose if this happens.

Digs.

Soggy
28-01-2013, 05:55 PM
Is there something wrong with the argument "because we are desperate for overseas investment to keep UK unemployment as low as possible, and spending a few billion is actually peanuts by comparison to the hundreds of thousands of jobs that rely on our relationship with the rest of Europe"?


not necessarily, trade won't dry up overnight as the scare mongers seem to try and make out. UK runs a trade defecit with Europe, so as a market we are as important to them as they are to us, so trade won't die it will continue in or out of the EU, which on its own gives us a huge bargaining chip to use. If all those companies thought that being out of the UK was profitable they would of already relocated as we aren't part of the Euro. The reason they stay in this country probably has more to do with a shitty tax regime favourabkle to them than anything else. As we can decide our own tax and interest rates we continue to be a country where businesses will locate to.

Digger
28-01-2013, 06:16 PM
not necessarily, trade won't dry up overnight as the scare mongers seem to try and make out. UK runs a trade defecit with Europe, so as a market we are as important to them as they are to us, so trade won't die it will continue in or out of the EU, which on its own gives us a huge bargaining chip to use. If all those companies thought that being out of the UK was profitable they would of already relocated as we aren't part of the Euro. The reason they stay in this country probably has more to do with a shitty tax regime favourabkle to them than anything else. As we can decide our own tax and interest rates we continue to be a country where businesses will locate to.

OK, let's take an example to make this easy. Nissan. They have a plant in the North East that is the largest car plant in the country. It employs 5,000 people in one plant, and that doesn't include all the sales people, service staff, and everything else across the UK that comes from selling cars made in that plant.

They supply cars from that plant to the EU. They have only exported a very small number of cars to Japan during extreme demand. Nissan would manufacture all of its cars in Japan and ship them here, but that wouldn't give them easy access to the EU market through our trade agreements.

If we were not in the EU, a French customer buying a car from the UK would be a lot like us buying a car from the US. There are import duties. There are taxes. It is not easy. There is a load of paperwork involved. The cost of that car goes up, so Nissan cars made in the UK would be more expensive against cars manufactured in France, for example.

A company like Nissan cannot afford to ignore the market that is France, Germany, Spain, the Netherlands, and the rest of the EU. So what would it do? Upscale production in its facilities in other European countries, those countries that are inside the EU.

What would that mean for us? 5,000 people wouldn't have a job any more. Sure, they might keep a few people on to do a bit of manufacturing for the UK market, after all there is a cost to bringing things in from the EU if there is a cost to taking things out, so perhaps 1,000 of those people get to keep their jobs.

This is one example. That's 4,000 jobs that are on a knife-edge. Nissan have made a whole stack of people redundant when a model manufactured at that plant was not particularly successful, over 1,000 in recent history. Do you think us leaving the EU wouldn't be such a huge thing that they would have to rethink how they did business?

Now put yourself in the shoes of Mr Nissan. He needs to invest in the EU production of cars, because sales of the new model are going well, and he is planning a new plant to manufacture their next big thing. Where are you going to put that plant? In the UK, where the government fairly openly suggests they are ok with us leaving the EU, and will allow Joe Public to decide the future profitability of his business in the EU? Or perhaps somewhere like the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, or perhaps Estonia or Latvia, where they have the same access to the EU, cheap workforce, relaxed employment laws and none of the uncertainty that the UK is going to have hanging over it for the next 5 years?

As far as I can see it, the only way to allay the fears of Mr Nissan is to vote in a Labour or Lib Dem government that is 100% against leaving the EU. Because they are not that stupid and reactionary. Because then he can invest knowing that the stupid Mr Cameron and his little idea of quitting the EU has gone away.

Digs.

Hot Totty
28-01-2013, 06:26 PM
Mr Nissan will do what he wants regardless our being in the eu. Membership is one factor but so is having a flexible and skilled workforce. Now I'm not saying that if we pulled out of the eu that Nissan would stay but business is dynamic and it will always look to serve its own interests so by having control back (tax/vat/working hours/ labour laws etc etc) we could attract other businesses to invest or heaven forbid become a manufacturing nation once again. There will be a period of pain I just think that in the long run it would be worth it - political suicide tho so it won't happen and we'll continue in limbo fudge :(

jamesp
28-01-2013, 07:59 PM
Digs,

Nissan UK is actually owned by Renault (state owned French company).

AxeMan
28-01-2013, 08:19 PM
not necessarily, trade won't dry up overnight as the scare mongers seem to try and make out. UK runs a trade defecit with Europe, so as a market we are as important to them as they are to us, so trade won't die it will continue in or out of the EU, which on its own gives us a huge bargaining chip to use. If all those companies thought that being out of the UK was profitable they would of already relocated as we aren't part of the Euro. The reason they stay in this country probably has more to do with a shitty tax regime favourabkle to them than anything else. As we can decide our own tax and interest rates we continue to be a country where businesses will locate to.

We're now Germany's biggest trading partner. Neither we nor they want to mess that up. Plus they're worried that France might be going to same way as Italy with their socialist government.

I remember when all the big multinationals were going to leave the UK if we didn't join the euro.

Janos
28-01-2013, 10:09 PM
I'd like to hear rational argument for being in the EU. I've still heard nothing better than it would be 'bad'.

Er. Did you not see my post about wine. Do you remember when you could only bring a couple of bottles in tax free?

Janos

PS - Digger makes a good point too.

Hot Totty
28-01-2013, 10:13 PM
Er. Did you not see my post about wine. Do you remember when you could only bring a couple of bottles in tax free?

Janos

PS - Digger makes a good point too.
Being a Guinness man ( doing my best for the Irish economy) I don't give a stuff about overpriced overrated French plonk, plus as James said Nissan uk is French

Jackdiver
28-01-2013, 10:47 PM
Er. Did you not see my post about wine. Do you remember when you could only bring a couple of bottles in tax free?



Err... I thought we didn't have duty free any more within the EU?

Scuttler
29-01-2013, 12:43 AM
Being a Guinness man ( doing my best for the Irish economy) I don't give a stuff about overpriced overrated French plonk, plus as James said Nissan uk is French

I have drunk a few pints of the black stuff in your honour tonight....to be sure....to be sure. Tomorrow....I'll clear up the rest of the pints I missed :)

ziggi
29-01-2013, 09:46 AM
Sorry for the off topic
but what are the current (if any) rules for an EU citizen buying property in the UK to either rent or use as a 2nd home for extended visits?,
likely a cash buy,main home will be in France

Hellenic Diver
29-01-2013, 09:57 AM
Sorry for the off topic
but what are the current (if any) rules for an EU citizen buying property in the UK to either rent or use as a 2nd home for extended visits?,
likely a cash buy,main home will be in France

No restrictions

Chrisch
29-01-2013, 10:03 AM
.....
Now put yourself in the shoes of Mr Nissan. He needs to invest in the EU production of cars, because sales of the new model are going well, and he is planning a new plant to manufacture their next big thing. Where are you going to put that plant? In the UK, where the government fairly openly suggests they are ok with us leaving the EU, and will allow Joe Public to decide the future profitability of his business in the EU? Or perhaps somewhere like the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, or perhaps Estonia or Latvia, where they have the same access to the EU, cheap workforce, relaxed employment laws and none of the uncertainty that the UK is going to have hanging over it for the next 5 years?....

Nissan/Renault would (will?) almost certainly put future production to Dacia in Romania. The new Renault engined Dacias are selling well on the mainland.

Chrisch
29-01-2013, 10:03 AM
Mr Nissan will do what he wants regardless our being in the eu. Membership is one factor but so is having a flexible and skilled workforce. ...

The UK's screwed then.

Digger
29-01-2013, 11:21 AM
Mr Nissan will do what he wants regardless our being in the eu. Membership is one factor but so is having a flexible and skilled workforce. Now I'm not saying that if we pulled out of the eu that Nissan would stay but business is dynamic and it will always look to serve its own interests so by having control back (tax/vat/working hours/ labour laws etc etc) we could attract other businesses to invest or heaven forbid become a manufacturing nation once again. There will be a period of pain I just think that in the long run it would be worth it - political suicide tho so it won't happen and we'll continue in limbo fudge :(

OK, so if we are not in the EU, Mr Nissan (who is almost certainly telling Mr Renault what to do with their Nissan manufacturing plants in the EU) is going to want a better deal to make up for the additional paperwork, duties and inconvenience by comparison to the current system of pretty much free trade between countries. The way to offer that is to either a) reduce wages in the UK plant or b) make it easier to fire people at minimum notice. You want to make it easier to pay people less and fire them more easily in the UK, just so we don't have to be in Europe any more?

I just don't see why that is worth it in order to have some odd idea of self-determination in the UK which we already have. The EU can't force us to do things if Westminster doesn't agree to it. See comment pages and pages ago about giving prisoners the right to vote. EU law says we have to. And yet as if by some miracle we haven't given prisoners this right.

If it is just about a few billion pounds of cash that we pay in but don't quite get the same back, then frankly that is a drop in the ocean compared to the UK economy generally, and also compared to the potential loss that comes from losing big organisations investment and jobs that we need right now. I agree that there is a discussion to be had - but do you honestly think that the general voting public, with an average of 5 GCSEs and who would need several hours of explanation to understand the real issues that leaving the EU would cause, can understand the economic arguments behind why we are in the EU through your average referendum campaign? No wonder the likes of UKIP and the BNP resort to simple "you don't want some Kraut in Brussels deciding how straight our bananas have to be!" drivel that for the large part doesn't actually exist and we are free to ignore.

As was discussed last night in our house, there are two camps. Camp one is people who want to leave the EU. Camp two is people who understand economics.

Digs.

Spirit of Guernsey
29-01-2013, 11:28 AM
Camp three are those who know that the EU and the Single Market are two different things.

Chrisch
29-01-2013, 11:42 AM
... You want to make it easier to pay people less and fire them more easily in the UK, just so we don't have to be in Europe any more?....

They want to leave so it's easier to pay people less and fire them more easily. "More competitive" is the euphemism.

Digger
29-01-2013, 12:19 PM
Camp three are those who know that the EU and the Single Market are two different things.

I'd like to see the UK manage to leave the EU without leaving the Single Market. Why would Germany, France and others allow that? We are allowed to pick and choose the bits of the EU that we like, but leave the bits we don't? I don't imagine they are particularly delighted that we are getting a whole load of benefits from the EU without having to stand the problems of the Euro, which is why all new members signing up have to agree to join the Euro. We were lucky there, in the current situation, but who knows whether that was the right thing to do long term. So Camp three can be people who don't understand that this is massively more complicated than a simple yes or no.

The other thing that occurs to me is the amount of paperwork created by trying to break the bond with the EU. I can imagine the government quite easily spending several billion pounds a year for a couple of decades trying to fix everything that comes with a simple decision like deciding to leave the EU. Having seen the money spent on just trying to amend a small clause in the paperwork before going to a Commons vote, trying to actually run a referendum, deal with the paperwork involved, fix all the laws that rely on EU membership at present, fight several legal cases that suddenly appear at our door as a result, will make Brussels seem efficient by comparison.

But, as we went through pages and pages ago, to have a referendum we would need a Tory majority at the next election. So we might as well discuss what breed we'd like our flying pig to be, but if it did happen I have to say we've got many bigger things to worry about than whether we stay in the EU or not.

Digs.

Spirit of Guernsey
29-01-2013, 12:23 PM
Norway?

Soggy
29-01-2013, 12:41 PM
As was discussed last night in our house, there are two camps. Camp one is people who want to leave the EU. Camp two is people who understand economics..

If you understand economics your in a minority and are wasted in your day job. It's little better than complete guess work.

Camp 4 - those who've looked at the bigger picture and are worried.

If you understand economics, care to explain why Germany is repatriating gold to the Bundesbank and stating readiness for a 'currency crisis' as the reason?

Oh and Nissan got huge tax breaks for putting its factory in Sunderland. Fuck all to do with work force or access to Europe it was simply about their bottom line profit.

jamesp
29-01-2013, 12:45 PM
I would be happy with just pay lip service to the rules we dont like(like the French), and not having a bunch of underemployed arseholes in the government "gold plate" and enforce the hell out of crap that gets the file 13 treatment elsewhere.

Chrisch
29-01-2013, 12:57 PM
.....
If you understand economics, care to explain why Germany is repatriating gold to the Bundesbank and stating readiness for a 'currency crisis' as the reason?...

It's pure politics. Are we now suggesting the Germans are about to do a Brown and sell all the gold off to buy foreign currency? Why on earth would they do that? All the world's currencies are trying to devalue against each other in a moronic zero sum game. The "export lead" recovery from impoverishing all your citizens being the given reason. Germany already has massive exports and a balance of payments surplus on exports.

All that is happening is they are shifting the metal from one vault to another.

Hot Totty
29-01-2013, 12:58 PM
As to prisoners right to vote are we now not liable to massive fines emposed by Strasbourg for refusing them the right to vote?

Chrisch
29-01-2013, 12:59 PM
Norway?

What about them? All the EU costs none of the benefits. Small population loads of oil wealth. Very expensive booze. Good diving. Eat whales. Nice scenery.

Soggy
29-01-2013, 01:05 PM
It's pure politics. Are we now suggesting the Germans are about to do a Brown and sell all the gold off to buy foreign currency? Why on earth would they do that? All the world's currencies are trying to devalue against each other in a moronic zero sum game. The "export lead" recovery from impoverishing all your citizens being the given reason. Germany already has massive exports and a balance of payments surplus on exports.

All that is happening is they are shifting the metal from one vault to another.

Well that's a unique answer and not one I've seen in the FT or other media outlets. So using the term 'currency crisis' is keeping your citizens in the dark.

One school of thought is that Germany has had enough of being told what to do by France, USA and UK and as those countries hold Germany's gold, ostensibly to stop Russia getting it during the Cold War, they are repatriating it to give them much more muscle. Also factor in that there is much debate on whether the likes of the US even have all the gold, they've not let the Germans see any if their gold for 30 years, you have an interesting event looming in the horizon.

I surmise brown sold the gold at the bottom if the market cos.......Germany at the time were asking to repatriate their gold from the BoE at that time.

Chrisch
29-01-2013, 02:02 PM
Well that's a unique answer and not one I've seen in the FT or other media outlets. So using the term 'currency crisis' is keeping your citizens in the dark.

You've lost me now - what is this currency crisis? One made up by Jeremy Warner as usual?


One school of thought is that Germany has had enough of being told what to do by France, USA and UK and as those countries hold Germany's gold, ostensibly to stop Russia getting it during the Cold War, they are repatriating it to give them much more muscle.

How does the physical location of a small part of the central bank's reserves change the "muscle" (whatever that means) of a member state? Also as far as I can ascertain Germany is not being told what to do by anyone.



Also factor in that there is much debate on whether the likes of the US even have all the gold, they've not let the Germans see any if their gold for 30 years, you have an interesting event looming in the horizon....

I'm sure the various German officials have been allowed a quick peek now and then :) Of course if this crazy Internet story were 5% true then yes we would have a very interesting event. It's almost worth believing the wingnuts for the entertainment value.

Soggy
29-01-2013, 02:09 PM
You've lost me now - what is this currency crisis? One made up by Jeremy Warner as usual?

How does the physical location of a small part of the central bank's reserves change the "muscle" (whatever that means) of a member state? Also as far as I can ascertain Germany is not being told what to do by anyone.

I'm sure the various German officials have been allowed a quick peek now and then :) Of course if this crazy Internet story were 5% true then yes we would have a very interesting event. It's almost worth believing the wingnuts for the entertainment value.

The physical location matters, remember possession is 9/10ths of the law. If they need gold to back up a currency crisis you'd be much better having the gold in question than 'hoping' its actually present in someone else's vault.

It was the Bundesbank, the German central bank that stated it was repatriating the gold in case of an upcoming "currency crisis"

No German officials have been allowed to check the gold stocks, also came from the Bundesbank.

I'm sure the likes of Forbes and the Financial times like these 5% truth stories to print. Use google and enlighten yourself.

sheesh
29-01-2013, 02:49 PM
As to prisoners right to vote are we now not liable to massive fines emposed by Strasbourg for refusing them the right to vote?

The EU and ECHR are two completely seperate entities. The former Ted Heath took us into, the latter Winston Churchill. One binds us on matters of free movement of goods, trade and people and the other provides protection for individuals from the excesses of the state providing things like the right to a private and family life, the right to a fair trial etc.

The European Court of Human Rights upholds the European Convention of Human Rights which we have been signatories to since 1947.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

Elvis
29-01-2013, 03:19 PM
The EU and ECHR are two completely seperate entities. The former Ted Heath took us into, the latter Winston Churchill. One binds us on matters of free movement of goods, trade and people and the other provides protection for individuals from the excesses of the state providing things like the right to a private and family life, the right to a fair trial etc.

The European Court of Human Rights upholds the European Convention of Human Rights which we have been signatories to since 1947.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

And let us not forget, the ECHR was Churchill's "baby" he wanted it to be his legacy, you wouldn't be wanting to ditch Churchill's legacy would you, good old winny, won the war almost single handed, what sort of patriot would you be then?

Chrisch
29-01-2013, 04:47 PM
The physical location matters, remember possession is 9/10ths of the law. ....

No, in law possession is no indication of title. You're thinking of folklore.

Soggy
29-01-2013, 05:09 PM
No, in law possession is no indication of title. You're thinking of folklore.

In soveriegn states and central banks it is :)

So would you leave large amounts of gold with your bankrupt neighbour or with your old adversary from across the pond, who's not got the best of records when it comes to respect for other soveriegn nations or international laws....

If your answer to either of these is yes, then i have a good friend in Nigeria you might want to speak with.

BBC News - 'Bankrupt' France comments rebutted (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21244911)

and if you want a good dose of conspiracy theory......why is France so keen to get into Mali......i wonder....anything to do with one of its mining exports?

Digger
29-01-2013, 06:41 PM
The other question that is fundamentally bothering me a bit is that everyone sees the UK as "us" and the rest of the EU as "them" - so their economic problems are not our problems, and the EU government is not our government etc, whereas in fact our government signed us up to this, and we are as much a part of Brussels as any other country in the EU.

The reality is that we are part of Europe. We got into it for sound reasons a couple of decades ago. We chose to have all the benefits that come with it. Now as soon as the going gets tough, everyone wants to get going.

I don't really believe in that. Partly because we are part of Europe. It has done a whole bunch of stuff for us as a country that has benefited us, so we should give it a chance when things aren't so rosy.

I suppose the analogy is like a marriage. Some people choose to give up and walk away when things aren't perfect, despite the common sense and economics of it making logical sense, and working on the relationship to make it work to the benefit of everyone. Many of the Eurosceptics seem to treat it like a one night stand. They want all the benefit without ever having to contribute.

The EU is always going to be a compromise. Countries like Greece are getting bailed out and given money all over the place, but don't you think that they are sitting in their armchairs arguing about whether they should be a part of an organisation that is going to saddle them with more than a generation of debt, instead of allowing them to control their own economy without having to be a part of the Euro which has prevented them from being able to control their own currency to manage their situation? And the Germans who watch as immigration from Eastern Europe settles and increases unemployment for them, legal EU migration to find jobs that they have signed up to and agreed? Should we all leave and give up on the idea of the EU altogether? I don't see a convincing argument for that.

Digs.

Soggy
29-01-2013, 07:13 PM
Should we all leave and give up on the idea of the EU altogether? I don't see a convincing argument for that.


You managed to make a pretty good arguemnt yourself but a couple of points for you.

CAP - corrupt and not fit for purpose.
Euro - one size fits all currency has been a disaster.
EU Migration - unrestricted movement of people across borders.
ECB - setting interest rates to benefit only German industry.
EU Parliament - waste huge amounts of money on moving site every few months.
EU Parliament - continent wide regulations are implemented with little opposition
EU Budget - the auditors refuse to sign off the budget as the accounts don't balance.
EU Elite - unelected politicians running the show.
MEPs - does anyone know who there MEP is without googling?
UK Contribution - net contributor.

reasons to stay in the Euro - its bad to leave.

Janos
29-01-2013, 09:03 PM
Err... I thought we didn't have duty free any more within the EU?

Exactly. Leave the EU and we're back to only bringing in a couple of bottles of wine, a litre of spirits, or a six-pack of beer.

Janos

Hot Totty
29-01-2013, 09:05 PM
Exactly. Leave the EU and we're back to only bringing in a couple of bottles of wine, a litre of spirits, or a six-pack of beer.

Janos
And that's a bad thing? :p

Janos
29-01-2013, 09:05 PM
You managed to make a pretty good arguemnt yourself but a couple of points for you.

CAP - corrupt and not fit for purpose.
Euro - one size fits all currency has been a disaster.
EU Migration - unrestricted movement of people across borders.
ECB - setting interest rates to benefit only German industry.
EU Parliament - waste huge amounts of money on moving site every few months.
EU Parliament - continent wide regulations are implemented with little opposition
EU Budget - the auditors refuse to sign off the budget as the accounts don't balance.
EU Elite - unelected politicians running the show.
MEPs - does anyone know who there MEP is without googling?
UK Contribution - net contributor.

reasons to stay in the Euro - its bad to leave.

This is like me setting up my house as "Janos-land" and declaring the rate of income tax to be zero. It makes financial sense until you stop and think where my money comes from - which is outside Janos-land.

Janos

AxeMan
29-01-2013, 09:26 PM
You managed to make a pretty good arguemnt yourself but a couple of points for you.

CAP - corrupt and not fit for purpose.
Euro - one size fits all currency has been a disaster.
EU Migration - unrestricted movement of people across borders.
ECB - setting interest rates to benefit only German industry.
EU Parliament - waste huge amounts of money on moving site every few months.
EU Parliament - continent wide regulations are implemented with little opposition
EU Budget - the auditors refuse to sign off the budget as the accounts don't balance.
EU Elite - unelected politicians running the show.
MEPs - does anyone know who there MEP is without googling?
UK Contribution - net contributor.

reasons to stay in the Euro - its bad to leave.
Don't forget the Common Fisheries Policy too.

Jackdiver
29-01-2013, 09:39 PM
Exactly. Leave the EU and we're back to only bringing in a couple of bottles of wine, a litre of spirits, or a six-pack of beer.


Yes, but it'd be duty free...

At the moment you can bring back what you like from France or where ever you want within the EU...

"Duty paid"...

Janos
29-01-2013, 09:43 PM
Yes, but it'd be duty free...

At the moment you can bring back what you like from France or where ever you want within the EU...

"Duty paid"...

I'm confused. Are we agreeing?

I used to be able to bring in a couple of bottles of wine without paying a stupid amount of money. Now I can bring in hundreds of bottles if it's for personal consumption. Hooray for the EU! Hic.

Janos

Mikael
29-01-2013, 09:49 PM
Of course if you are based in Spain you will see all the elderly Brits and may well have the same view of why do all these old foreigners come here, they don't make any effort to speak Spanish and then want to import Heinz baked beans



not to forget moaning about how the locals can't make good brew and getting visiting family to bring over Yorkshire tea bags ;)

Diving Dude
29-01-2013, 10:17 PM
Digsy, you make a valid point until you state that if others don't agree with you they are thick and don't understand the question.
I taught my kids that if you disagree with some one the last thing you do is insult or criticise them for their choice, it means your argument is running out of steam.

Diving Dude
29-01-2013, 11:04 PM
I think I may have to start another useless poll.
The question I would ask is -
Are the best decisions in life made by the heart or finances.

Spirit of Guernsey
30-01-2013, 12:09 AM
I'm confused. Are we agreeing?

I used to be able to bring in a couple of bottles of wine without paying a stupid amount of money. Now I can bring in hundreds of bottles if it's for personal consumption. Hooray for the EU! Hic.

Janos

but can you get spirits forŁ8 per litre?

Diving Dude
30-01-2013, 12:13 AM
Yup

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f7/White_spirit.JPG/220px-White_spirit.JPG

Baron015
30-01-2013, 12:15 AM
Can't wait to leave the EU. Then I can order a sodding BOV at last.

Soggy
30-01-2013, 06:57 AM
Can't wait to leave the EU. Then I can order a sodding BOV at last.

When are you ever in the EU, your always on holiday :)

Chrisch
30-01-2013, 10:56 AM
You managed to make a pretty good arguemnt yourself but a couple of points for you.

.....CAP - corrupt and not fit for purpose.

CAP is not corrupt. the reforms needed to stop big business benefiting will never take place because big business runs the world. This is problem with the current crony capitalism so beloved of the right, it is a problem with the EU, the UK, the US and so on. The CAP is a political football.


Euro - one size fits all currency has been a disaster.

How so? Where is this "disaster" you keep banging on about? The 2008 bank fraud has collapsed the economies of the developed world including those in the Euro. The Euro imposes strict controls on governments preventing printing money like a loon (UK strategy). The "disaster" is nothing to do with the Euro.


EU Migration - unrestricted movement of people across borders.

Whole point of the common market - if you don't agree with it then we should leave. This is the debate to have but you will have a pop at me again about racist little Englander type arguments.


ECB - setting interest rates to benefit only German industry.

Rubbish. The ECB sets a rate to suit the Euro, like the BoE sets a rate to suit Sterling. Who does or doesn't benefit is not the decision making criteria.


EU Parliament - waste huge amounts of money on moving site every few months.

Politicians are like that. Hardly reason to throw the towel in is it?


EU Parliament - continent wide regulations are implemented with little opposition

European parliament doesn't make or implement laws/regulations. But if you feel they are innefectual it might be due to the fact it's full of UKIP wingnuts who think their job is to insult people and piss about wasting huge sums of money (see above point :))


EU Budget - the auditors refuse to sign off the budget as the accounts don't balance.

Civil service getting it wrong.


EU Elite - unelected politicians running the show.

Yeah - I'll agree on that - it needs some reform badly.


MEPs - does anyone know who there MEP is without googling?

Or your MP, or your local councillor, or your PCC Commissioner - voter apathy isn't the fault of the EU.


UK Contribution - net contributor.

Peanuts and more than outweighed by the business benefits.


I'd be the first to admit there are some big issues that need to be addressed, but it's a loser's way of dealing to run off crying and refuse to play any more. The world is the way it is and all of us must share some responsibility for being lazy and not taking enough interest in politics. The whole of the developed world lives in a "Strictly On Ice Jesus Christ Superstar's Got Talent" la-la land. The real power of big business want that and work hard to ensure that is the way people stay. Meantime big business pays no tax and you and I get fleeced, and the bottom two deciles of society get shat on.

The in-out debate revolves around the free movement of people in the EU. All the rest is window dressing IMHO.

Soggy
30-01-2013, 11:30 AM
EU regulations are the most direct form of EU law, as soon as they are passed, they have a binding legal force throughout every member state on a par with national laws. - From the EU website.

Euro being a disaster - a common currency for 15 member states with considerable differences in economic performance. No ability to control their currency to boost output from devaluation. It's worked out so well for the PIIGS....

ECB has shown time and again it's at the behest of the Bundesbank when setting interest rates. You don't bite the hand that feeds you. You don't set an interest rate to favour the poor economies of Southern Europe to the detriment of the economic powerhouse of Germany.

Take off the rose tinted European love-in specs and see the truth of the disaster across Europe.

Digger
30-01-2013, 11:40 AM
Digsy, you make a valid point until you state that if others don't agree with you they are thick and don't understand the question.


The thing is, those people arguing that we should leave can't understand the consequences, or they wouldn't think the way they do. I am sure they understand the question.

It is a bit like someone telling you that the quickest way to get to work would be to walk across the M25. It is true - the quickest way would be straight across, but if you've ever been anywhere near the M25 you know that this is incredibly foolish to even discuss. So foolish that it doesn't warrant discussion - you just tell them that they are being silly.

I see people that think we should leave the EU in the same way you might a person who suggests walking across the M25 at 8am is sensible. They are making decisions either without all the facts, or they have seen the facts and can't see the consequences of that choice.

The danger is that (to carry on using my M25 analogy) asking the general public whether we should stay in the Euro is a bit like asking a 5 year old whether we should walk across the M25 to work, because it is quicker. Except whatever the 5 year old says, having never stood at the side of a motorway, you have to do. If you explained all the arguments to them, they could make a sensible choice about whether that was a good idea. But people in the UK don't listen to all the arguments, they don't largely understand the economics behind it, and if they did they'd laugh Cameron and his pandering to the lowest common denominator out of office.

Digs.

Soggy
30-01-2013, 11:50 AM
So go right ahead and state those facts so we can have a proper assessment of the facts.

So far you've not stated a single fact or verifiable figure. You whole argument has been a couple of poor analogues and the 'leaving the EU will be bad'..

Spirit of Guernsey
30-01-2013, 11:57 AM
The thing is, those people arguing that we should leave can't understand the consequences, or they wouldn't think the way they do. I am sure they understand the question.

It is a bit like someone telling you that the quickest way to get to work would be to walk across the M25. It is true - the quickest way would be straight across, but if you've ever been anywhere near the M25 you know that this is incredibly foolish to even discuss. So foolish that it doesn't warrant discussion - you just tell them that they are being silly.

I see people that think we should leave the EU in the same way you might a person who suggests walking across the M25 at 8am is sensible. They are making decisions either without all the facts, or they have seen the facts and can't see the consequences of that choice.

The danger is that (to carry on using my M25 analogy) asking the general public whether we should stay in the Euro is a bit like asking a 5 year old whether we should walk across the M25 to work, because it is quicker. Except whatever the 5 year old says, having never stood at the side of a motorway, you have to do. If you explained all the arguments to them, they could make a sensible choice about whether that was a good idea. But people in the UK don't listen to all the arguments, they don't largely understand the economics behind it, and if they did they'd laugh Cameron and his pandering to the lowest common denominator out of office.

Digs.

I used to walk across the M25 every day when I lived near Reigate.

Digger
30-01-2013, 12:00 PM
Take off the rose tinted European love-in specs and see the truth of the disaster across Europe.

Just as soon as you stop blaming the EU for failings that are as much the fault of the UK as the EU. Don't you see how the UK (and our economy, people, faults and failings) are a significant proportion of the EU? Leaving the EU won't fix the thousands of people sitting on their backsides waiting for a handout, it won't solve the inability of our politicians and general public to actually fix simple things, it won't get us out of recesssion so that there is so much money sloshing about we can all have mortgages at 5 times our self declared income again. It will probably do the opposite. Plus we won't have anyone to blame it on then but ourselves, and we will be on our own dealing with it.

All the arguments against Scottish devolution (which seem to make sense to most people) apply to UK leaving the EU. Being a small little place, even a prosperous place with very few problems, is a dangerous position to be in when it comes to a global economy dominated by 2 or 3 major powers. The EU is currently one of those powers. None of the member states on their own would be. We'd just have to follow along with whichever direction the US, China and India took the world economy in the next 10 years.

Digs.

Soggy
30-01-2013, 12:04 PM
So your still relying on the same tired argument of 'leaving the EU would be bad'

For someone who appears to credit themselves with a high degree of economic knowledge your complete lack of factual argument is baffling.

Or as I surmise to be the case you don't have an arguement to make for staying in the EU.

Digger
30-01-2013, 12:13 PM
So your still relying on the same tired argument of 'leaving the EU would be bad'

For someone who appears to credit themselves with a high degree of economic knowledge your complete lack of factual argument is baffling.

Or as I surmise to be the case you don't have an arguement to make for staying in the EU.

Don't be silly. See various economic arguments over the last 15 pages. Businesses would have no incentive to invest in the UK for access to the EU. Because we wouldn't be in it. If you'd like an illustration of how fragile business is, see how much the impact of a few million tax break for someone like Nissan did on the decision to invest here. A few million. Any idea how fast you can spend a few million if you've got to go back to the old fashioned method of shipping stuff from one country to another without a free trade agreement, even processing the paperwork would wipe that out in a couple of years, let alone the levies and duties that seem almost inevitable - like importing something from the US and having to pay VAT, import duty, admin fees, it soon stacks up.

I can't provide you with economic facts on something that hasn't happened yet. I could probably find a good idea of overseas investment currently in the UK which would be threatened, and put an estimate on what percentage of those businesses might leave or downscale operations in the UK, but the reality is that would be guesswork. You are asking for facts where none exist.

But your argument seems to centre around "I don't want someone in Brussels telling me what to do" instead preferring someone in Westminster who has a similar level of distain for the electorate doing the same. Given the choice between the EU parliament and UK parliament, I can't see much difference personally. The secondary argument seems to be "I don't want to pay money to another country that is a part of the same union that I am a part of" which seems a little odd, a bit like objecting to paying a bit more of the gas bill because your wife/husband earns less money than you do, but living separately would double what you are each paying. Feel free to share something more than that, because I can't see any facts coming out of the anti-EU argument here either.

Digs.

Soggy
30-01-2013, 12:22 PM
And still nothing of substance. You now admit you have nothing to base your argument on but guesswork. So you whole argument is now " I guess it'll be bad to leave Europe'

I was hoping for a little more from an economic mastermind.

I've made my argument based on the evidence shown in this thread or you can use google for yourself. Trade won't dry up over night, it's more important to our trading partners.

Chrisch
30-01-2013, 12:22 PM
EU regulations are the most direct form of EU law, as soon as they are passed, they have a binding legal force throughout every member state on a par with national laws. - From the EU website.

Unless ratified, member states do not pass as law any decision made by the commission.


Euro being a disaster - a common currency for 15 member states with considerable differences in economic performance. No ability to control their currency to boost output from devaluation. It's worked out so well for the PIIGS....

You are assuming that the devaluation of a currency would boost output or even that anyone would want to do it. If you have 20 grand in the bank how do you feel when you wake up and the government has devalued it so it's now worth 16 grand? If your pension fund has lost 30% of it's value in the last 5 years this is a good thing?

The Euro removes from individual member states the ability to steal money from their citizens by devaluing currency. The great fear is that now yet another EU law will be broken and the money supply will be increased in order to devalue the Euro with the specific goal of making it easier to pay off the loans, the tactic used by the UK government - which has no such qualms about shitting on it's citizens.

The so called PIGS (governments and people) went loopy and borrowed money on nearly as bad a scale as the UK and are now, as a result, nearly as bolloxed as the UK. Blaming the Euro is a bit like blaming Sterling for Gordon Brown's crackpot decision to buy aircraft carriers for which we have no aircraft, or people re-mortgaging their house to pay for their holidays because the bank offered them a 2% mortgage for a year. Because their government cannot steal billions from their savers/investors like the UK has done then they are in the poo rather more than we are. It's their own fault, not the currency or it's rules.



ECB has shown time and again it's at the behest of the Bundesbank when setting interest rates. You don't bite the hand that feeds you. You don't set an interest rate to favour the poor economies of Southern Europe to the detriment of the economic powerhouse of Germany.

There are many people that share this view but no evidence it is correct. The low interest rate encourages malinvestment, notably property (and the resultant bubble and bursting of property - hence the 2008 crash) It would appear that the availability of cheap loans is too much temptation for too many people and as a result they go nuts. (Many German people too - just because Germany itself didn't have a real estate bubble doesn't mean that thousands of Germans aren't screwed with their villas in Greece) You are lamenting human nature.


Take off the rose tinted European love-in specs and see the truth of the disaster across Europe.

There is, without doubt, a disaster to be seen, but it is not as a result of the EU, the Euro or the impropriety of the gravy-train MEPs. The disaster is global and is a combination of factors, the main one of which is the real estate bubble that has crippled the global financial system. A debt-fuelled boom for over a decade has left pretty much every developed economy on the planet with a massive and insurmountable problem that has yet to really play through the system. In the US the answer has been to create trillions of dollars and for the government to buy up the banks' bad debt lumbering the taxpayer with the shit to clear up for a generation and a half. The UK has pursued much the same strategy but on a smaller scale as it has a globally irrelevant currency which is not mopped up like the US dollar is.

The "European project" of greater integration and co-operation between the member states has worked well and provided many benefits (with the concomitant cost of course) for it's citizens. I don't have any rosy glow viewpoint of it, it is something I am broadly in favour of and support the general idea. It is riven with problems and the very serious issue of corruption needs to be addressed urgently. Sadly as one can see that criminal behaviour by the global banking elite goes unpunished (rewarded even) and the corruption that is now endemic in global capitalism is unstoppable and existential in it's threat. The solution to the criminal behaviour of the super rich can only come at a trans-national level. Individual countries do not have the power to tackle it. Countries like the UK and US are drivers of it rather than opposing it. It's much more of an issue to me than the in-out issue of the UK in the EU.

Digger
30-01-2013, 01:17 PM
And still nothing of substance. You now admit you have nothing to base your argument on but guesswork. So you whole argument is now " I guess it'll be bad to leave Europe'


See my M25 analogy. I guess it would also be bad to walk across the M25 at 8am, but the simple fact is that it is possible that you could do it every day blindfold and you might not get killed by a car doing 80mph while its owner is on their mobile phone and leering over the woman he fancies in lane 2. Unlikely, but possible. Doesn't make it a good idea to try it even once.

Everything that you believe could come true. But I (and many other people who can see the obvious arguments for staying) think if you have a hope that leaving the EU is going to somehow fix everything that is wrong with the UK you might as well put on the blindfold and save yourself 15 minutes of having to get around that inconvenient motorway each morning.

I am not an economic mastermind. I can just see fairly straightforward business decisions being made for companies looking to onvest in the very attractive multi-billion dollar economy with spread risk that is the EU, compared to the comparably tinpot economy that is the UK with a fairly duff track record of stability, sensible political decisions and economic growth. If you can't see those, it doesn't make me a mastermind, it just means you are either ignoring what is in front of you or deluded about what is going to happen if they actually do this.

You would do well to concede that your argument is also guesswork, albeit based on xenophobia and scepticism as opposed to any real understanding of the financial impact of doing it. If you wanted to argue the financial points, you are very welcome to pick up on any statement made by the pro-EU camp and point out its failings. I look forward to this, as opposed to trying to convince you based on nothing more than "it would be good to leave because I don't like France, Germany and the rest of those foreign types what don't talk proper English"

Digs.

Soggy
30-01-2013, 04:27 PM
You would do well to concede that your argument is also guesswork, albeit based on xenophobia and scepticism as opposed to any real understanding of the financial impact of doing it. If you wanted to argue the financial points, you are very welcome to pick up on any statement made by the pro-EU camp and point out its failings. I look forward to this, as opposed to trying to convince you based on nothing more than "it would be good to leave because I don't like France, Germany and the rest of those foreign types what don't talk proper English"


I see you've run out of arguement and returned to the xenophobic/little englander/racist line.

I've read your M25 analogy and couldn't understand it at all at 8am in the morning on the M25 in the morning i could crawl blindfolded drunk as a bat across the motorway not worrying as the traffic is stationary. Try again to make an argument to convince those of us who are economic illterates of the great benefits to remaining in the EU?


Your argument doesn't make sense form being in the EU from a business point of view as they follow bottom line and won't particulalry care where they place their investment as long as the place they are putting that investment has a stable long term outlook, which compared with the Eurozone the UK has that. Then also think through the logic behind it being a gateway to Europe, bhy place your business here when its as easy to of placed your business within the Eurozone and not have to worry about currency exchange and even better access to cheap labour. Its all about tax breaks and bottom line, we were told when we didn't go into the Euro that multi-nationals would leave in droves, they didn't because we made it profitable for them to remain here and theres no reason for that not to happen.

I'm surprised you and Chris are still in this country, with its tinpot economy, haven't you thought of moving somewhere nice like Portugal, Spain or even Greece. I hear those Eurozone countries economis are ticking along nicely these days with France about to follow.

Digger
30-01-2013, 04:56 PM
I see you've run out of arguement and returned to the xenophobic/little englander/racist line.

I've read your M25 analogy and couldn't understand it at all at 8am in the morning on the M25 in the morning i could crawl blindfolded drunk as a bat across the motorway not worrying as the traffic is stationary. Try again to make an argument to convince those of us who are economic illterates of the great benefits to remaining in the EU?


Your argument doesn't make sense form being in the EU from a business point of view as they follow bottom line and won't particulalry care where they place their investment as long as the place they are putting that investment has a stable long term outlook, which compared with the Eurozone the UK has that. Then also think through the logic behind it being a gateway to Europe, bhy place your business here when its as easy to of placed your business within the Eurozone and not have to worry about currency exchange and even better access to cheap labour. Its all about tax breaks and bottom line, we were told when we didn't go into the Euro that multi-nationals would leave in droves, they didn't because we made it profitable for them to remain here and theres no reason for that not to happen.

I'm surprised you and Chris are still in this country, with its tinpot economy, haven't you thought of moving somewhere nice like Portugal, Spain or even Greece. I hear those Eurozone countries economis are ticking along nicely these days with France about to follow.

To help you with a fairly straightforward analogy, perhaps you could imagine a minefield, which operates in the same way. You might get through it unscathed. Or you might step on a mine. If the route to work was 5 minutes across a minefield, or half an hour round the outside of it, which would you choose? Someone who doesn't understand how dangerous mines are might make that decision. But their ignorance doesn't make it a good idea. What you are suggesting in leaving the EU is an economic gamble. If you think we should be gambing with no idea of the consequences of our actions in the current economic climate, and allowing the general public to make that decision, then it explains your viewpoint - I don't know many people who would agree with you, but there we go.

The reason I assume that your motivation is xenophobic/little englander/racist is because the rest of your argument doesn't make sense to me. I don't see how you can argue that there is no economic argument for staying in the EU. That, effectively, is the argument for staying in the EU. Please answer the following questions so we can work out why your view differs from what I see as a fairly straightforward economic argument that has been made 5 times in the last 15 pages:

1. If you were a company investing in a new facility somewhere in the European geographic area, in order to sell to the maximum number of people, would you place your new facility inside the EU, where there is a common market across more than 500 millions people and one set of trade rules, you can move goods from one country to another easily, selling from your facility to any of the dozens of countries across mainland Europe, or would you invest in a little island without that access, which can make up any rules it likes on a whim, which creates huge amounts of paperwork and cost to add on to every order you ship, and an uncertain situation regarding the potential import duties to any of continental Europe?

2. By "follow the bottom line" do you mean they invest in countries where doing business is cheapest, because it doesn't have a load of cost associated with importing a product from one economic area to another, similar to when you import something from the US to the UK?

Digs.

Diving Dude
30-01-2013, 05:02 PM
Digsy. am l right in thinking that you thing we should stay in the EU but it needs to change. If so then you, as the best negotiator l know, must realise than Cameron will have a very week hand if he goes to the EU demanding change but says whatever happens we'll stay, he will get SFA. Now if he goes in with the threat of leaving he will have a far stronger bargaining position.
Now if the rest of the EU want the UK to stay they have to make sure they please Cameron and the public.

Digger
30-01-2013, 05:09 PM
Digsy. am l right in thinking that you thing we should stay in the EU but it needs to change. If so then you, as the best negotiator l know, must realise than Cameron will have a very week hand if he goes to the EU demanding change but says whatever happens we'll stay, he will get SFA. Now if he goes in with the threat of leaving he will have a far stronger bargaining position.
Now if the rest of the EU want the UK to stay they have to make sure they please Cameron and the public.

The EU knows that he can't actually do what he is threatening. Or if he did, he would be a fool.

The skill in negotiating with someone with which you are going to have to do business again (a lot like the UK and the rest of the EU) is finding win/win. Anyone can negotiate using ultimatums and aggression to get a win/lose. But the reality is that if the EU loses, the UK loses too.

So what David Cameron needs to do is have some balls. Be prepared to stand up to the EU, make clear what he wants, come up with a plan on how to get it, and then get some important people in the EU on side. Instead, he has gone in with an opening offer of "do this otherwise we'll try and leave" which never really works.

It would be like me walking in every night from work and telling Mrs Digger that if she doesn't cook what I want for dinner that I am leaving her. It might work the first day, it might work the second day, but pretty soon she'd either just tell me to get on with it and pack my suitcase for me, or ignore the threat because it becomes meaningless.

Cameron isn't really negotiating. He is just pandering to the UKIP/BNP and far right Tory vote. Which I think is silly, because what got them into government (albeit a coalition) was moving closer to the centre so that disenfranchised Labour voters could realistically vote for them without believing they'd do stupid stuff like this.

Digs.

Soggy
30-01-2013, 05:34 PM
1. If you were a company investing in a new facility somewhere in the European geographic area, in order to sell to the maximum number of people, would you place your new facility inside the EU, where there is a common market across more than 500 millions people and one set of trade rules, you can move goods from one country to another easily, selling from your facility to any of the dozens of countries across mainland Europe, or would you invest in a little island without that access, which can make up any rules it likes on a whim, which creates huge amounts of paperwork and cost to add on to every order you ship, and an uncertain situation regarding the potential import duties to any of continental Europe?

2. By "follow the bottom line" do you mean they invest in countries where doing business is cheapest, because it doesn't have a load of cost associated with importing a product from one economic area to another, similar to when you import something from the US to the UK?


I would invest in where i saw the best return for my investment with the most stable medium to long term economic climate. Somewhere with a low corporate tax regime and where i could make the most amount of money, bit like Nissan really. When comparing the UK with the Eurozone i'd be putting my money in the Uk. If i was really investing i'd be putting my money in China.

I'll point you back a few pages to a post i made concerning the Bundesbank stating they were preparing for a 'currency crisis'...

this was the same half baked scare story we had when we didn't enter the euro and the multin-nationals didn't leave then either.

Soggy
30-01-2013, 05:42 PM
The EU knows that he can't actually do what he is threatening. Or if he did, he would be a fool.

The skill in negotiating with someone with which you are going to have to do business again (a lot like the UK and the rest of the EU) is finding win/win. Anyone can negotiate using ultimatums and aggression to get a win/lose. But the reality is that if the EU loses, the UK loses too.

So what David Cameron needs to do is have some balls. Be prepared to stand up to the EU, make clear what he wants, come up with a plan on how to get it, and then get some important people in the EU on side. Instead, he has gone in with an opening offer of "do this otherwise we'll try and leave" which never really works.

It would be like me walking in every night from work and telling Mrs Digger that if she doesn't cook what I want for dinner that I am leaving her. It might work the first day, it might work the second day, but pretty soon she'd either just tell me to get on with it and pack my suitcase for me, or ignore the threat because it becomes meaningless.

Cameron isn't really negotiating. He is just pandering to the UKIP/BNP and far right Tory vote. Which I think is silly, because what got them into government (albeit a coalition) was moving closer to the centre so that disenfranchised Labour voters could realistically vote for them without believing they'd do stupid stuff like this.


so you'd go with a policy of appeasement then, one that worked out well for Neville Chamberlain ;)

ahhhhhhhhhhhh the sound of Godwins Law :)

Baron015
30-01-2013, 05:46 PM
Don't want: US of E, closer political integration, EU Foreign Minister, EU Parliament, EU Court, EU Police, EU Army, EU laws, EU passport, uncontrolled EU residency rights, EU welfare, EU socialism

Do want: loose trading federation with specific agreements to minimise protectionism and duties, and favour efficiency and productivity. Like NAFTA but for Europe and actually working without all the politics. Or some of the ASEAN multilateral agreements.

If Chrisch and Dig can help me understand how this can be achieved then I will support them.

Otherwise the answer must be: Non!

Tb

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Mikael
30-01-2013, 05:53 PM
so you'd go with a policy of appeasement then, one that worked out well for Neville Chamberlain ;)

ahhhhhhhhhhhh the sound of Godwins Law :)

You choose to go there Soggy and thereby completely missed Diggers argument. You have to stop thinking of problem as UK against Europe. Europe is a collection of countries working together, negotiation is for achieving a compromise where collectively everyone wins. Ok at times you don't get the car on Tuesday evening because the wife is off shopping but at least you only have to pay half the running costs.

How you got around to bringing Godwin into it escapes me?!?

Hot Totty
30-01-2013, 06:24 PM
You choose to go there Soggy and thereby completely missed Diggers argument. You have to stop thinking of problem as UK against Europe. Europe is a collection of countries working together, negotiation is for achieving a compromise where collectively everyone wins. Ok at times you don't get the car on Tuesday evening because the wife is off shopping but at least you only have to pay half the running costs.

How you got around to bringing Godwin into it escapes me?!?

Nope the argument is much more historical, the common market which the uk voted on and joined was just supposed to be freeing up trade between nations correct me if I'm wrong but I don't remember ever being asked (or my parents) if we wanted to join a federal arrangement - the ultimate end of the current path, it seems we have drifted down this path guided by self serving politicians like kinnock. My parents view belonging to Europe was a good way of avoiding war, not very successful so far and I firmly believe that a global war is much more likely between large superstates than with a motley collection of countries squabbling amongst themselves. So for me free trade yes federal Europe no thanks.

Soggy
30-01-2013, 06:36 PM
Don't want: US of E, closer political integration, EU Foreign Minister, EU Parliament, EU Court, EU Police, EU Army, EU laws, EU passport, uncontrolled EU residency rights, EU welfare, EU socialism

Do want: loose trading federation with specific agreements to minimise protectionism and duties, and favour efficiency and productivity. Like NAFTA but for Europe and actually working without all the politics. Or some of the ASEAN multilateral agreements.

If Chrisch and Dig can help me understand how this can be achieved then I will support them.

Otherwise the answer must be: Non!


You're such a little englander!! ;)

Mikael
30-01-2013, 06:44 PM
Nope the argument is much more historical, the common market which the uk voted on and joined was just supposed to be freeing up trade between nations correct me if I'm wrong but I don't remember ever being asked (or my parents) if we wanted to join a federal arrangement - the ultimate end of the current path, it seems we have drifted down this path guided by self serving politicians like kinnock. My parents view belonging to Europe was a good way of avoiding war, not very successful so far and I firmly believe that a global war is much more likely between large superstates than with a motley collection of countries squabbling amongst themselves. So for me free trade yes federal Europe no thanks.

Sorry I still don't understand how Soggy is drawing comparisons between the UK having to part take and assert itself in EU negotiations to Chamberlain trying to appease Hitler?

As for what you are saying, does it really matter how we got into Europe? The debate should be pragmatic, we are in Europe at the moment, is staying or leaving our best option over the short/medium/long term? Such a debate can include speculating where Europe is heading but the US of E comparison is not I feel helpful.

I should state I feel the comparison is not helpful because its carries so many connotations. We need to have reasoned debate not swayed by emotional rhetoric. Soggy keeps returning to the little englanders line but its not adding anything new or informative.

Hot Totty
30-01-2013, 06:55 PM
But that's exactly where it's heading a us of e. For me this is not something I wish to be involved in, as to the economics short term lots of pain, medium term easing, long term stronger dynamic country. It won't happen though as we are run by professional politicians only really interested in being in power and doing something as radical as pulling out of Europe would be political suicde when the pain hits - pretty much what's happening now, we have a government trying its best to redress all sorts of issues but because large tracts of the population are being affected I doubt if they'll get a 2nd term.

Soggy
30-01-2013, 07:04 PM
I should state I feel the comparison is not helpful because its carries so many connotations. We need to have reasoned debate not swayed by emotional rhetoric. Soggy keeps returning to the little englanders line but its not adding anything new or informative.

I return to it as its a term thrown at those who disgree with a european superstate. Its been banded about along with the terms racist and xenophobic all of which i find abhorent and used by those who lack any argument.

I've tried to refrain from using any kind of insult, as has been said, its a sign that you've lost the argument.

Mikael
30-01-2013, 07:09 PM
But that's exactly where it's heading a us of e. For me this is not something I wish to be involved in, as to the economics short term lots of pain, medium term easing, long term stronger dynamic country. It won't happen though as we are run by professional politicians only really interested in being in power and doing something as radical as pulling out of Europe would be political suicde when the pain hits - pretty much what's happening now, we have a government trying its best to redress all sorts of issues but because large tracts of the population are being affected I doubt if they'll get a 2nd term.

Problem here is political system that the UK has adopted. Being that it is a two party system, each election is just about trying to win the swing voters while not pissing off their main electoral base too much. As such we the voters simply have a choice between the lesser of two evils. There are no real attempts to build cross party commitments for sustainable long term policies on issues such as energy. The Pro vs Con European argument is much the same. This way the two sides just take time and effort repeatedly undoing the what was done in the last term when the other side was in power.

Fix this and we might have a half decent chance of functioning as coherent political and economic entity.

Hot Totty
30-01-2013, 07:11 PM
Fix this and we might have a half decent chance of functioning as coherent political and economic entity.

We need a coo, where's Mubarak when you need him :p

Mikael
30-01-2013, 07:15 PM
We need a coo, where's Mubarak when you need him :p

I didn't know Mubarak was a dairy farmer?

Hot Totty
30-01-2013, 07:17 PM
I didn't know Mubarak was a dairy farmer?

Coup not cow, I have flu so my usual high standard of spelling may be remiss :p

Mikael
30-01-2013, 07:29 PM
I return to it as its a term thrown at those who disgree with a european superstate. Its been banded about along with the terms racist and xenophobic all of which i find abhorent and used by those who lack any argument.

I've tried to refrain from using any kind of insult, as has been said, its a sign that you've lost the argument.

But in using the 'little englander' line you are denigrating the others persons statement, you are implying that his/her argument is all about accusing you or others of being xenophobic rather then putting forward a structured response. If that person is engaging and providing counter arguments to yours (which you may or may not agree) then you have effectively insulted them.

Take for example Digger's case with Nissan. Now the two of you disagree about whether being in the 'federal' part of Europe will affect the bottom line as you refer to it but this doesn't mean that Digger hasn't responded. The answer may not be to your satisfaction but it certainly had nothing to do with labelling you as xenophobe. He did I believe ask at one point if you're position was motivated by xenophobia to which a simple 'no' would suffice.

Soggy
30-01-2013, 07:39 PM
But in using the 'little englander' line you are denigrating the others persons statement, you are implying that his/her argument is all about accusing you or others of being xenophobic rather then putting forward a structured response. If that person is engaging and providing counter arguments to yours (which you may or may not agree) then you have effectively insulted them.


and both Chris and Digger have labelled those who disagree with their views as racist/xenophobic and little englander. I didn't use it instead of an argument it was an insult that was thrown at me, something you seem to of missed. I've used it since to throw it back at them and once as a joke with someone i know the term 'little englander' definitely doesn't apply to.

so let me lay it out to you, i find racist/xenophobic abhorent insults. I 'hate' no one, i find it a pointless exercise. I DO NOT HATE economic migrants, i actually understand why they are here but it does not mean i have to agree with the open borders policy. I DO NOT HATE Europe, in fact i find it a lovely wonderful place full of virbant cultures and generally people just like me who are proud of their nations. I may joke with those of other nations but i hold no ill feeling towards them. I BELIEVE in my own country and i still believe Great Britain is Great and we don't need a federal europe for europe or Great Britain to prosper.

Chardy
30-01-2013, 07:42 PM
"Europe is a collection of countries working together, negotiation is for achieving a compromise where collectively everyone wins. Ok at times you don't get the car on Tuesday evening because the wife is off shopping but at least you only have to pay half the running costs."

What does a win-win for the UK look like?

The fact that that Europe has gone from a Common Economic Market to a Union heading to a Federalist State is relevant and in particular how it happened. The vote in 1975 was about remaining within a Common Market not about becoming part of a Federalist State with a single currency.The terms of the agreement have changed and the people deserve the opportunity to decide. I think it will still be a yes vote.

Mikael
30-01-2013, 08:26 PM
and both Chris and Digger have labelled those who disagree with their views as racist/xenophobic and little englander. I didn't use it instead of an argument it was an insult that was thrown at me, something you seem to of missed. I've used it since to throw it back at them and once as a joke with someone i know the term 'little englander' definitely doesn't apply to.

so let me lay it out to you, i find racist/xenophobic abhorent insults. I 'hate' no one, i find it a pointless exercise. I DO NOT HATE economic migrants, i actually understand why they are here but it does not mean i have to agree with the open borders policy. I DO NOT HATE Europe, in fact i find it a lovely wonderful place full of virbant cultures and generally people just like me who are proud of their nations. I may joke with those of other nations but i hold no ill feeling towards them. I BELIEVE in my own country and i still believe Great Britain is Great and we don't need a federal europe for europe or Great Britain to prosper.

Maybe I did miss that but none the less if want to be the voice for a reasoned debate then throwing something back at some one doesn't put you in a good light either.

I also don't see why you find the terms racist or xenophobic so insulting. If some one is genuinely racist then call them on it. If some one claims your being racist but you are not then put them right and don't sweat it. I have at no point accused you of being racist or xenophobic.

That said we both know that racisms and xenophobia is part of UK culture (as it is all others that I can think of) and will play a role in a number of voters' minds if the EU question came to referendum. We even jokingly stereotype ourselves as such and what makes stereotypes funny is that they often have an element of truth.

If you want the reasoned debate, as I say I suggest you drop the quips about little englanders and stick to discussing federal EU. Unlike the pro supports that have to speculate what it would be like to leave, you could be justifying your claim EU is becoming the US of E right now by showing us examples from present day.

As for Great Britain being great.....

Well I don't what your metre stick for greatness is but I can't take seriously a country that has such a poor public transport system (same day walk on train fare pricing is a joke) and still hasn't lifted the finger in trying to decide what magic solution will save us when more of our power stations come to end of life. Guess we will just have to buy yet more power from France. If you are in the sea cable laying business there might contract in it for you. Then of course there is piss poor political system (both the use of FPTP and our current lot of politicians which I don't trust at all), we may not be as bad as some but we could be a lot better. It depresses that for the first time I am considering voting labour in the next election if only to keep the torys out.

Chrisch
31-01-2013, 10:00 AM
.....the place they are putting that investment has a stable long term outlook, which compared with the Eurozone the UK has that. ......

That's the nub of our disagreement. The UK is the most indebted country in Europe (geographical Europe). I don't think, even for a second, it has a long term stable future, I think it will continue to experience the slow relentless decline that it has experienced since the end of the war. The UK is a spent force. If Scotland goes it alone even more so. If anything changes it will be that the decline accelerates.


Don't want: US of E, closer political integration, EU Foreign Minister, EU Parliament, EU Court, EU Police, EU Army, EU laws, EU passport, uncontrolled EU residency rights, EU welfare, EU socialism
...
If Chrisch and Dig can help me understand how this can be achieved then I will support them.
...

The whole point of the common market is free movement of people. If you don't want that then you must leave. You cannot achieve less integration - it is what the common market was set up for - it's in the Treaty of Rome you signed. There is no "EU socialism" that's such utter bollocks that it's laughable, but it shows the prejudice so many people have rather than an understanding of the true facts. Your passport is biometric because the US says it must be. There's no EU army only NATO which has kept the peace for 50 years but you can leave that too if you want.

Bottom line again - the real reason most want out is immigration.

Bottom line again Cameron is after the racist/UKIP/little Englander vote. (That's not the same Soggy as saying everyone anti-EU fits all these categories, simply that this is the majority of the argument and where the votes are...)

If you don't want all the retired people back from Spain/Portugal/France/Greece then you have to accept the working people in from wherever. That's the deal. Pull out and the old farts come back, for better or worse. Whether it is possible to achieve some hitherto non-existent status of one leg in one out where you get to access the marketplace but without the free movement of people remains to be seen, but that is not what question is going to be asked.

The Tories have always fallen apart over "Europe", they're doing it again. They will lose the next election. The interim period will see ever more decline in investment in the UK and the long term future will be down yet another notch further than was going to be the case. At some point there will be a run on Sterling again and the shit will really hit the fan and the current situation will look as if it is heaven by comparison.

IanB
31-01-2013, 03:52 PM
As ever News Biscuit (http://www.newsbiscuit.com/2013/01/29/now-give-us-an-inout-vote-on-the-uk-demands-middle-england/) have their take on it

Digger
31-01-2013, 04:05 PM
What amuses me is that there are so many dissapointed Lib Dem voters, that previously saw their coalition as the first real crack at government and now see it as being bent over by the Tories and given a good old fashioned Eaton caning on almost every issue.

So what we will see is even less Lib Dem votes at the next election, and a possible Labour/Tory coalition government. Which would be hilarious. And we definitely wouldn't be getting an EU referendum if that happened.

Digs.

Chrisch
31-01-2013, 04:42 PM
If people really want a referendum there is a solution. Start a referendum party. It should campaign the next general election on a single issue - the offer of a referendum. As soon as the referendum is put into law the party should dissolve itself and call a general election. That way none of the main parties need promise it or withhold it. If UKIP were actually honest and weren't just in it for the MEP expenses gravy train they could offer this, but they won't as they love to sponge off the taxpayer and are laughing at the morons that vote for them. Therefore another new more honest party must be created.

Then if the majority of folk want the referendum they can have it and immediately vote for their primary political party choice once again.

There's a old B&W film and annoyingly I can't remember what it was called, where the government rid itself of the inconvenience of democracy by having a referendum for every trivial decision, after a few dozen referenda (with mandatory voting) the people got annoyed and demanded a referendum to stop having referenda. Not unsurprisingly the vote was cast for the government to make all the decisions and go back to the old system. Very funny but sadly what would happen.

The Duck
31-01-2013, 05:05 PM
It was something like "The Rise and Rise of Arnold Rimmer"

The Duck
31-01-2013, 05:08 PM
Ah! It was Michael Rimmer not Arnold Rimmer - Peter Cook, 1970

Mikael
31-01-2013, 05:24 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSUKMa1cYHk

Baron015
01-02-2013, 08:55 AM
....duplicate

Baron015
01-02-2013, 08:57 AM
The whole point of the common market is free movement of people.

Please explain. I thought the whole point of the common market was the free movement of goods. To reduce barriers to buying and selling freely between countries. Import/export. And so on. Not free movement of people across borders.

I don't mind movement of people across borders - I'm from Latvia - but surely the appropriate visa conditions must be met etc.... I would need to demonstrate some worthwhile skill to move to Australia or NZ. Why not the same for EU ?

Chrisch
01-02-2013, 09:24 AM
Please explain. I thought the whole point of the common market was the free movement of goods. To reduce barriers to buying and selling freely between countries. Import/export. And so on. Not free movement of people across borders....

No. The Treaty of Rome included workers. Always was the point of the Common Market, EEC, EU. You cannot have a "common market" that doesn't include the workforce.

Treaty of Rome - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Rome)

"It proposed to create a common market of goods, workers, services and capital within the EEC's member states"

That's what Heath signed the UK up to. It's what we have belonged to ever since. It has given ordinary folk like me the greatest personal freedom in a generation - I can live and work where I choose within 27 countries. The downside if you want to see it that way is it has conferred the same freedom on other member states and so we have loads of East Europeans over here and people don't like them. As a Latvian person you can live anywhere you like in the 27 countries of the EU as well. You can work there, start a family, claim benefits and enjoy the same rights as people born there. In return English people can (and do) buy property in Latvia and hope that as it prospers and develops the capital value of the property will increase. (I looked at Riga myself)

Australia or New Zealand are not part of the EU and yes, you need to persuade them why they should let you in. But their citizens cannot just turn up in Latvia and expect a free ride.

Latvia is somewhat more advanced than the UK and is in Schengen. So it really does believe in free movement of people. The UK has always been half-hearted and a bit, err well "racist" actually about foreigners, something about being an island nation. In reality once a bit of time has past the foreigners are generally well accepted and the media turns its guns on the next group of people. Once it was the Caribbean people, then the Asians (particularly the African Asians) now it's the Poles. The next lot are the Romanians and Bulgarians. Once a few Romanians turn up everyone will forget about the Poles.

I don't think there are enough people in the Baltic states for us to notice you :)

Janos
01-02-2013, 10:30 AM
I would invest in where i saw the best return for my investment with the most stable medium to long term economic climate. Somewhere with a low corporate tax regime and where i could make the most amount of money, bit like Nissan really. When comparing the UK with the Eurozone i'd be putting my money in the Uk. If i was really investing i'd be putting my money in China.

I'll point you back a few pages to a post i made concerning the Bundesbank stating they were preparing for a 'currency crisis'...

this was the same half baked scare story we had when we didn't enter the euro and the multin-nationals didn't leave then either.

The CBI have warned against GB leaving the EU.

Britain must stay in EU, warns CBI chief - FT.com (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/88e12ba4-4ac9-11e2-9650-00144feab49a.html#axzz2JdrZ7ZpB)

Janos

PS - And if you want to invest in China, I know a man trying to get out of an investment there. I'm sure he'd sell it to you for a knock down price.

Janos
01-02-2013, 10:37 AM
No. The Treaty of Rome included workers. Always was the point of the Common Market, EEC, EU.

No no no no no.

The original treaty (The Treaty of Paris, in 1952) was primarily about coal and iron ore. By making France dependent on German coal, and Germany dependent on French iron ore. The two economies would be come mutually dependent and therefore prevent another war (and also increase steel production for the reconstruction of both countries).

Janos

Chrisch
01-02-2013, 03:42 PM
No no no no no.

The original treaty (The Treaty of Paris, in 1952) was primarily about coal and iron ore. By making France dependent on German coal, and Germany dependent on French iron ore. The two economies would be come mutually dependent and therefore prevent another war (and also increase steel production for the reconstruction of both countries).

Janos

That was the Iron and Steel community - part of the cold war. It was the precursor of the Common Market. The common market was and still is about all goods and of course people. You are right in that this precursor didn't include movement of people, but the treaty to which Edward Heath signed the UK up did include free movement of workers.

Honestly, if the majority of the UK want to leave then they should - that's democracy. It's an utterly stupid idea that will cost us dearly but if it is what people genuinely want then so be it. The trouble is that the truth rarely sees the light of day thanks to the wingnut newspapers, on top of that the actual repercussions are speculative. We cannot say for sure how much it will cost us to leave until we have left. What, it seems to me, many people want is Daily Telegraph land where we get all the benefits but are some sort of low tax sweatshop - Thatcher's "Hong Kong of Europe". Whilst this will make huge sums for the big companies and super rich, but it will shit on anyone in the bottom 75-80% of the population.

GoDiva
01-02-2013, 05:04 PM
What I have noticed in the UK is that often "European rules and regulations" are blamed for an awful lot of changes, but how come I only see these in the UK? Either the UK is a country at the top oof the class, the only one doing what the teacher says, or the EU is blamed for many (unpopular) decisions.

Baron015
01-02-2013, 08:29 PM
No. The Treaty of Rome included workers. Always was the point of the Common Market, EEC, EU. You cannot have a "common market" that doesn't include the workforce.

Treaty of Rome - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Rome)

"It proposed to create a common market of goods, workers, services and capital within the EEC's member states"

That's what Heath signed the UK up to. It's what we have belonged to ever since. It has given ordinary folk like me the greatest personal freedom in a generation - I can live and work where I choose within 27 countries. The downside if you want to see it that way is it has conferred the same freedom on other member states and so we have loads of East Europeans over here and people don't like them. As a Latvian person you can live anywhere you like in the 27 countries of the EU as well. You can work there, start a family, claim benefits and enjoy the same rights as people born there. In return English people can (and do) buy property in Latvia and hope that as it prospers and develops the capital value of the property will increase. (I looked at Riga myself)

Australia or New Zealand are not part of the EU and yes, you need to persuade them why they should let you in. But their citizens cannot just turn up in Latvia and expect a free ride.

Latvia is somewhat more advanced than the UK and is in Schengen. So it really does believe in free movement of people. The UK has always been half-hearted and a bit, err well "racist" actually about foreigners, something about being an island nation. In reality once a bit of time has past the foreigners are generally well accepted and the media turns its guns on the next group of people. Once it was the Caribbean people, then the Asians (particularly the African Asians) now it's the Poles. The next lot are the Romanians and Bulgarians. Once a few Romanians turn up everyone will forget about the Poles.

I don't think there are enough people in the Baltic states for us to notice you :)

You are right there are not enough Balts to be noticeable much over here.

But in Aluksne where I am from, the town has dropped from 12,000 to 8,000 as a result of Schengen and our EU membership. Most of these are now in Ireland and UK. As a result, in Aluksne lots of shops have shut, fewer businesses, etc. Not good for us, although most are sending money home and that is helping a lot of families.

We've got a few scandies that have bought some farmland around us, but not really anything significant in terms of influx into Aluksne region.

Sadly most people buying properties in Riga and Jurmala are Russians, regardless of EU rights. Can't live with them, can't live without them. We don't like it but they seem to have all the money in the world and think they can buy everything - and they are right.

Tb.

Soggy
01-02-2013, 09:52 PM
What I have noticed in the UK is that often "European rules and regulations" are blamed for an awful lot of changes, but how come I only see these in the UK? Either the UK is a country at the top oof the class, the only one doing what the teacher says, or the EU is blamed for many (unpopular) decisions.

It's a British thing, we abide by the 'rules' but many other countries tend to 'overlook' them.

Janos
01-02-2013, 10:02 PM
It's a British thing, we abide by the 'rules' but many other countries tend to 'overlook' them.

I'm not sure that's actually true.

However - what did you think of the CBI link? Do you disagree with them?

Janos

Hot Totty
01-02-2013, 10:06 PM
I'm not sure that's actually true.

However - what did you think of the CBI link? Do you disagree with them?

Janos

Yes :p their just scared that they wont get a big bonus because of a loss in profit whilst they seek new markets

Janos
01-02-2013, 10:07 PM
That was the Iron and Steel community - part of the cold war. It was the precursor of the Common Market. The common market was...

Not sure if you intend anything by the different use of capitals for Common Market / common market.

But the European Steel and Coal Community was a common market, and the pre-cursor to the Common Market. It was about free movement of goods - and the prevention of war.

Janos

Diving Dude
02-02-2013, 12:18 AM
.....Sadly most people buying properties in Riga and Jurmala are Russians, regardless of EU rights. Can't live with them, can't live without them. We don't like it but they seem to have all the money in the world and think they can buy everything - and they are right.

Tb.

Oooooo....that's you now labelled as a racist little Latviander.

Baron015
02-02-2013, 02:35 AM
Oooooo....that's you now labelled as a racist little Latviander.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2272195/The-town-thats-We-visit-town-countrys-biggest-influx-East-Europeans.html

Yep.

Soggy
02-02-2013, 08:07 AM
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2272195/The-town-thats-We-visit-town-countrys-biggest-influx-East-Europeans.html

Yep.

You've quoted the Daily Hate Wail that'll set Chris off! :D

Scubee
02-02-2013, 08:53 AM
I'm not sure that's actually true.

However - what did you think of the CBI link? Do you disagree with them?

Janos

You have to register to read the article.

Janos
02-02-2013, 09:29 AM
You have to register to read the article.

How weird. I could read it first time (and I don't have a subscription) but can't now.

It was the main theme of his speech to the CBI's conference in November and was reported widely - here's a link in the Telegraph.
CBI chief warns UK against EU exit vote - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/businesslatestnews/9687876/CBI-chief-warns-UK-against-EU-exit-vote.html)

Janos

Chrisch
02-02-2013, 11:07 AM
You've quoted the Daily Hate Wail that'll set Chris off! :D

It is an inaccurate source of information, but the only bit that annoys me is by linking to it you boost their Google ratings. If only they linked to TDF as a reciprocal measure then all would be well in the world :)

Chrisch
02-02-2013, 11:13 AM
.... or the EU is blamed for many (unpopular) decisions.

It's an easy scapegoat, much like the Health & Safety "rules" that are oft quoted but don't exist. I have had similar conversations with people in other EU countries who have the same perception. The most memorable was with a chap in a furniture shop in Luxembourg who suddenly started on a racist rant about all the Portuguese people in Luxembourg and how he wished their government was more like Tony Blair (UK PM at the time) and passed laws to keep the immigrants out. (I can only assume he thought us English immigrants were OK?)

Soggy
02-02-2013, 12:06 PM
It is an inaccurate source of information, but the only bit that annoys me is by linking to it you boost their Google ratings. If only they linked to TDF as a reciprocal measure then all would be well in the world :)

Although on the whole I agree with you on the daily mail. The article resonates with my personal experience, as I mentioned earlier in this thread about the pizza delivery boys. Again I have no issue with the migrants but the system that allows them.

And actually I think the Eastern European shops are great, they do some very tasty food.

Baron015
02-02-2013, 04:32 PM
Although on the whole I agree with you on the daily mail. The article resonates with my personal experience, as I mentioned earlier in this thread about the pizza delivery boys. Again I have no issue with the migrants but the system that allows them.

And actually I think the Eastern European shops are great, they do some very tasty food.

The Latvian bakeries are second to none. World class. Just magic. I could live on freshly baked speķa rauši (piragi) forever.

Tb.

Soggy
02-02-2013, 04:39 PM
The Latvian bakeries are second to none. World class. Just magic. I could live on freshly baked speķa rauši (piragi) forever.


I've been trying to figure out how to put this without a barrage of abuse...........



I like Polish sausage :D

Spirit of Guernsey
02-02-2013, 04:46 PM
I've been trying to figure out how to put this without a barrage of abuse...........



I like Polish sausage :D

Racist pervert!!!!!

Chrisch
02-02-2013, 04:48 PM
Racist pervert!!!!!

Leave the guy alone. If he want to polish his sausage who are we to argue?

Soggy
02-02-2013, 04:50 PM
I was into Czech crumpet last year too ;)

Chrisch
02-02-2013, 05:00 PM
Petra Cubanova? (9/10)

Mikael
02-02-2013, 07:41 PM
The town that's had enough: We visit the town with the country's biggest influx of East Europeans. | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2272195/The-town-thats-We-visit-town-countrys-biggest-influx-East-Europeans.html)

Yep.

Didn't read the article but had a good laugh at the video.

I have to fly to get to a foreign country and do so for pleasure so I don't see what this lady is moaning about, she can nip down to the high street for a fraction of the cost!

As for the 'all the local services are being overwhelmed' well as she points out locals are moving away so that should help even things out a bit but if it remains a problem then local authorities will have to invest in further capacity, this is no excuse for not adapting if there is growth in the area be that by Brits or other EU citizens. Would be exactly the same story if a whole load of Spalding residents wanted to up and move to Boston.

Janos
03-02-2013, 12:20 AM
Although on the whole I agree with you on the daily mail. The article resonates with my personal experience, as I mentioned earlier in this thread about the pizza delivery boys. Again I have no issue with the migrants but the system that allows them.

And actually I think the Eastern European shops are great, they do some very tasty food.

Indeed. And the Poles have manaed to take even salad and make it tasty by adding sausage, potatoes, and then removing everything green except for half a spring onion.. :thumbsup:

But you've still not commented on my link. Do you think the CBI have a valid argument?

Janos

Soggy
03-02-2013, 08:48 AM
But you've still not commented on my link. Do you think the CBI have a valid argument?


Trying to register to read it but for some reason won't let me. I'll keep trying.

I'm hardly going to be wholly persuaded by a lot if very rich people wanting to get richer ;). They have an argument as valid as any other but the argument must be convincing for those who are going to vote on the matter. As I keep saying, those who use the 'leaving is bad' insult the intelligence of the electorate.

As far as I'm concerned I'm not blinkered to only seeing the business argument in this, I think it's a red herring anyway, I'm looking at the much bigger picture and what thus country needs/wants.

Hot Totty
03-02-2013, 08:53 AM
We could leave, all of the business that uses us as a gateway into the wider eu could up sticks and go. The country could impose trade restrictions etc etc and yet new business would still pop up and exploit opertunities, as I've said business is dynamic there will be pain but that pain I believe will be worth it long term

Soggy
03-02-2013, 09:29 AM
We could leave, all of the business that uses us as a gateway into the wider eu could up sticks and go. The country could impose trade restrictions etc etc and yet new business would still pop up and exploit opertunities, as I've said business is dynamic there will be pain but that pain I believe will be worth it long term

That was the same threat used when we didn't go in to the euro and it shows what a very weak argument that is.

We would do well to realign our economy away from the vampire multinationals to making products to sell.

Dave1w
03-02-2013, 09:41 AM
If we did leave, do you really think either the current government or the other lot would be capable of building or rebuilding a credible country/economy outside the EU?
I don't think it's Europe that's holding them back.

Hot Totty
03-02-2013, 09:46 AM
If we did leave, do you really think either the current government or the other lot would be capable of building or rebuilding a credible country/economy outside the EU?
I don't think it's Europe that's holding them back.

The whole country would have to rediscover how to be self supporting, it means EVERYONE!! That's why I think it's the only way otherwise we will become a minor subregion of a eu superstate

Soggy
03-02-2013, 09:51 AM
If we did leave, do you really think either the current government or the other lot would be capable of building or rebuilding a credible country/economy outside the EU?
I don't think it's Europe that's holding them back.

I don't think either lot are capable of running a country at all. The EU is hardly a glowing representation of good governance either.

Janos
03-02-2013, 10:29 AM
Soggy - I don't think the Telegraph link needs you to register.

CBI chief warns UK against EU exit vote - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/businesslatestnews/9687876/CBI-chief-warns-UK-against-EU-exit-vote.html)

Janos

Diving Dude
03-02-2013, 10:53 AM
l doubt that the CBI chief lives in Boston.

Janos
03-02-2013, 11:21 AM
l doubt that the CBI chief lives in Boston.

True, but a few CBI members will be. Some people in Boston will be pissed off with the EU. Some farmers on the otherhand will appreciate being able to get people to work the fields [1] and having someone to flog their cabbages too.

But there a pros and cons to everything. For me, the pros (better UK economy, no limits on bringing wine into the country) outweigh the cons. Other people will have different priorities and so may come to a different view. But they're wrong. ;) Still - that's the price you pay for democracy. :D

Janos

[1] - A friend of mine recently took over the family farm. A few of the lads on the farm live in farm-cottages and are approaching retirement. He's going to struggle to replace them when they move on.

jamesp
03-02-2013, 12:18 PM
That was the same threat used when we didn't go in to the euro and it shows what a very weak argument that is.

We would do well to realign our economy away from the vampire multinationals to making products to sell.

Make what and with whom?

The shops are all full of cheap imports from China sold at inflated "UK" prices, while the "high value" goods manufactured in this country are being made in factories owned by foreign companies, which include third world Chinese and Indian national companies, whilst being staffed by labour from the EU; because the "local" labour market consists of thick, uneducated idle fuck wits.

The only ability in the UK mass employment market is for breeding and claiming.

Working is what other people do.


As for the Euro, Toyota scrapped plans for a factory in the UK over the Euro. It was penciled for next to the Deeside facility, it went to France instead. Where the ran slap bang into the French 35 hour working week.

The factory is still in France though.

Soggy
03-02-2013, 01:41 PM
Make what and with whom?

The shops are all full of cheap imports from China sold at inflated "UK" prices, while the "high value" goods manufactured in this country are being made in factories owned by foreign companies, which include third world Chinese and Indian national companies, whilst being staffed by labour from the EU; because the "local" labour market consists of thick, uneducated idle fuck wits.

The only ability in the UK mass employment market is for breeding and claiming.


that just throwing in the towel....come on thats just how the mass media and governement want you to see it so when they sell us down the road, they can do so ' as its best for the UK'.

A German model works well but it will require kicking our youth into getting a heavy does of reality about their job prospects. We need more apprenticeships and less irrelevant degrees now, so we can build a strong workforce. Unfortunately many of the disaffected youth assume some sort of stigma with not having a degree and don't want to do an apprenticeship becasue its not a degree. the last 10 years of a governement selling this notion to the young didn't help at all.

degrees for all and jobs for none.

jamesp
03-02-2013, 02:21 PM
that just throwing in the towel....come on thats just how the mass media and governement want you to see it so when they sell us down the road, they can do so ' as its best for the UK'.

A German model works well but it will require kicking our youth into getting a heavy does of reality about their job prospects. We need more apprenticeships and less irrelevant degrees now, so we can build a strong workforce. Unfortunately many of the disaffected youth assume some sort of stigma with not having a degree and don't want to do an apprenticeship becasue its not a degree. the last 10 years of a governement selling this notion to the young didn't help at all.

degrees for all and jobs for none.

I`m 44 and have both.

I actually have tried to recruit youth of today for apprenticeships. I actually think I would be better off shrinking the business and looking after myself. The kind of person I want, with five decent GCSEs wants to go to uni; the kind of person the careers advisors think should do an aprenticeship has zero to ten GCSEs all at foundation level Grade G. That is an actual experience of mine.

Too many of the aprenticeships out there are no more than a con to get around the minimum wage. A two year apprentice ship is a joke, six months is a con.

As for comparison to the German model; yeah dont make me laugh. We have never been anywhere near their level. I worked with a German toolmaker, technically trained; could actually sit down and design press tools. I have a toolmaker working for me at the moment, 36 years old, HNC educated and cant work out cutting speeds (2Pi x R x RPM). Only a small problem as he hasnt got the first clue what they should actually be anyway.

At least in Germany you dont get fucked over by the accountants closing you down and offshoreing to a.n. other third world country as the unions would nail them all to a tree.

Biggest issue with far too many kids today is they really think they are the Bees knees, when in fact anything over twenty years ago they would have been told they were actually just thick.

Its pointless having more apprenticeships if the skill base isnt there to start with.
Most CVs I see for technical apprenticeships have the following pattern:-
Qualifications: few and very poor grades.
Interests: football (watching), socialising, computers, cars. Anything that they can do whilst sat on their arse.

When I was leaving school, the guys looking for apprenticeships would have been better than average grades and interests would have been more like:- Football (playing in a team, probably at county level), computers(could programme one), cars (could take an engine to pieces with their teeth and put it back together again).
These days they actually look aghast at getting their hands dirty.

steve6690
03-02-2013, 03:07 PM
We will never be able to adopt the German model. It's too harsh and we're too soft. My wife's nephews all did their apprenticeships in various jobs after leaving school. They had to do a proper application in the first place, followed by an exam and then a final interview just to get a place. 3 years of on-the-job training, plus day release school lessons, written and practical exams etc. And all while being paid relatively poor money.
If you don't keep up to the standard required they kick you out. At the end of the apprenticeship you aren't guaranteed a job either. If they can't take all the apprentices on then it comes down to performance. And you never hear anybody complaining about it.
When I met my wife in the 80's she was working in a shoe shop as an apprentice sales advisor. You could give her any shoe in the shop and she would be able to tell you where, how and from what it was made.
They just do things a lot differently over there, and I think it would be a long, slow process to adopt it here.
They've changed the unemployment benefit rules too. Now you get 12 months. After that - nothing. So many other things they do which we'd never introduce.

Mikael
03-02-2013, 04:09 PM
that just throwing in the towel....come on thats just how the mass media and governement want you to see it so when they sell us down the road, they can do so ' as its best for the UK'.

A German model works well but it will require kicking our youth into getting a heavy does of reality about their job prospects. We need more apprenticeships and less irrelevant degrees now, so we can build a strong workforce. Unfortunately many of the disaffected youth assume some sort of stigma with not having a degree and don't want to do an apprenticeship becasue its not a degree. the last 10 years of a government selling this notion to the young didn't help at all.

degrees for all and jobs for none.

How is the UK gov. telling us that we the British public are a load of scroungers and that the all our companies are foreign owned and run, a line they can use to sell us down the road, especially as its best for the UK ?!?

That aside, though I can not comment on the German model, I agree with you about Brits needing a dose of reality and that we should bring apprenticeships back into favour over degrees for everyone. The problem I think, lies in to UK government seeing Universities as vehicle for social mobility. At the end of the day Universities should be keeping their courses competitive and focusing on producing high quality graduates so we can compete in the world economy, irrespective of the students social class. Driving everyone to Uni is expensive, instead the Government should be assisting those at state schools who have the passion to go to University to apply on a level playing field with those from independent schools. Beyond that it should be down to the Universities to select their students. As I mentioned on former forum, I also think we need to start to pragmatically choose which courses we support based on the contribution those professions can have to our economy/society. In short let engineers/scientists/teachers/doctors study with minimal financial burden compared to say media studies, or to put it another way if your course is not very vocational then you can study it but only if you are willing to self fund.

Adrian
03-02-2013, 04:30 PM
How is the UK gov. telling us that we the British public are a load of scroungers and that the all our companies are foreign owned and run, a line they can use to sell us down the road, especially as its best for the UK ?!?

That aside, though I can not comment on the German model, I agree with you about Brits needing a dose of reality and that we should bring apprenticeships back into favour over degrees for everyone. The problem I think, lies in to UK government seeing Universities as vehicle for social mobility. At the end of the day Universities should be keeping their courses competitive and focusing on producing high quality graduates so we can compete in the world economy, irrespective of the students social class. Driving everyone to Uni is expensive, instead the Government should be assisting those at state schools who have the passion to go to University to apply on a level playing field with those from independent schools. Beyond that it should be down to the Universities to select their students. As I mentioned on former forum, I also think we need to start to pragmatically choose which courses we support based on the contribution those professions can have to our economy/society. In short let engineers/scientists/teachers/doctors study with minimal financial burden compared to say media studies, or to put it another way if your course is not very vocational then you can study it but only if you are willing to self fund.
I think that a University education is now just another commodity item for sale from our service economy. Foreign students pay a lot to be here, so it has perceived value. I only have to hear the accent of the students (and staff) in an engineering dept. of my local universities to know this. 'Professionalisation' of some work areas has also played it's part. I've no idea if having been university training has really made a difference to those work areas.

I also think that getting so many UK students into further education is a way to delay the inevitable of many appearing in the jobless statistics.

Cynical? Moi?

Mikael
03-02-2013, 04:46 PM
I am for having a international department. In my department we have staff from Malta, China to mention a few places. That's good as long as they are being picked on the acadmedic merit. Equally within the student body, lets have a mix of Europeans and internationals.

Where my concern starts is if the number of internationals is artificially high simply because it brings in fees. Now you can see why a University would do that, especially an expensive department to run such as engineering one (floor space is now being charged by the m2 so we are hit especially hard given our need for labs etc) but there are downsides. The standards of minimum required English should be upheld and efforts should be made to integrate those internationals with come the remainder of the student body.

Soggy
03-02-2013, 05:08 PM
BBC News - Tony Blair: Quitting EU would be 'huge problem' for UK (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21312932)

I need no more of an argument to leaving the EU than Tony Blair wants us to stay.....

I guess he can kiss goodbye the EU presidency when we leave.

Soggy
03-02-2013, 05:11 PM
I think that a University education is now just another commodity item for sale from our service economy. Foreign students pay a lot to be here, so it has perceived value.

I have a close friend who runs one of the departments of the local university, they spend a lot of time in China. They have agreements with Chinese universities and the students make them a very large income.

Soggy
03-02-2013, 05:49 PM
Soggy - I don't think the Telegraph link needs you to register.

CBI chief warns UK against EU exit vote - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/businesslatestnews/9687876/CBI-chief-warns-UK-against-EU-exit-vote.html)


I think the comments section is very enlightening.....

the one i most enjoyed was Carnifex about 4-5 comments in....

Just go check them yourself if you doubt them:

1) Somewhat more than 80% of UK GDP is generated by British companies selling goods and serves to British companies;

2) By definition rather less than 20% of UK GDP is dependent on foreign trade;

3) Of (2) above, the ONS figures suggest that something like 47% is trade with the EU. What the ONS does not make clear is that trade with Holland (a very significant trading partner!?) includes all the goods Britain sends to the Rotterdam hub as discharge port for re-export. Talk about cooking the books;

4) Germany is our biggest European trading partner, followed by France and then Holland! (but see (3) above). Trade with Germany and France together accounts 25% of the 20% of the GDP generated by foreign trade. Let's be generous and say about 6 - 7% of GDP. Trade with the rest of Europe, even Italy, is negligible in real terms;

5) The USA is by far our largest foreign trading partner. It accounts for rather more than the combined trade with the EU. Let's be generous to the EU and say that trade with the USA only accounts for 7% of UK GDP ie trade with the EU and USA equal, and together this trade accounts for 14% of UK GDP;

6) Foreign trade with the biggest market in the world ie "the rest of the world" is about 6% of UK GDP. Why? Answer - we are not permitted to trade freely with the rest of the world. Why? Answer the EU;

7) What the above means is that Sir Roger and Ken Clarke and every other swivel-eyed Europhile is simply being disingenuous when they say leaving the EU would be an economic disaster.

8) In all of the above I have for good reason ignored the blindingly obvious point which is that the EU sells to UK significantly more than we sell to the EU ie their trade with us is rather more valuable to them than our trade with them is important to us. The EU members would think rather carefully about being difficult if UK left the Common Market, which is not a necessary or inevitable result of leaving the EU;

9) No Europhile seems to have the ability to contemplate the possibility (odds on, given (8) above) that UK could simply enter into bi-lateral trade agreements with EU members if the need ever arose;

10) No Europhile dares consider that under WTO rules, it would probably be illegal for the EU to get into a tariffs war on UK trade with EU members in any event. I have not checked this in detail, so am happy to be proven wrong on the point, but it does not detract from 1 - 9 above. Even if the EU or its members were entitled to raise tariffs, UK could do the same on their trade with us (refer to (8) above again....);

In short what it comes to is that UK, by binding itself to the economic corpse that is the EU for the irrational fear of "losing" around 7% of GDP, is drowning itself by inches. This despite being in a world where the international language of trade is English, and where our businesses and bonds of friendship/history (think Commonwealth) are a huge asset - one which EU membership prevents us from trading on fully because of EU protectionism.

So, Sir Roger, with respect you are talking complete and utter tosh.

Mikael
03-02-2013, 06:49 PM
What does Carnifex know, he is still using inches!
;)

(I was going to complain that he hadn't given his source but you omitted to quote the line above where he mentions getting it from the Office of national statistics)

What I don't like is the suggestions that the EU would be 'difficult' to the UK if we left, the implication being that the EU is like a petulant child. There is no need for discriminatory imposition of tariffs for their to be an impact on us, there is nothing personal in it. We would be outside the EU so not automatically guaranteed the same free flow of people or trade. As for the setting up of bi-lateral trade agreement, its a possible outcome but again not guaranteed. Its in the same way many Scotts gloss over the full implications of the leaving the UK, with a lot of things we just don't know how they will play out. Again this is the inherent danger of simple Yes/No vote.

If you want a reasoned debate about the relative importance of the EU trade to and from the UK, fair enough but can we finally drop this island mentality of us against them. The EU does not go around trying to shaft its member states it simply does not always work very well.

Mikael
03-02-2013, 07:22 PM
As for a personal example, what happens to the UK's part in the international nuclear fusion research effort?

The Culham Centre for Fusion Energy, based in Oxfordshire, has long had money flooding in to support JET (the Joint EUROPEAN Torus) reactor. Now that JET is winding down, EUROPE is redirecting most of its money to the shared research facility in Cadarache where the international ITER reactor is being built with 7 partners (Europe, USA, Japan, India, S. Korea, China and the Russian Federation). This is enough of a bureaucratic beast already, I don't fancy the fun we would have trying to re-write that agreement to keep the UK in it despite as no longer being a union member.

Maybe you are not a fan of fusion, ok what about research in general. Take for example the EU framework programes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framework_Programmes_for_Research_and_Technologica l_Development), this is substantial monies that we can use in European universities and research institutes so we can maintain an edge in high end technology and science. If the UK government saved that tax Euro do you think it would go back into research? I doubt it.

Janos
03-02-2013, 08:57 PM
I think the comments section is very enlightening.....

the one i most enjoyed was Carnifex about 4-5 comments in....

Sorry - but comments on a website, even by Carnifex, don't cut it with me. The 80/20 thing is cobblers for a start.

Janos

Baron015
03-02-2013, 09:01 PM
Sorry - but comments on a website, even by Carnifex, don't cut it with me. The 80/20 thing is cobblers for a start.

Janos

I agree Janos, I think that applies especially to comments on THIS website - TDF.

Baronski

Soggy
03-02-2013, 09:03 PM
Sorry - but comments on a website, even by Carnifex, don't cut it with me. The 80/20 thing is cobblers for a start.

Are you going to show us the stats for your statement or are we relying on your comments on a website to base our opinion on?

Interesting that He points to the INS as his source, care to dispute that?

Janos
03-02-2013, 09:07 PM
Are you going to show us the stats for your statement or are we relying on your comments on a website to base our opinion on?

Interesting that He points to the INS as his source, care to dispute that?
So you trust him but you don't trust me. I'm going to sulk and drown my sorrows :)

Janos

Soggy
03-02-2013, 09:09 PM
So you trust him but you don't trust me. I'm going to sulk and drown my sorrows :)

Janos

No I trust neither of you. One of you has offered a source for their position, so it can be checked and assessed for validity.

Janos
03-02-2013, 09:11 PM
No I trust neither of you. One of you has offered a source for their position, so it can be checked and assessed for validity.

Ok. My position is also backed by the ONS.

Janos

Janos
03-02-2013, 09:12 PM
No I trust neither of you. One of you has offered a source for their position, so it can be checked and assessed for validity.

Ok. My position is also backed by the ONS. Twice it seems...

Janos

sheesh
03-02-2013, 09:34 PM
Ok. My position is also backed by the ONS. Twice it seems...

Janos

Always good to double check things ;)

Hot Totty
03-02-2013, 10:44 PM
Interesting pol results, the leave contingent have been gathering pace as this discussion has been going on. The gap is closing ;)

Chrisch
04-02-2013, 10:05 AM
Its all a bit academic though isn't it? After all the Tories are not going to win.

Hot Totty
04-02-2013, 10:11 AM
Totally acedemic regardless who gets in, non of them have the bottle to go to the country :(

Soggy
04-02-2013, 04:06 PM
Its all a bit academic though isn't it? After all the Tories are not going to win.

But UKIP might :D

Soggy
04-02-2013, 04:48 PM
Sorry - but comments on a website, even by Carnifex, don't cut it with me. The 80/20 thing is cobblers for a start.


The best that i can find with a quick google is 32% of GDP is exports.
Exports of goods and services (% of GDP) in the United Kingdom (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/exports-of-goods-and-services-percent-of-gdp-wb-data.html)

That doesn't account for the chaps stament about double counting of exports through Rotterdam, i haven't got that far. That said still leaves the numbers heavily against the 'bad to leave EU' doomsters....not the end of the world as its been trotted out so far. still the affect on our GDP figures would be in the single figures, not the monster hit we are led to believe.

AMW
04-02-2013, 05:16 PM
Many reasons to stay in and those have been covered although for me a good reason is:

If we are part of the same club it will help stop the playing of Europe's favourite game "killing each other" less nationalistic self interests and a more open forum.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iI9RoNUNWAw&feature=youtu.be

Emotive video but with good reason.


Andrew

Diving Dude
04-02-2013, 05:21 PM
l claim a Godwins.

This could be a new game like corners.

Hot Totty
04-02-2013, 05:23 PM
Sorry I don't agree, I believe it increases the probability of a world conflict many fold. Smaller countries will squabble invade each other, occasionally it'll bring others in as well it is unfortunately the nature of man. Have three or perhaps 4 mega states and the probability for global conflict goes off the end of the scale. All it reduces is the probability of a war with another European country that's all.

Diving Dude
04-02-2013, 05:25 PM
Yeah right, just like the whole of the EU backed us fully when another Nation invaded our sovereign territory in 1983.

Chrisch
04-02-2013, 05:27 PM
The best that i can find with a quick google is 32% of GDP is exports.
Exports of goods and services (% of GDP) in the United Kingdom (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/exports-of-goods-and-services-percent-of-gdp-wb-data.html)

That doesn't account for the chaps stament about double counting of exports through Rotterdam, i haven't got that far. That said still leaves the numbers heavily against the 'bad to leave EU' doomsters....not the end of the world as its been trotted out so far. still the affect on our GDP figures would be in the single figures, not the monster hit we are led to believe.

It's very hard (if not impossible) to accurately assess the impact of an all out "out". Clearly not all the 30 odd percent would dry up on day one. Whilst I think it is a dumb idea to leave, I don't want to be though of as a "doomster" - it's not doom, it's simply that any reduction in our economy, any reduction in our world dominance and any statement of isolationism is to me a pretty daft thing to do. For sure the UK would carry on and we would still have a few exports much as we do now. The real issue for our export market though is that we don't have a big, vibrant manufacturing sector with globally desirable brands. What there is is mostly foreign owned (Jaguar Land-Rover for example) and is therefore vulnerable to relocation (in or out).

It isn't going to be a "monster hit" it is simply going to increase the rate at which the UK slides into obscurity and irrelevance. I don't see that as a doomsday scenario, rather just a sad end to the UK, probably in conjunction with Scottish independence and slipping out the G20 to become notable only for the fact that we speak a slightly incorrect form of American and having a jolly soap opera aristocracy that some tourists find worth looking at.

The European financial centre of Frankfurt will buy Lloyds of London and there will be a big argument about calling it "of London" even though it isn't based there. It will be renamed Lloyds Register or something like that. Barclays will move their HQ to New York (where it is already listed on the NYSE). Unemployment will become a major issue in London, rather than the current problems of overpriced housing in the capital as everyone wants to live there.

20 years from now England will be much as Poland is today, an underdeveloped country noted for it's cheap labour. Poland's GDP will overtake England. English people will lament the Poles going home and taking their skills and businesses with them. The massive burden of retired people and the huge financial millstone of the state pension will cripple what is left of the English economy. Presumably the departure of the East Europeans will be trumpeted by the UKIP government as "yet another success". Switch the light off will you?