UK EU Referendum - Stay in or leave?

[Sultan Of Swing]

The main feature of migration flows is that the people flock to genuine opportunity. Britain and Germany are both creating jobs hence their attractiveness to migrants. But if you look at the British migration patterns you will see that they almost all go to London and the South East. That is the real economic engine of the UK. The Scots economy does not grow as well , has a higher dependency culture and welfare costs. So even as members of the EU I am not sure that they would be a migration destination unless people thought they could get to England through Scotland. Also independence , with the collapse in the price of oil does not really cost out for Scotland regardless of what happens in the EU. It is possible that the Scots would reject independence even like last time and choose to remain in the UK even outside the EU.

With the oil gone I can't see what the economic argument would be for Scotland leaving in a second referendum, oil was pretty much the centrepiece of the economic argument in the first one. If Scotland leaves in a second referendum I suspect it would purely be out of being fed up with Westminster government and some good old patriotic fervour. I think however that reason (and scaremongering) would in the end prevail and Scotland would remain in the union.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

No evidence that ever existed but Braveheart is still a great film.

So William Wallace wasn't really an Australian?

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

So William Wallace wasn't really an Australian?

Nope, and he didn't hate Jews or abuse his wife either.

Sorry Mel y'know I'm only teasing, I love you really

 

[mindlight]

Maybe Donald Trump would rebuild it for us.

And get the Scots to pay for it

 

[mindlight]

With the oil gone I can't see what the economic argument would be for Scotland leaving in a second referendum, oil was pretty much the centrepiece of the economic argument in the first one. If Scotland leaves in a second referendum I suspect it would purely be out of being fed up with Westminster government and some good old patriotic fervour. I think however that reason (and scaremongering) would in the end prevail and Scotland would remain in the union.

I do not want to see Scotland gone - they add a lot to the British culture and would be sorely missed - besides its a national pastime for Scots and English people to make fun of each other and yell at each other at football and rugby matches. But I think the SNP would use a BREXIT to push for a new referendum. Boris seems to think that the evidence that the Scots would be more pro EU is not necessarily overwhelming. The lack of an economic case and also that Scotland would have the weight of a country like Lithuania in the Union once separated from the UK.

Another interesting case is Northern Ireland. Protestants want to leave and Catholics to stay being the pattern. Given Ireland south of the border wants to stay it would be interesting to see how the dynamic between the 2 Irelands would work after BREXIT. At the moment the borders are relatively open.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/416a0036-d7ff-11e5-98fd-06d75973fe09.html#axzz40uhIlFS8

 

[GoodbyeDave]

In the last referendum, I voted for staying in but this time I think I'm for the Brexit. So little of what the EU gets up to is relevant or necessary. They've even set a legal minimum age for children being allowed to blow up balloons! What we need is subsidiarity: the principle that matters should be dealt with at the lowest possible level. Most East Europeans would agree, but the Germans with their enthusiasm for regulation and the Latins with their enthusiasm for the gravy train will always block it.

 

[Altfish]

They've even set a legal minimum age for children being allowed to blow up balloons! What we need is subsidiarity: the principle that matters should be dealt with at the lowest possible level.

This is a problem with the anti-EU press they jump on anything and misinterpret it. The EU HAS NOT banned children from blowing up balloons - FACT.

But they had to issue a press release to confirm it...
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-11-698_en.htm?locale=en

I don't suppose the Telegraph/Times/Mail/etc. ran the correction so the story sticks.

 

[Yerda]

I've always found it funny that Scotland wanted to be 'independent', and yet still remain a subject of the European superstate.

Well perhaps I can clear it up a little for you. At present we live with our devolved parliament, the houses in London, and the European parliament. "Independence" would have been the removal of one of those tiers of governance, specifically the one that is least democratic and most toxic.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Well perhaps I can clear it up a little for you. At present we live with our devolved parliament, the houses in London, and the European parliament. "Independence" would have been the removal of one of those tiers of governance, specifically the one that is least democratic and most toxic.

There is no European super state. The EU is a union of Sovererign states. The European parliament has few powers and those it has have been agreed by all the individual nations.

The members of the council of ministers are also nominated by individual countries through their respective governments.
Much in the way our own ministers are appointed by our prime minister.

Such systems of government are by agreement not imposed.

 

[Altfish]

The best reason to stay in Europe ...

"I once asked Rupert Murdoch why he was so opposed to the European Union. 'That’s easy,' he replied. 'When I go into Downing Street they do what I say; when I go to Brussels they take no notice.'"

 

[Ultimatum]

It's an organisation responsible for maintaining free trade & movement

Single Market isn't the Union.

.[/QUOTE]

 

[Jeremy Taylor]

We should leave. The EU is a large bureaucratic undemocratic mess that strips away Britain's sovereignty over her own borders and laws.

I believe at least in the long run it will certainly be good for Britain to be an independent country again and settle her own affairs.

The deal is very much insufficient, but I suspect politicians could do a good job of spinning it into a good deal and persuading people to stay in with the usual scaremongering.

If Britain leaves, that poses a serious threat to the continued existence of the EU, which is great. The eurosceptics are already doing well in France, with Britain gone there will be a big surge in euroscepticism across Europe, I don't believe the EU will be able to stay together.

I suggest reading The Great Deception by Booker and North. If you understand the history of the EU and those who have guided it - with the Monnet Method at its centre - you cannot escape the conclusion its purpose is a United States of Europe. This truth isn't conveyed to the British people enough. One of the original pressure groups for the European project, founded in 1955 by Jean Monnet himself (regarded by the Eurocrats as one of the founding fathers of the EU), was called The Action Committee for the United States of Europe. If as an Englishmen you quite sensibly wish to be an independent nation, then you must vote to leave. Already the Committee of Permanent Representatives is in practice the most powerful legislative body over Britain, passing more laws and directives than parliament. The areas over which the EU claims jurisdiction, using qualified majority voting, are immense.

I just wish the debate were more honest. Let the federalists come out of the woodwork and we can have a proper debate on EU federalism versus a sovereign Britain.

 

[Jeremy Taylor]

Fifth largest economy in the world, I think we Brits can be quite pessimistic about how influential we actually are. Other countries lower down on the economic ladder manage just fine and negotiate their own trade deals, we can do even better.

Also, in the end, in Europe we would have influence not as Britain but simply as part of the population of Europe. Most people want to have influence as Britain, and as a nation, not like Texas has influence through the US or as simply part of the general, undifferentiated population of Europe.

Though it is true at the moment that we wield more weight in Brussels than our population deserves (though we pay more and get less too), this can't go on indefinitely as ever closer union is pursued. In the end there will be a push to have the say weighted to population.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

I suggest reading The Great Deception by Booker and North. If you understand the history of the EU and those who have guided it - with the Monnet Method at its centre - you cannot escape the conclusion its purpose is a United States of Europe. This truth isn't conveyed to the British people enough. One of the original pressure groups for the European project, founded in 1955 by Jean Monnet himself (regarded by the Eurocrats as one of the founding fathers of the EU), was called The Action Committee for the United States of Europe. If as an Englishmen you quite sensibly wish to be an independent nation, then you must vote to leave. Already the Committee of Permanent Representatives is in practice the most powerful legislative body over Britain, passing more laws and directives than parliament. The areas over which the EU claims jurisdiction, using qualified majority voting, are immense.

I just wish the debate were more honest. Let the federalists come out of the woodwork and we can have a proper debate on EU federalism versus a sovereign Britain.

If we vote to stay in, I'm sure all the federalists will come out of the woodwork, and at any sign of protest, "Well, you voted to stay in, it's been settled forever!"

 

[Jeremy Taylor]

If we vote to stay in, I'm sure all the federalists will come out of the woodwork, and at any sign of protest, "Well, you voted to stay in, it's been settled forever!"

If we vote to stay in, then that is more or less the end of England as an independent nation. It is the end of more than a thousand years of our history.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

If we vote to stay in, then that is more or less the end of England as an independent nation. It is the end of more than a thousand years of our history.

Britain lost the remains of it's empire during the Second World War.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

Britain lost the remains of it's empire during the Second World War.

So? Therefore we should be a part of someone else's?

 

[illykitty]

Yes that is a long list and includes India. But to actually register to vote you need to have an address in the UK from which you are a registered tax payer. You need a National Insurance number also. So in other words you would have to be a Commonwealth national who is resident in the UK and paid taxes there which disqualifies the vast majority.

But this issue is causing controversy as apparently 1.5 million Commonwealth and Irish nationals qualify and most will probably be inclined to vote to stay

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...-voting-in-EU-referendum-says-new-report.html

Exactly, hence why I can vote, although I am Canadian. I am a permanent resident of the UK, got an indefinite visa, have been for almost 7 years (wow, time flies), married to a Brit. So I don't know, I think it's fair enough for me to have a voice in all of this since it is my home too. I don't know if I'll get citizenship eventually but I know I'm not moving back to Canada.

Also, I'm voting to stay in. Honestly, I have my own agenda (doesn't everyone?) which includes a more united world and let's just say I was "hinted" at it being better for businesses around where I live. I also think of the Tories having free reign and it scares the heck out of me, especially with the environment. ~_~ I also think it's too scary a leap to separate. It's not like you can backtrack and say "Oh crap this didn't work out... Oi EU! Take us back in!" "Nope."

I also haven't seen any compelling argument in favour of an exit yet. I like some good facts and pros and cons.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

So? Therefore we should be a part of someone else's?

We're not a super-power any more, so it probably makes sense to be part of something bigger.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

We're not a super-power any more, so it probably makes sense to be part of something bigger.

Fifth biggest economy, have more faith in your country, man!

What has happened to our nation that we've become so resigned and okay with submitting to another power.

When Henry VIII split from the superpower at the time, the Roman church, he paved the way for a dominant independent England (of course he did so for purely selfish reasons).

Even if we will never be a superpower again, isn't it better to be independent, for the sake of our nationhood, our identity, our country?

Do you think the greats of British history would want us to submit ourselves to another power, or remain independent to the end and if we fail, we fail with dignity.