To ask brexiteers to explain to me why they want us to leave the EU?

[ethelfleda]

I have a totally open mind here. I did vote remain but I genuinely want to know why people think that leaving the EU is a good thing?
I’m not being goady - I actually want people to convince me that Brexit is a good thing so I don’t feel so terrified of what’s to come!
So what is it about the EU that’s bad for us? What will we achieve by leaving?

either the EU is overriding our own elected government in some areas and forcing it to do things it otherwise wouldn't

But the EU is not imposing things on us! We are also the EU. We have just had European elections - we also elect MEPs. Do you complain about local councils being overidden by Westminster?

Time for a kinder world
"I do actually think it is better for us to have FOM with our closest neighbours." (Only?) Perhaps then it is the remained that are racist? (Light hearted to be honest but I'm sure you get my drift)

Re: housing/living standards. The government can't force someone to pay 50% of their wages on rent like a lot of Brits do if they choose to house share/split costs to save money. A willingness to live with a very low quality of life by some European workers means that Britsh workers can only compete by having a very low quality of life too.

Not at all. You simply cant claim any 'mandate' for a leave on any basis from voting actualities and certainly not in Westminster for a no deal. I'd suspect we all know it's going to be boiled down to 'no deal, revoke or 2nd ref.' and Brexiters are not prepared to allow 'the will of the people' to be expressed, as this is contrary to their aim i.e. make a load of money out of the chaos that will follow a no deal.

Again, nobody in 2016 voted to make life poorer with limited freedoms. The population was clearly lied to, with the "all the benefits of membership, and none of the costs" bollocks.

Do you complain about local councils being overidden by Westminster?
Not sure of the relevance, but yes. I view it (just as one example) as awful that local planning decisions can't be made locally as the appeals process ultimately lets a Secretary of State override a local authority. Local decisions should be made locally.

As far as us being part of the EU - how and why is necessary for us to legislate via the EU to do things that aren't wished for by our locally elected government? It doesn't make sense. Of course we take part but the democratic deficit arises from the fact we are only one Country in 28 (admittedly weighted by QMV in some cases) which means we wind up with what the EU as a whole can agree to, and not necessarily something that is a priority for us or in our own interests.

This is fine when you are getting things you wanted but your fellow (UK) voters keep rejecting - not so much when you get stuff you didn't want but the rest of the EU did.

The government was allowed within EU rules to limit the number of EU citizens coming to the UK by only allowing those with work to stay - other countries did this. Not doing this is really a failure of the government

Enforcement of this is very expensive and would result in intrusive processes for all of us. It would be much easier and cheaper to control who is allowed in in the first place rather than having to allow everyone from the EU in then go looking for people to send away because they no longer meet the requirements.

It would be much easier and cheaper to control who is allowed in in the first place rather than having to allow everyone from the EU in then go looking for people to send away because they no longer meet the requirements

^^ I could buy this argument however it assumes that Brexit as a whole is cost neutral. What I see is economic hit (size and length depending on the economist you trust), money already owed to Eu to be paid (before they agree an FTA) and then the additional costs funding new systems.

And meantime public services getting an increased hammering.

however it assumes that Brexit as a whole is cost neutral

Where did I say that?

I think before Remainers worry about the economy and freedom to travel they have also neglected a key fact; namely the whole push for Global Climate change will mean a massive decline in productivity worldwide and a “drop” in living standards.

People can’t consume resources at the rate they do. Less car usage, less new production and more re use, less plane travel ( including buying more local and less from abroad).
The economy is going to retract whatever happens.

"It would be much easier and cheaper to control" - it can only be cheaper if the overall benefits don't exceed all the associated costs/losses.
I felt that you were looking at the savings for that policy in isolation.

I felt that you were looking at the savings for that policy in isolation.

A fair point, but my point was not solely based on the costs - I was countering the claim that it's as simple as the Uk government "not bothering" to implement extra controls. As with many things EU, the rules reflect the typical setup of mainland Europe - where there is a much greater apparatus of bureaucracy surrounding employment and ID registration, and where benefits are restricted to those who have contributed.

@Allhailthesun

Great point. This story from the Guardian was used to highlight what a disaster Brexit is going to be.

To me it highlights the mad economic system we've constructed where we ship a small single component part of a car over 3000 miles without any apparent regard for the environmental impacts - and as a previous poster observed, the EU loads tonnes of paperwork into trucks each month for the pilgrimage between Strasbourg and Brussels. Of course the EU isn't the sole offender or cause of this, but they really aren't helping either.

Timeforakinderworld
"The government was allowed within EU rules to limit the number of EU citizens coming to the UK by only allowing those with work to stay - other countries did this. Not doing this is really a failure of the government, not the EU"

Aah I guess this was the policy that you can come but no benefits for several years?
So we allow people to build a life in our country but if their job falls through they fall into hopeless poverty/homelessness and social services need to remove their children because they have no means to support them? Or "send them back" to countries where they now have no home or income.

How utterly barbaric and inhumane. If you allow people to come you need to support them - unless we don't care about hungry/ homeless/hopeless families living in our communities?

I am glad our government didn't go down this route! Makes much more sense to manage the number of people that come into the country and support those that do when it is required.

Sunni Aah I guess this was the policy that you can come but no benefits for several years?
So we allow people to build a life in our country but if their job falls through they fall into hopeless poverty/homelessness and social services need to remove their children because they have no means to support them? Or "send them back" to countries where they now have no home or income. As they do in Belgium in a heartbeat if you can't support yourself any more.