Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Brexit

The EU Referendum is nearly upon us.........23rd June.

1000 replies

Daisyonthegreen · 13/04/2016 20:42

I have been invited by other posters to start a new EU Referendum Thread as the EU thread "In out shake it all about what to vote in the EU referendum "is now closed.
Anyhow this vote is is pretty crucial for the good of the country and your family.
I make no secret of the fact I feel to vote to Leave is the best option.
On the "In out shake it all about,what to vote in the EU Referendum " Thread I posted many links and gave views on why I feel that way.
I feel we would flourish free of the beaucratic ,undemocratic organisation it has turned into.
A Trading block initially started up with 9 countries in the 1970s has become out of control,mammoth and unwieldy and frankly rather dangerous.
We need to wrest back control of our own country,our borders and our ability to broker our own Trade deals which the EU insists on doing for us.
Plus our own Judicial decisions.
We on leaving would still Trade with the EU,they need us more than we need them actually but the beauty of it we could be free to broker our own deals with the rest of the world on our terms.
In short we would flourish.
We can love/ like Europe but not be in the EU.

OP posts:
MyHovercraftIsFullOfEels · 23/04/2016 18:49

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Chalalala · 23/04/2016 19:02

I was just about to post something to this effect, Hovercraft.

The US is a federal union of states that accepted to surrender part of their sovereignty to become integrated into a super state... Hell, Texas was once an independent Republic. So yes, I'd say they practised what they preach. They ARE like a supercharged version of the EU already.

Btw, current odds of Obama's fellow democrat and former Secretary of State to be the next President are currently around 70%. But if you want to cross your fingers for Trump to pull off an upset and win instead, be my guest.

Daisyonthegreen · 23/04/2016 19:08

Hover
Chalalala
A ridiculous argument,not comparable at all.
You are both desperate.
One cannot compare the different States in America to different Countries in Europe which have utterly different languages,history and cultures.
Your desperation is pathetic.

OP posts:
CoolforKittyCats · 23/04/2016 19:15

Btw, current odds of Obama's fellow democrat and former Secretary of State to be the next President are currently around 70%. But if you want to cross your fingers for Trump to pull off an upset and win instead, be my guest.

I have no desire for Trump to be president nor do I particularly like Clinton either.

I wouldn't however be in favour of Cameron etc al going over to the USA and intervening.

Anyone remember the Owen Jones headline last year when Russel Brand intervened in the GE and came out in favour of Labour? That went well....

BTW I am most probably a 'remain' before any Brexit insults are thrown this way.

Chalalala · 23/04/2016 19:18

And you know what other comparison is ridiculous?

Comparing the UK and its 65M people to the US and its 318M people. What is right for one may not be right for the other. Shocker, I know...

"Ridiculous", "desperate", "pathetic"... really going all out, aren't you? methinks the lady doth protest too much Smile

Chalalala · 23/04/2016 19:24

The thing is you are conflating a couple of different questions, KittyCat. Does Obama know what he's talking about when he discusses US policy? Overall I'd say he probably does. Did he have a right to state his view, especially when the Brexit camp was putting words in the US's mouth? Yes, absolutely. Was he wise to do so? That remains to be decided.

AnnaForbes · 23/04/2016 19:29

The US is a federal union of states that accepted to surrender part of their sovereignty to become integrated into a super state... Hell, Texas was once an independent Republic. So yes, I'd say they practised what they preach. They ARE like a supercharged version of the EU already.

Silly comparison.

The EU comprises 28 disparate economies with their own religions, their own cultural, their own economy and economic cycles. To find parity just isnt plausible.

The USA comprised a group of 13 colonies, mainly made from migrants from England, with smaller numbers of Spanish and French settlers. It still took one hell of a war before they managed to form the United States.

YokoUhOh · 23/04/2016 19:31

Daisy there are 41,000,000 Spanish speakers in the US, so the 'same language and culture' argument isn't exactly watertight.

SpringingIntoAction · 23/04/2016 19:36

The US is a federal union of states that accepted to surrender part of their sovereignty to become integrated into a super state.

You missed the bit where it gained Independence from Britain. Grin The bit when it actually gained sovereignty. Grin

Chalalala · 23/04/2016 19:41

It still took one hell of a war before they managed to form the United States.

The war wasn't between the colonies

But yes, of courses the cases aren't the same. Just like the geo-political and economic situation of the US is very different to that of the UK today. The silly comparison point goes both ways.

SpringingIntoAction · 23/04/2016 19:44

The ckue is actually in the words federal union of states

That's what is in store for us -a federal united states of Europe.

One Currency - the Euro
One Flag - that blue rag
One Anthem - Ode to Joy'
One President of Europe - Junckers
One seat on the UN - MEPs voted last week for Britain to relinquish its seat on the UN Security council in g=favour an an EU seat

.....and so on

Until "the influence of the Westminster Parliament is just a council chamber in Europe", as Ken Clarke is looking forward to.

MyHovercraftIsFullOfEels · 23/04/2016 19:45

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Chalalala · 23/04/2016 19:51

missed the bit where it gained Independence from Britain. grin The bit when it actually gained sovereIgnty

actually, go have a look at the Declaration of Independence: it proclaims the United Colonies to be "free and independent states", plural.

But I don't want to argue the two cases are the same, of course they are not. All I was saying was that the US actually do know something about pooling sovereignty into a federal state.

BronzeBust · 23/04/2016 19:57

Since we've been in the EU "Poverty doubles in UK over last 30 " This Is because lower paid workers suffer more from wage compression. Since the EU has made it is just as easy to recruit anyone in the EU, big employers have a much bigger pot of labour to draw from which lowers wages (supply and demand).

Before the EU, firms had to justify why they wanted to employ a foreigner over a native. I suppose you can call this rampant racism and xenophobia (common sense springs to mind just like most other successful counties) however, it ensured the local people were employed before importing more labour. There is little virtue in importing labour when labour exists already. Of course there will always be a job vacancy to skills mismatch and this is a valid reason to import labour.

Since the EU, it has given the right to 450m people to apply for jobs in the UK at the expense of the other 6.5 billion in the world. So why limit unchecked migration to the EU? Why not to every country in the world? Is it not racist to give preference to a Dutch doctor than an Indian doctor? That is why I get annoyed at the R and X card being pulled every time an argument involving immigration is raised by a Brexiter. By the same daft notion, The EU is a racist regime because it gives preference to its own citizens over that of non EU citizens.

The Poverty and Social Exclusion in the United Kingdom (PSE) project, led by the University of Bristol, has revealed the wealth gap between the haves and the have-nots in the UK is widening still further.

Many low and median earners have seen no real improvements in their incomes over the last 30 years despite economic growth.

The TUC's Britain's Livelihood Crisis report said that the figures showed a "livelihood crisis" has been brewing in Britain for decades, and was only put off by an "unsustainable rise in personal debt". The façade of wealth brought to you courtesy of economic sticking plaster ;DEBT!.

So much for the EU being of benefit to us. The EU is good for the rich and corporates aiding wage compression. Lets spread the poverty equally over the EU.

Still think flooding the country with cheap labour is good for everyone?

Good for the rich and corporates. Bad for everyone else. When TTIP gets underway, then we'll see just how good that is for the EU. Monsanto. Just one corporate we do not want over here or their vile products and practices. I urge everyone to see what Monsanto does to US farmers, you will be shocked. All while the US government looks on and does nothing about it, even giving Monsanto protections.

Lurked

You mentioned inward and outward investment. Of course there is a net position because we invest abroad as well as they other way round. How do you gauge how much we benefit from these? Most large international corporates inwardly investing don't pay corporation tax at the rate they should. They will shift it to a jurisdiction that treats their money well. Some even get incentives from the government. We've seen certain companies pay a pittance in tax; a joke in comparison to the profit they made so our country loses out to the special treatment that these corporates get away with. So on to the employees of these firms, yes they spend their wages in this country and pay tax but as you have correctly pointed out, a lot of consumer goods are imported and so there are massive outflows of cash to China, Taiwan or wherever most of the products are made. Also have to factor that lower income families receive benefits and a would unlikely be paying enough tax to cover the social costs (healthcare, schooling etc.). A lot of food is imported so again, this money is flowing out of the country. It takes me back to my argument that we are way down the list for wealth per capita in the world.

In the Net international investment position we are way down that list at 31st. Minus £444 billion.

For the benefit of anyone here that doubts how the status of a nation can change, consider this:

The USA, as recently as 1960 the world's largest creditor, has now become the world's largest debtor. They still have the largest (just) GDP but by golly their country is in horrendous debt.

Tied to the EU, the UK will get poorer and poorer over time because with only 3 net contributors to the EU, someone has to pay for all the other 25. For every new country that joins the EU, we will have higher subs to pay and our representation will be diluted until we are but just a tiny voice at the end of an enormous EU table.

Still think we can reform the EU: in your dreams.

Daisyonthegreen · 23/04/2016 19:57

Super video mums,put the kettle on for a comforting brew and listen to a good MEP give you some great positives in "Time to Exit from the EU".

OP posts:
SpringingIntoAction · 23/04/2016 20:07

The States realised that they were stronger together. I agree that the EU isn't going to become a single "super-state" as so many Brexiters seem to suggest it is.

It is. It's written into the preamble of the Treaty of Rome - "EVER CLOSER UNION"

In fact, if you're saying it's not comparable because "The EU comprises 28 disparate economies with their own religions, their own cultural, their own economy and economic cycles. To find parity just isnt plausible", then the argument that it's going to become one (another part of Brexit's Project Fear) is obviously told as a lie by people who know that it's a lie!

If you think the European Superstate is a lie you are either woefully ignorant of the true purpose of this experiment or woefully dishonest.

No single currency has ever been successful without being under single political control - like the US.

Its no secret that the aim of the EU is a single "European entity". Even their founder admitted this:

The States of Europe must therefore form a federation or a European entity that would make them into a common economic unit.

www.historiasiglo20.org/europe/monnet.htm

The Lisbon Treaty gave the EU that 'legal entity" that it needed to be able to turn itself into a country.

The EU knows that the Euro will fail unless it can gain political control of the countries that use the Euro. Doing so is a longterm plan, achieved via harmonisation of disparate economies. When a country has met certain tests it can join the Eurozone - thus surrendering its own currency and putting itself at the mercy of Germany and the ECB, as Greece discovered.

President Junckers wants an EU army. Now why would a trading community need that? Answer - EU superstate

www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/08/jean-claude-juncker-calls-for-eu-army-european-commission-miltary

And these liars want us to believe everything else they say

Top Tip. If you wish to be treated nicely stop abusing the other posters. When you abuse other poster anyone reading your posts forms an opinion of the sort of person you are. That, coupled with the evidence that some of your posts break talk guidelines are deleted does not assist your credibility.

So try to play nicely - like the rest of us.

CoolforKittyCats · 23/04/2016 20:11

And these liars want us to believe everything else they say

Sorry but when you start throwing insults around you lose any point you may have.

SpringingIntoAction · 23/04/2016 20:15

actually, go have a look at the Declaration of Independence: it proclaims the United Colonies to be "free and independent states", plural

You are still missing the point.

In order to create the US it first had to gain independence for some of those States from the Britain. Why didn't they just stay as part of the UK? They wanted to rule themselves - therefore they wanted to obtain their own sovereignty from the UK.

Having gained their sovereignty they pooled (not lost) sovereignty by forming one single political union, under one flag, with one currency and a federal system of government.

That is exactly what I object to.

lurked101 · 23/04/2016 20:19

Just FYI I don't read your posts bronze.. no point. Your fundamental understandings are so flawed I'd have to write a book.

BronzeBust · 23/04/2016 20:23

"WSJ: Simply counting up times the U.K. was outvoted tells us nothing useful about Britain’s sway in the bloc, Simon Nixon writes"

Come again. If we are consistently out voted, is that not a representaion of how ineffective our voice is? Getting even more ineffective as more countries join.

We only have 9.7% of the vote. How can anyone suggest we have a great sway. Coupled with the latest news we are the most ignored nation in the EU, I think this writer needs a reality check.

Chalalala · 23/04/2016 20:25

Having gained their sovereignty they pooled (not lost) sovereignty by forming one single political union, under one flag, with one currency and a federal system of government.

That is exactly what I object to.

Well, I think we are actually in agreement, Springing. You object to it, that's absolutely fine - but Americans do not, since this is what they did, and what forms the basis of their country.

So from this perspective Obama was not being hypocritical when he came out in favour of Britain in the EU. Which was the point I was trying to make.

Chalalala · 23/04/2016 20:26

If we are consistently out voted, is that not a representaion of how ineffective our voice is?

if you go and read the article it explains in detail how that is not actually the case.

SpringingIntoAction · 23/04/2016 20:31

Well, I think we are actually in agreement, Springing. You object to it, that's absolutely fine - but Americans do not, since this is what they did,

and what forms the basis of their country.

BINGO!

That's exactly what I don't want for the Uk - to be one state within a federal European superstate.

If that's what you want fine - but it's not for me.

SpringingIntoAction · 23/04/2016 20:34

BronzeBust

Good points.

Just ignore the personal abuse from TeamLurked. They seem to think it's an acceptable alternative to having any valid reason for staying.

SpringingIntoAction · 23/04/2016 20:42

So from this perspective Obama was not being hypocritical when he came out in favour of Britain in the EU. Which was the point I was trying to make.

You are still missing the point.

The reason Obama was called hypoocritical is because he is suggesting that the UK submits itself to be governed as part of a European Superstate masquerading as a trading organisation - in a way that the US would never permit itself to be governed

If the EU is so great why didn't Obama ask to join it instead of just negotitaitig TTIP?
Because he would not countenance the loss of US sovereignty and the other rules he would have to abide by such as free movement of Europeans to live in America.

US has trade deals with Canada and Mexico. Why is Obama not letting all his trading partners, like all the Mexicans to go and live in the US?

So somebody who fails to practise what he preaches is rightly called a hypocrite.

Obama is a hypocrite

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.