Quick Poll: EU stay or leave?

[BlueSmarties76]

Would you vote to stay or leave the EU?

Quick poll.

Germany has higher wages, higher welfare standards and a health service which is far better than the NHS. Why would these people want to leave that to move to UK?

Britain is a more tempting prospect to low-skilled incomers because of the nature of our labour market.

We have a (by European standards) somewhat "American" style labour market which has a lot of flexibility and fairly low worker protections. This means that (like America) our economy churns out a lot of jobs--mostly not very good jobs, but still jobs. It is fairly cheap and low-risk to hire someone, because worker protections and employer-funded benefits are quite low. Hence, lots of people will happily hire someone low skilled from another country.

In many European countries, by contrast (esp. in Scandinavia but to an extent this is true of Germany too), worker protections are much greater, minimum wages are higher, it is harder to fire someone if they turn out to be a dud etc. This makes for a more equal society, but it also means that relatively fewer jobs are generated and employers are much less willing to hire an outsider for the rather low number of jobs that are generated; it is pricey to hire a person, and hard to fire them if they end up being a drag on your business.

Scandinavian type economic models are great for building an egalitarian, happy society with a fantastic quality of life. They do not, however, mesh that well with mass migration from poor countries, for the reasons I have just set out. There is a very high level of long-term welfare dependency among immigrants from poor countries who stay in Scandinavia and to a lesser extent Germany. Those who are entrepreneurial by nature will most likely be highly motivated to come to the UK, where it is easier to get your foot on the first rung on the employment ladder. Oh, and English is widely spoken worldwide.

Quite understandable, really.

Whether the UK is equally happy to accept them is, however, another matter.

"I don't have a link to that piece of information that I noted and neither should I be expected to have to sprinkle each of my posts with links to everything I post."

It is normal practice to expect people to back up their claims, and not just on MN.

Stay.

It is normal practice to expect people to back up their claims, and not just on MN

I am posting on a social media site, not writing a doctrinal thesis.

We do not go through life bookmarking references, maintaining metadata and demanding proof of the veracity or otherwise of every piece of information we hear or read.

If we did that the world would be a cold silent place.

Springing: A major element of the Brexit narrative is to exaggerate fears over immigration to UK.
Part of that narrative is to convince voters that refugees and asylum seekers who have been accepted by other EU countries will somehow all arrive in UK. This distorts reality because to move legally to UK they would need first to acquire EU citizenship. This is currently a long and complex process.
You stated that EU countries will be changing their laws to grant citizenship within two years - thus, you imply, facilitating swift onward movement to the El Dorado that is the UK. I - and others- do not believe this and have asked you to back up your claim.
It is an entirely reasonable request.

Yes, this is a public forum but you still need to back up your claims if you want to be taken seriously.

These are quite sweep statements and could considered to be bordering on smears

Springing: A major element of the Brexit narrative is to exaggerate fears over immigration to UK.

Firstly, my primary reason for wanting Brexit is to regain sovereignty.

One of the benefits that naturally flows from having full Sovereignty is the right to decide who should be permitted to come and live in the UK.

Secondly, I think legitimate migration from EU countries is often conflated by the IN side with the migrant crisis which is a totally different issue.

The Brexit ‘narrative’ is not to exaggerate fears over ‘immigration’ in general, but to draw attention to the fact that 180,000 additional EU citizens (a town the size of Crawley) decided to come to live in the UK last and utilise UK services and we had no control over the decision as whether they should be able to do so. Meanwhile, in an attempt to reduce overall net migration figures, the UK is raising the immigration barriers to non-EU migrants to the UK whose skills the UK could benefit from. The Brexit side are saying that in order to ensure an immigration that suits the sills needs of the UK, immigration should not be automatically available to every EU citizen but should be opened to immigrants from all over the world, if the have the skills we need. So the Brexit migration policy is less isolationist that that which currently exists.

Part of that narrative is to convince voters that refugees and asylum seekers who have been accepted by other EU countries will somehow all arrive in UK. This distorts reality because to move legally to UK they would need first to acquire EU citizenship. This is currently a long and complex process.

That is quite a charge to make against the legitimate concerns of those who wish to the the EU.

I am quite clear on the differential rights of EU citizens and asylum seekers to come to the UK. There is absolutely no suggestion that all asylum seekers granted asylum throughout the EU could all suddenly come to the UK. They can’t. If the are eventually given EU citizenship by an EU country, the option is available to them to come and live in the UK. That’s a fact.

I believe it is the Remain campaign that is attempting to conflate the 2 groups of people in an attempt, I believe, to try to portray the leave campaign’s legitimate concern about uncontrolled legitimate migration from EU countries as some bigoted rant against asylum seekers. We've moved on since that tactic was used in an attempt to close down legitimate debate

An asylum seeker’s qualifying period for acquiring EU citizenship varies from country to country but can be 4 years. Regardless of how long it takes, once an asylum seeker has acquired EU citizenship they are then free to come and live in the EU. That is undeniable. Whether they chose to or not is up to the individual EU citizen.

My concern is also that Mrs Merkel quite unilaterally decided to say ‘refugees are welcome in Germany’, without, it appears to have consulted the other EU countries that would be affected by her unilateral invitation, without making the necessary arrangements for them to safely get there and without distinguishing which of the migrating people are actually refugees and which are economic migrants. There was no debate beforehand in the European Parliament, even though it affected citizens in all EU countries.
Mrs Merkel then repeated her behaviour when she decided, without consultation, to offer the Turkish ‘asylum / migrant trade’ deal, which again will affect us.

If we are going to have an organisation like the EU dictating how we are allowed to control our borders then the German prime Minster should not be issuing invitations without prior EU-wide consultation and democratic debate.

The greatest wealth the UK possesses is its people and the culture they maintain

Just wanted to say what a lovely comment! We rarely here people say good things about the UK.

I cant see how any one would want to vote in.

I am sure many will say - the same for the leavers.

But LOOK at whats going on right now! Its chaos, there is no coherent plan, there is no coherent policy at all. The EU cannot cope with the migrant crisis.
They are all arguing, poor Greece takes the brunt, Germany is supposed to be standing with Greece, after all its partly Merkels fault so many are heading to Germany, But Germany can only help Greece if other nations are willing to share the burden of Migrants.

They will not. Some have put razor wire fences up Greece recalled its ambassador from Austria, Austria cut Greece out of a meeting with Balkan states, Austria lambasts Greece for waving through thousands of migrants, Greece cant afford to keep them, France condemned Belgium's decision to impose border checks, new measures Germany wants to bring in to deter migrants have been opposed, its all a shambles.

UK is the worlds fifth largest economy, the EU is dwindling in importance, The EU's share of the worlds gross product has slumped from 30 per cent in 1980 to below 17 per cen, the proportion of brit exports to the EU has fallen from around 55 per cent in 2000 to less than 45 per cent last year and is projected to fall much further!

Of course, we will still do trade with other EU countries when we leave and of course we will keep security.

I think we would be in an excellent negotiating position when we leave, excellent, we hold all the cards.

You are contradicting yourself. You claim not to be conflating EU and non EU migration, and then go on and do exactly that.

"I am quite clear on the differential rights of EU citizens and asylum seekers to cone to the UK"

" Mrs Merkel..decided without consultation to offer the Turkish asylum/migrant trade deal, which again will affect us"

Uk controls its own borders. Turks are not EU nationals (despite the UK government having beeen the loudest advocate of membership for Turkey over the years) and will still require visas to come to UK even if they have visa free access to Schengen. The migrants are not EU citizens either and will not be able to come to UK unless they become EU citizens. I note that you have now increased your "two year" claim to "four years". It is a minimum of 8 years before immigrants can acquire German cotizenship.

lagod

where is the evidence for this, Wolfgang was on andrew marr last week and batted away marrs question over turkey with a " oh that could take years, its so far away its not worth discussing" this week, we are hearing about a fast tracked Ascension of turkey to the EU.

this is a fast moving un predictable situation. migrants will collapse the EU they will do anything to keep turkey, happy, we have seen this!

I wouldn't be sure of any facts thus far.

And as Fredick Forsthye said on today's show, ( AM) Turkey joining is a worry, its a land bridge from syria and isis.

whatever legal channels are, and visas may or may not be needed, borders are now turkey for the EU ( if they join) its a huge worry.

Mouse: The Turkish accession issue is long and complicated, but if you google you will get all the details. It has been stalled for years now over a whole host of issues.

The key point to remember is that decisions on new Member States have to be taken by unanimity - ie everyone has to agree. So if the elected UK government does not like it, it will not happen. But as I say, over the years it has been the UK pressing for Turkish membership with Germany and France opposed. Cyprus also opposes strongly.

You can also be sure that any concerns UK voters have about Turkish membership will be shared by people in other EU countries. France for example has said they would have a referendum on this if it ever got that far.

Lagodiatitlan

*You claim not to be conflating EU and non EU migration, and then go on and do exactly that.

"I am quite clear on the differential rights of EU citizens and asylum seekers to cone to the UK"

" Mrs Merkel..decided without consultation to offer the Turkish asylum/migrant trade deal, which again will affect us"*

These are two statements of mine that you have taken out of context and attempted to conflate. However, there is absolutely no contradiction in those 2 disparate statements.

UK controls its own borders.

I have already explained that it does not – so on this we must disagree.

Turks are not EU nationals (despite the UK government having beeen the loudest advocate of membership for Turkey over the years) and will still require visas to come to UK even if they have visa free access to Schengen.

I know that. I have written about that myself. Why do you insist on keep telling me what I already know?

The migrants are not EU citizens either and will not be able to come to UK unless they become EU citizens.

I note you have used the term ‘migrant’ in your statement above, when I specifically used the term ‘asylum/migrant’ in that reference to the Turkish deal you mentioned above. We need to be careful here about terminology:
A migrant could be an economic migrant with no right to asylum or an asylum seeker. A migrant would have no right to come to the UK unless the obtained EU citizenship - agreed. An asylum seeker could, under some circumstances, come directly to the UK.

I note that you have now increased your "two year" claim to "four years". It is a minimum of 8 years before immigrants can acquire German citizenship

Firstly, what has German citizenship got to do with the availability of EU citizenship to “immigrants”, as you have chosen to call them this time, when each EU country sets it’s own criteria and qualifying periods? If you are referring to the Syrian refugees that the German Chancellor has negotiated to bring to the EU, there is no expectation that they will all settled in Germany and they will be subject to the EU's Resettlement policy, which could find them resettled in any of the countries that have signed up to the agreement.

When you understand the difference between ‘migrant’ and ‘asylum seeker’ you would realise that some countries (Finland) have different criteria for 'migrants' seeking EU citizenship than for asylum seekers seeking EU citizenship – who can apply for citizenship after 4 years. So, again you are conflating migrants with asylum seekers.

You insist on misquoting me. I did not make any “two year claim” at all. I reported a news item I had heard that stated some countries were CONSIDERING - I put this in capitals to emphasise it yet again, reducing the qualifying period for EU citizenship to 2 years. I made it quite clear in an earlier post that it was a news item I was aware of and I stand by that ‘claim’ even if I cannot reference it.

And to further support my claim that Mrs Merkel’s deal could actually affect us in the UK, quite apart from the fact these Syrian migrants could, one day attain EU citizenship and have the right to come to the UK, our Government could actually decide to help Mrs Merkel’s Turkish ‘deal’ succeed by agreeing to bring some of the Syrian asylum seekers to the UK. He isn’t obliged to as we have an opt out of the EU Settlement Plan, but he could still chose to do so.
Even if he decides not to and the Syrian asylum seekers are resettled elsewhere in the EU, many could exercise their right as asylum seekers right to be reunited with family members in the UK, as has already been granted to some Calais migrants. That also affects us here in the UK.

So, contrary to your laboured attempts to portray my two statements are contrary to each other I think it is your own assertion that has proven to be untrue.

I am quite happy to discuss this but would prefer if you moderated yout tone. I have no appetite to take part in any point-scoring exercises.

There is a whole thread discussing the Turkey deal in In The New section here on MN.

Lago, Spring...
Whilst you are arguing about the fine details of who said what... Keep this image in mind as you struggle through the traffic jams tomorrow.

It is on a bridge over a river in N Spain. The sort of bridge that would cross the Mersy, Thames, the Stour, or any of our rivers where people are cut off from each other by a bit of water and make a huge positive difference to us. See how empty it is.
It was built with EU money. Money we could use for ourselves.

what more do people need to see to realize we need to leave the eu.

The EU superstate,that is what is coming.Turkey will be joining the EU. do not be fooled or be blind to this. the EU is incapable of being flexible.Angele Merkel is very cleaver she knows most will be heading to the UK once they become EU citizens

Contrary to some media reports & scaremongering by certain politicians Turkey won't be joining the EU for years, probably not in my lifetime. EU Council of Ministers (elected heads of the EU states) agreed to fast track visa liberalisation & the "readmission" of migrants in the EU to Turkey. It was also agreed to "re-energize" accession talks which were on hold, but fast tracking Turkey's membership wasn't agreed . See EU statement;

www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2015/11/29-eu-turkey-meeting-statement/

Visa liberalisation means replacing easily forged visas with more secure machine readable passports for short term travel in the Schengen area & adopting measures to combat crime (eg introducing laws & fingerprinting.) The EU criteria for visa liberalisation is set out in a "roadmap;"

ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-is-new/news/news/docs/20131216-roadmap_towards_the_visa-free_regime_with_turkey_en.pdf

To join the EU Turkey must meet the conditions on democracy, justice, rights etc set out in the Copenhagen agreement. That involves completing 33 of 35 policy "chapters." Since Turkey applied to join the EEC/EU in 1987 14 chapters have been opened & only 1 of these has been provisionally closed. The conditions for EU membership are available here;

ec.europa.eu/enlargement/policy/conditions-membership/index_en.htm

Turkey won't be able to satisfy the conditions for years, if ever, & then all the existing EU states must ratify it's membership. Under both Labour & Tory governments the UK foreign policy has been to support Turkey's EU application whereas Angela Merkel has repeatedly opposed it's full membership.

LEAVE

What main stream media do not want you to watch.

I'll be voting OUT of the EU on 23rd June.
I don't believe the EU is democratic. It's very corrupt and its medalling into aspect of our lives. We joined the EEC regarding trade and we have been lied to by every PM since we joined in 1972. Our Sovereignty and our ability to make our own laws for British people has slowly been stripped away from us. We Britain is no longer in control of our own destiny and if we remain we are betraying every single person who fought and died for us to keep our freedoms from Nazism, Communism.
Why would anyone who chooses and blindly sleepwalk into voting to remain wanting to follow the ideology of men who created the EU who were former Nazis?

After Serving Queen & Country for 12 Years ,it make my blood when Marine ' A ' IS still in Jail and Blair is walking the Streets .....,OUT!

After Serving Queen & Country for 12 Years ,it make my blood Boil when Marine ' A ' IS still in Jail and Blair is walking the Streets .....,OUT!

I vote leave - remembering why we have this referendum in the first place, because of the unstoppable flow of immigration and why UKIP did so well. I dont normally believe anything politicians say except Priti Patel made one of the most truthful statements Ive heard, that the Cameron/Osborne brigade havent a clue what its like in many areas being taken over by other cultures - they are safe in the Cotswolds.

The referendum is not being put before voters because of the unstoppable flow of immigration. It is because of the internal divisions in the Conservative party, trailing back to Major's 'bastards'. Also the threat of UKIP to the Conservative party. Ironically it seems to be creating some sort of implosion of the Conservatives. I would be amazed if the rifts could be healed.

The level of immigration is not unstoppable. Around half of the numbers could be reduced or stopped in the morning, because they are from outside the EU. The UK government has put in place any tough entry requirements. The 35,000 salary and people not being able to bring partners/spouses from outside the EU unless they meet certain requirements. As they are from outside the EU, all these requirements/impediments are put in place solely by the national government. In fact if the numbers from the EU were simply replaced by people from the Commonwealth etc. The impact on the UK wrt schools, hospitals, housing etc. would not be different. You know the countries Brexit people are stating are much more in tune with the UK because they understand the culture. Countries like Nigeria, Ghana, Bangladesh, Pakistan and Tonga. Uganda as well, which is not so democratic under Mugabe. I have no issues with these countries or people from them. I am just wondering why Brexiteers are saying they are more in tune with the UK than other European countries. There are very fine and admirable people who live in and migrate from the Commonwealth countries as well as fine people from other countries.

As said, the UK government has politically been one of the biggest cheerleaders of Turkey's entry into the EU, NATO ally and all that. It is interesting how the UK populace seem to be completely against what all their governments are cheerleaders for. It would question how representative the representative democracy is in the UK, this being the case. Also it was a huge cheerleader for extending entry to all the accession countries that everyone is now complaining about.

As I am not writing a doctorate and do not need to refer to any credible source, I can say that the 4 horsemen of the apocalypse are going to be let loose in the UK in the event of a Brexit and everyone is doomed. If anyone has the temerity to question this, it is simply an attempt to smear my statement on their part.

Yanis Varoufakis was on Andrew Marr on Sunday and he said that if the UK left, the EU is likely to implode and the result would create a deflationary vortex which would affect the UK as well resulting in 1920's/30's type depression. After hubris comes nemesis.

Of course he also said economists cannot see into the future. It was interesting to see Liam Fox quote the Bank of England. This was the same Bank of England that 'Leave' wouldn't trust at all on other pronouncements because they were at odds with their predictions in their own campaign.

I find Priti Patel's statement very interesting and wonder whether she extends it to all decisions taken by these people in relation to the UK and not just in relation to EU matters. The same Priti Patel who was paid to lobby the Government on behalf of British American Tobacco. I'm sure the ordinary person was at the forefront of her mind. Even being part of a group seeing how British American Tobacco could influence the World Health Organisation on a treaty whose aim was to seek to protect the ordinary person against the devastating effects of smoking. WHO FCTC. She is certainly not coming from a place of moral bankruptcy herself! It would beg why she supports her own party at all and a Government full of privileged people making decisions that has impact on a population she believes that are distanced from. She must have this problem with a lot of governing bodies and people in positions of influence. It beggars the question why she isn't speaking out on all of these and their impact on the ordinary person their decisions impact on? What about Boris, Lamont, Lawson and so on?

What bar does she think should be put in place to exclude people from putting their name on the ballot paper. Wealth, education, inheritance expectations?

I would think an exit from the EU would allow many a privileged person (that PP refers to) to dismantle workers protections and entitlements bit by bit as the Conservatives have done to Welfare etc. Some may be big on Brexit for this very reason. Maybe even tobacco companies being eased up on wrt their marketing and products having to comply with certain standards.

Don't you understand how the game works? When they are part of the club they have to all follow the rules and maintain collective responsibility to play the game and conceal the truth - it's the Oxbridge omerta.

What has now happened is that this EU referendum has caused a tectonic shift, a volcanic eruption which has liberated some of the gae's players and put them on opposing sides, so the oerta and the collective responsibility is now out of the window and they can tell the truth about the lies the other half tell. That is why the public is beginning to see the real story rather than the collective spin we are usually fed by the team.

At the end of this process, it will be difficult for all the team's players to unite because the leader, the manager, has lost the dressing room. That means that we will get a new, more honest, politics as there is a battle to get a new manager in.

'Yanis Varoufakis was on Andrew Marr on Sunday and he said that if the UK left, the EU is likely to implode and the result would create a deflationary vortex which would affect the UK as well resulting in 1920's/30's type depression.'

The EU will implode but it won't be deflationary because all of the member countries will be able to expand as they escape the deflationary, austerity driven clutch of Germany and the bankers. It will be the end of austerity and regulation and bureaucracy and the birth of growth and expansionary economic policy as the climate change stuff and all the other regulatory mechanisms are dismantled.