Why should we stay/leave the EU?

[OhYouLuckyDuck]

What reasons are there for staying or leaving?
I think I will vote for us to stay as I think it might be a moderating influence on any government wanting to do things to extreme plus we will lose trade with Europe if we leave. I'm undecided though.

net by population shows here shows a slightly different picture to your map. Seems the biggest contributors are Luxembourg and Netherlands (UK is 7th), and the net beneficiaries are the countries of south and east , plus Ireland.

So a net flow from the wealthiest countries to the poorest ones.

this seems to be where the map originally came from - dating from Oct 2014 and relates to a rejigging of payments based on relative success of the economies of the countries - and reflects that the UK at the time was not so affected by the Euro crisis. So piecesofake appears to be misrepresenting things slightly.

This springs to mind ""Lies, damned lies, and statistics" is a phrase describing the persuasive power of numbers, particularly the use of statistics to bolster weak arguments."

Thanks for the fact checking. :)

Throck- your link is 2007 over 9 years out of date.....

"The U.K. pays much more than it receives - about 4.7b "- according to attached Guardian article. Please do read all the way to the bottom as lots of info there.

www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/nov/22/eu-budget-spending-contributions-european-union

Here's an example from local paper in Southampton of that EU money we contribute, working against us. Ford closing factory that produced transit vans encouraged by EU removing British jobs. Our taxpayers money coming back to hurt our workers.

www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/10020273.Ford_s___80m_EU_loan_to_boost_Turkey_factory___and_close_ours/

The 2007 link you attached is misleading as it is out of date. Full facts attached would probably be worth you reading - last year's figures -

fullfact.org/economy/our-eu-membership-fee-55-million/

Last year we contributed £18bn - got rebate of 5bn - EU spent 4bn on UK projects. We contributed 9bn that we didn't get back and the 4bn used for EU funded projects.

Unless you look at the amount of money a country receives back from the EU, then you can't get clear picture as who are the largest contributors.

If you read down the attached telegraph article you'll see it explained why Britain is the second largest net contributor after Germany - because we don't get the same amount given back as, say, Italy(who paid similar amount in2014, but got a lot more money back from EU - so overall were a smaller net contributor - read down through article.

www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/11221427/EU-budget-what-you-need-to-know.html

It's not about how much we pay in or get back.

It's about sovereignty - which is the right to make our own laws, control our own borders, raise our own taxes, defend ourselves and trade with whichever countries in the world we want.

We cannot do all of those things while we are in the EU.

We are therefore subservient to a higher authority, the EU, that we cannot democratically remove. That is not democratic.

We must leave the EU and regain the power of self-determination

House of Lords & Monarchy aren't democratic institutions either.

It makes sense that UK would pay the 2nd most money into EU.. we're the 2nd largest economy, are we not? And I think 3rd most populous (just below France).

OK - here's how it works

If enough people agree with you that there be no monarcy or no House of Lord or should not ben both, then you elect sufficient MPs to vote for the abolition of the House of Lords or the Monarchy or both. If the vote is carried the affected institutions would be abolished. We have the power to do so.

If the UK don't like the President of the European Union or the European Commission, neither the citizens of the UK (nor of the wider EU) have any democratic means of abolishing them.

But feel free to think that conflating this EU megastate with our House of Lords or the Monarchy if it helps you feel confident that the EU makes us Safer, Strobger, Better.v One day you'll learn how wrong you were.

olutely no democratic m

No, we are not subservient, because it was our choice to join the EU. If you choose to join a club, do you feel subservient because you need to observe its rules? We have a major part to play in making those rules whereas, if we left, we would continue to be very significantly affected by them but would have no influence over them.

Most materially, we joined because of the advantages to us, and we should stay because the cost to us of losing those advantages will be disastrous.

Not sure what point you are making - how are the queen and the EU comparable in your opinion? Simplistically, a democratically elected government generally keep the House of Lords busy discussing bills - suggesting improvements to a bill an elected government wish to introduce. Democracy sets the agenda.

House of Lords spend most of their time suggesting amendments etc to a government introduced bill and passing it back and forth between the houses.
HoLords can introduce a private members bill to be discussed, but as time is so limited debating the governments bills very few would get time and only most popular would be discussed . House of Lords can bring a private bill which will be a local issue, rather than affect community as a whole - local authority.

I assume we all know the queen doesn't actually have the ability to make laws...

AugustaFunkNottle

No, we are not subservient, because it was our choice to join the EU.

Massive logic flaw there. We chose to be subservient. We are subservient. We volunteered to be subservient. You are still subservient even if you voluntarily agreed to be so.

If you choose to join a club, do you feel subservient because you need to observe its rules? We have a major part to play in making those rules whereas, if we left, we would continue to be very significantly affected by them but would have no influence over them.

Wake up. We have 'no major part' to play in this club at all. We have no influence at all in this club. Every one of the last 72 requests we made to the club were rejected. It took our elected Head of state 3 days grovelling with his begging bowl to achieve the square root of absolutely nothing. It is impossible to reform this club that refuses to reform itself. Even one of the biggest admirers of the club, Lord Owen now says it's time to leave the club. It is an outdated club. It is the wrong club for us.

Most materially, we joined because of the advantages to us, and we should stay because the cost to us of losing those advantages will be disastrous

Wrong. There is no advantage. There is only enormous risk and danger in staying in.

Lljkk I'm glad it makes sense to you that we are in fact the second largest net contributor, I knew that any way - I was responding to the misrepresented facts re the 2007 map you felt was accurate representation. 😏

No, Springing, it isn't a logic flaw. If we choose to be part of something, that doesn't make us subservient to it: it means that we took a decision based on the advantages we perceived we would derive from it.

You have ignored the point I made about joining a club. Suppose you join, say, the National Trust. You can't just wander round their properties when you like, you can't go to parts of their properties that are closed, you have to obey their rules as to how to behave when on their properties, and if you want continued access you have to pay further subscriptions. Are you therefore subservient to them?

There is no advantage. There is only enormous risk and danger in staying in.

If we leave, all too many people will discover the advantages they are now receiving. Sadly they will be those whose businesses will collapse or will lose substantial parts of their markets, and those who lose their jobs as a result.

Do you read up on what is happening in the EU zone economies - they are disastrous. None of it is working. Do you approve of how they've treated Greece? Do you believe Greece should have ever been allowed to join? Do you think German banks should have lent so much money to Greece - then be surprised they can't pay it back?

Do you read up on the looming Italian banking crisis? Stacks of info out there - I'll attach one article, but really should read up on it; basically Germany is leaning on them for budget decisions etc - and it is seriously heading towards Greek style problems. This is one of the other reasons our government currently want this referendum out of the way in such a rush - the EU economy will be down the pan very soon.

www.euractiv.com/section/justice-home-affairs/opinion/beware-of-italy-s-banking-crisis/

Other poorer countries looking to join - and £9 minimum wage here - will be even more attractive as other European countries suffer more over next few years.

Do the people that want to stay read up on other economies and are they happy with the way Germany treats Greece?

Make no mistake the EU is Germany btw ; EU 'negotiations' = asking Germany what we can have.

AugustaFinkNottle

No, Springing, it isn't a logic flaw. If we choose to be part of something, that doesn't make us subservient to it: it means that we took a decision based on the advantages we perceived we would derive from it.

Augusta darling, you don't understand sovereignty and the transfer of sovereign power. Let's talk again when you do.

You have ignored the point I made about joining a club. Suppose you join, say, the National Trust. You can't just wander round their properties when you like, you can't go to parts of their properties that are closed, you have to obey their rules as to how to behave when on their properties, and if you want continued access you have to pay further subscriptions. Are you therefore subservient to them?

I can talk from experience on this one as I am a member of the National Trust as well as an unwilling serf of the European Union.

I pay an agreed subscription annually to the NT. Just as we do to the EU

I pay no more to the NT. I do however find the EU comes back to me from time to time demanding that I pay them additional £1,6bn because I have been working hard and have become quite prosperous.

As a member of the NT, I can also trade with the Historic Houses Association or the Landmark Trust or English Heritage. Being in the EU means I cannot make trade arrangements unilaterally with other potential trading partners.

As a member of the NT I can appear before a Planning Committee to argue my own case for planning permission or on a jury to try a case. As a member of the EU I am prevented from taking my seat on other international organisations such as the World Trade Organisation - the EU insists it will do that for me. It limits my ability to represent my own interests or decide things for myself.

If I break one of the rules of the National Trust it does not seek to censure my via the European Court of Justice, like the EU does.

I can leave the National Trust at any time I chose. I cannot leave the EU without giving notice and negotiating an exit package with them.

But your analogy of the NT is wrong. It's better to equate the EU with the Flat Earth Society as the EU has about as much benefit and relevance to us as the Flat earth Society has. The National Trust is a treasure. The EU is a cess pit of vested interest incompetence and corruption.

There is risk staying in too. Tying self to sinking ship or cut free and swim.

didn't say it was accurate.. .LeaveTRA, just happy someone tried to check the facts.

On the democracy thing... I'm a little afraid of the excesses of democracy, but moreover, I swore an oath of Loyalty to the Queen so I won't ever campaign against monarchy. Still seems odd when a Brit strongly decries antidemocratic EU while ignoring HoL.

I don't find PM democratically selected, either. I mean, nobody directly votes for PM to be PM do they? And you get so few referenda in this country.

Springing, as soon as you went into patronising mode you seriously showed yourself up. People who use that sort of tactic demonstrate their lack of ability to debate; whilst the rest of your post demonstrates such depths of illogic and, frankly, deliberate twisting of the facts that, fortunately, we can all safely ignore you.

Do the NT take your income and then return some of it to you - but tell you what you can spend it on ; then keep the rest to share out to someone in another country to support things that you may not care about.

Someone unelected in the NT membership office deciding without reference to you what they deemed worth spending your money that you gave to them?

Augusta - passive aggressive - famous term on here you will be familiar with.
"You" may ignore - yes. However, not 'we'. I don't believe you can speak for anyone other than yourself?

The NT certainly decides what to spend my money on without consulting me, Leave. I still don't feel subservient to it.

No, Leave, you are another who is being selective: it is interesting that that seems to be a repeated tactic in the "leave" camp. I didn't say "we may all ignore". I said "we can all safely ignore". It doesn't meant the same thing at all, and it certainly in no way is a statement as to what anyone will do.

Another repeated tactic in the leave camp seems to be the personal attack. I wonder why they might want to divert attention from the substance of the debate?

The House of Lords don't bring in laws that will affect our daily lives - local issue they are discussed - in etc and very few get chance to even be discussed as they are busy discussing the house of commons' bills. Currently best system for checking democratically elected MPs - nothing is perfect but it is is nothing like the EU system.

I've no idea what link you can make. It's the best system at the moment . Unless you want to take democracy to the nth degree and have a national vote on who is cooking dinner etc

They bear no comparison EU and our House system - we don't get listened to at the EU table about anything - the House system is our MPs discussing us and if we don't like them they get voted out. hoL stay but they won't be bringing in laws that decide how our money is spent.