Buy all your VW California Accessories at the Club Shop Visit Shop

EU Referendum - 23rd June - How will you vote?

EU Referendum

  • Stay in the EU

    Votes: 90 51.4%
  • Leave the EU

    Votes: 85 48.6%

  • Total voters
    175
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't agree Mike, you should contribute, regardless of whether I or anyone else has time or inclination to watch the video. You've decided (erroneously) that some people are dismissing you and your facts which then makes you want to vote leave. It's an hour and eleven minutes long and is unashamedly partisan. But if you want put forward any pro exit facts (that we have allegedly dismissed) I'm all ears :)
Fred you still don't get it and you are coming to all the wrong conclusions.
Firstly there is no point contributing if it is not a debate or an objective look at the options. I frankly don't care which way anyone votes and only look for honest consideration of those involved. If that isn't there or the attitude is defensive I am going to learn nothing from them. I post links or material in order to get an opinion on them. They are not necessarily what I believe. Of course the video was partisan it was called Brexit for goodness sake. That was the point.
The thing is you posted a one hour eleven minute video and nothing else. If you want a debate, please consider making it slightly easier for other people to understand your points by posting a summary of them. I don't think that a lack of reply is unreasonable (you can't MAKE people respond to you) and I don't think that this is a good enough reason for you to vote leave. But it's absolutely your prerogative (not that you need my blessing :)).

There hasn't been any discussion on the pros and cons so I agree. Quite pointless
Probably the single most important political decision that any of us will ever be asked to make will be decided purely on a hunch. Unless you have a crystal ball you are kidding yourself if you think you know any better. There isn't a single individual or organisation that can possibly know what the future consequences of Remain or Brexit will be.

I have happily put forward several evidence based reasons why we should stay. Other than the sovereignty point raised by @Digger which I accept has some legitimately, I haven't seen a clear, evidence based argument put forward to leave. Maybe I missed it in this thread or somewhere else?
 
Note sure if to post this or not

I'm glad you did. That has helped me to make my mind up. As a 'saver', it doesn't make sense to leave. I am also pretty convinced that from a national security perspective we are much better off. For me the heart says leave, but that is for all the wrong reasons. I am now firmly in the stay camp.
 
The thing is you posted a one hour eleven minute video and nothing else. If you want a debate, please consider making it slightly easier for other people to understand your points by posting a summary of them. I don't think that a lack of reply is unreasonable (you can't MAKE people respond to you) and I don't think that this is a good enough reason for you to vote leave. But it's absolutely your prerogative (not that you need my blessing :)).




I have happily put forward several evidence based reasons why we should stay. Other than the sovereignty point raised by @Digger which I accept has some legitimately, I haven't seen a clear, evidence based argument put forward to leave. Maybe I missed it in this thread or somewhere else?
I attempted to draw a line under this but obviously without success.

Fred, you and Crispin are like some sort of double act. I reply to him and you respond. Yes I can see you have made some points. I have looked. You have not. I did re post a video link stating that I was interested in comment. I posted other links but was defeated by your lack of an open mind.

You are seriously deluded if you believe your non reply has persuaded me to vote out. What it did was make me look elsewhere.

I see on the News the latest gambit from the remain campaign is to threaten us with higher air fares.

I'm about to find the ignore function and put you on it. Byee


Mike
 
Britain's top travel association ABTA warns that Brits could face higher costs, health care limitations and other issues that would force them to cut back on their trips to Europe if the country decides to pull out of the EU during a referendum in June

EasyJet CEO Carolyn McCall told CNNMoney it's better for fliers to stay in the EU

A Brexit "would most likely lead to higher air fares and fewer scheduled flights between the EU and UK," warned Monarch Group CEO Andrew Swaffield in a statement in the ABTA report. His firm operates the low-cost British carrier, Monarch Airlines

But there was one key bright spot in the ABTA report: European travelers could come to the U.K. in greater numbers if the pound continues declining, making their vacation a bit cheaper
 
Reasons to Stay
REASONS WHY BRITAIN’S FUTURE IS IN THE EU



1. Jobs
Around 3.5 million British jobs are directly linked to British membership of the European Union’s single market – 1 in 10 British jobs.

2. Exports & investment
The EU buys over 50 per cent of UK exports (54 per cent of goods, 40 per cent of services).
Over 300,000 British companies and 74 per cent of British exporters operate in other EU markets.
American and Asian EU firms build factories in Britain because it is in the single market.

3. Trade
The EU negotiates trade agreements with the rest of the world. Outside the EU Britain would have to renegotiate trade deals alone. While the EU is the world’s largest market, a UK outside the EU would not be a high priority for other counties to negotiate a trade deal.

4. Consumer clout
British families enjoy lower mobile phone roaming charges, lower credit card fees, cheaper flights and proper compensation when flights are delayed or cancelled. These sorts of benefits could not be achieved by Britain alone.

5. Clean environment
Through commonly agreed EU standards, national Governments have achieved improvements to the quality of air, rivers and beaches. Good for Britain and good for Britons holidaying or living abroad!

6. Power to curb the multinationals
The EU has taken on multinational giants like Microsoft, Samsung and Toshiba for unfair competition. The UK would not be able to do this alone.

7. Freedom to work and study abroad – and easy travel
1.4 million British people live abroad in the EU. More than 14,500 UK students took part in the European Union’s Erasmus student exchange scheme in 2012-13. Driving licences issued in the UK are valid throughout the EU.

8. Peace and democracy
The EU has helped secure peace among previously warring western European nations. It helped to consolidate democracy in Spain, Portugal, Greece and former Soviet bloc countries and helped preserve peace in the Balkans since the end of the Balkans War. With the UN it now plays a leading role in conflict prevention, peacekeeping and democracy building.

9. Equal pay and non-discrimination
Equal pay for men and women is enshrined in EU law, as are bans on discrimination by age, race or sexual orientation. This benefits Britain and British people who live in other EU countries.

10. Influence in the world
As 28 democracies, and as the world’s biggest market, we are strong when we work together.
Britain is represented in many international organisations in joint EU delegations – giving Britain more influence than it would have alone. The EU has played a major role in climate, world trade and development.

11. Cutting red tape
Common rules for the common market make it unnecessary to have 28 sets of national regulations.

12. Fighting crime
The European Arrest Warrant replaced long extradition procedures and enables the UK to extradite criminals wanted in other EU countries, and bring to justice criminals wanted in the UK who are hiding in other EU countries.

Eurojust helps UK authorities work with other EU countries’ to tackle international organised crime such as drug smuggling, people trafficking and money laundering.

...and one bonus...

13. Research funding

The UK is the second largest beneficiary of EU research funds, and the British Government expects future EU research funding to constitute a vital source of income for our world-leading universities and companies.

http://www.proeuropa.org.uk/twelevereasons
 
Don't mention the funding to Wales.

I wish I had spotted the link beforehand. Only saw it today when checking my SIPS. It would have saved my brain from running through many different scenarios over the last month including contingency planning for the company / retirement. On the plus side I'm conservative on my deliberations on the basis any improvement is a bonus well received.
 
The below article comes from Moneyweek a well respected publication and not from either camp. It is interesting in that it gives the argument from both sides and even from different camps on those sides.
Quite long but I believe worth a read.

It was written in November2015.

http://moneyweek.com/why-were-backing-brexit/


Mike
 
The below article comes from Moneyweek a well respected publication and not from either camp

Title of article

"Why we’re backing Brexit"


Maybe it is just me:headbang
 
Some of these posts are so strident in their comment that I wouldn't be surprised if the posters are fully paid up members of the " Remain " group tasked with publicising the Remain Groups PR strategy to sway Forum Members and belittle any sensible comments or debate.
The following springs to mind:-
"The lady doth protest too much, methinks"
 
Er...so what if they are? As I said about 100 pages ago, the Leave campaign can't keep dismissing any forecast they don't agree with as "scare stories"....that's not sensible debate
 
If we had point 6 in place I would vote out. We haven't. I think the guy summed it up nicely at the end.

I'm going to have to stop posting on this topic as I have a small business to run which is drowning in EU red tape. (It's not but then again I might be deluded;)).
 


Title of article

"Why we’re backing Brexit"


Maybe it is just me:headbang
Your post suggests that I had not made it abundantly obvious that the article supported Brexit.
That was the point. This is a debate. It is informative to look at both sides if you are trying to reach a decision.
A considered opinion by a magazine who's readership is from the investment community is interesting to look at alongside opinion from let's say Hargreaves Landsdown.

My full post not just the bit you posted made this clear and the title is obvious.


"The below article comes from Moneyweek a well respected publication and not from either camp. It is interesting in that it gives the argument from both sides and even from different camps on those sides.
Quite long but I believe worth a read.

It was written in November2015.

http://moneyweek.com/why-were-backing-brexit/


Yes it's Backing Exit that is the title but it gives the arguments. It's not just a list from one side or the other.

Do you only read stuff that supports your view and why be so dismissive with your comments and headbanger emotives which is a bit of a trend for you.

This is important and others are allowed to draw an opinion.


Mike
 
I wouldn't be surprised if the posters are fully paid up members of the " Remain " group tasked with publicising the Remain Groups PR strategy to sway Forum Members and belittle any sensible comments or debate
I hit disagree, so in the spirit of recent comments have to reply....

WG are you seriously saying that the Remain Groups PR strategy would include tasking people to sway Forum members and belittle sensible comments and debate?

That's surely a conspiracy theory too far. Mind you from the flag on your avatar, I see you are currently in the land of conspiracy. Hope you bump into Elvis on your vacation.

Edit: Mind it would be interesting to see what he would have to say about it - given every one and his dog has given us their views so far. :)
 
Last edited:
The right wing magazine, The Spectator, has a very different opinion on the fall of Newsweek:
www.spectator.co.uk/2012/12/who-killed-newsweek/
"More often [Newsweek] stories were twisted out of shape. Rhetorical kookiness took over from straight reporting."
LOL Only a small point but suspect you have not read my post or the article as it is not Newsweek as your post ridicules but Moneyweek.

By the way my leanings are liberal.


Mike
 
I hit disagree, so in the spirit of recent comments have to reply....

WG are you seriously saying that the Remain Groups PR strategy would include tasking people to sway Forum members and belittle sensible comments and debate?

That's surely a conspiracy theory too far. Mind you from the flag on your avatar, I see you are currently in the land of conspiracy. Hope you bump into Elvis on your vacation.

Edit: Mind it would be interesting to see what he would have to say about it - given every one and his dog has given us their views so far. :)
At least Elvis would probably have his own comments, told in his own way using his own words. Here we just seem to get " Copy & Paste " , so you can make up your own mind.;);)
 
The right wing magazine, The Spectator, has a very different opinion on the fall of Newsweek:
www.spectator.co.uk/2012/12/who-killed-newsweek/
"More often [Newsweek] stories were twisted out of shape. Rhetorical kookiness took over from straight reporting."
Funny how magazines and newspapers are never described as 'left wing'. No one ever says 'the left wing paper the Guardian', or the 'left wing magazine the New Statesman'. I wonder why?
 
The below article comes from Moneyweek a well respected publication and not from either camp. It is interesting in that it gives the argument from both sides and even from different camps on those sides.
Quite long but I believe worth a read.

It was written in November2015.

http://moneyweek.com/why-were-backing-brexit/

Mike
I read the article. The first third of the piece is a basic attack on the Euro. As mentioned several times in this thread, the referendum is on membership of the EU, not on Britain adopting the Euro so this seems to be a false argument.
The next section completely overlooks any meaningful remain arguments. It suggests that those voting to leave want to do so because of greater global trade, less regulation, and improved controls over immigration as benefits of leaving the EU, but also that they want to keep the free movement of capital, goods and labour. It doesn't say how these benefits will be realised at all.
The rest of the article mostly talks about how Britain might negotiate trade deals with Europe over time but there is no real suggestion of what that might look like and importantly fails to recognise that to do so (like Switzerland, Norway etc) will mean free movement of goods, services and people, negating any suggested benefits of the UK leaving the EU.
The article also trivialises research which doesn't support a leave position (saying that this is considered "Worst Case" when the research said nothing of the sort). There were no citations or references offered.

I thought it was pretty lazily researched and weakly written to be honest.
 
here is the infographic and the source article that the moneyweek article is so dismissive of. The first link is an excellent "quick" summary.
http://www.bfna.org/sites/default/files/publications/The_Economics_of_Brexit_0.pdf
http://www.bfna.org/sites/default/files/publications/Brexit - potential economic consequences if the UK exits the EU.pdf

"If the United Kingdom (UK) exits the EU in 2018, it would reduce that country’s exports and make imports more expensive. Depending on the extent of trade policy isolation, the UK’s real gross domestic product (GDP) per capita would be between 0.6 and 3.0 percent lower in the year 2030 than if the country remained in the EU. If we take into account the dynamic effects that economic integration has on investment and innovation behavior, the GDP losses could rise to 14 percent. In addition, it will bring unforeseeable political disadvantages for the EU – so from our perspective, we must avoid a Brexit."
 
here is the infographic and the source article that the moneyweek article is so dismissive of. The first link is an excellent "quick" summary.
http://www.bfna.org/sites/default/files/publications/The_Economics_of_Brexit_0.pdf
http://www.bfna.org/sites/default/files/publications/Brexit - potential economic consequences if the UK exits the EU.pdf

"If the United Kingdom (UK) exits the EU in 2018, it would reduce that country’s exports and make imports more expensive. Depending on the extent of trade policy isolation, the UK’s real gross domestic product (GDP) per capita would be between 0.6 and 3.0 percent lower in the year 2030 than if the country remained in the EU. If we take into account the dynamic effects that economic integration has on investment and innovation behavior, the GDP losses could rise to 14 percent. In addition, it will bring unforeseeable political disadvantages for the EU – so from our perspective, we must avoid a Brexit."
I think the operative word here is "POTENTIAL " . Who knows what WILL happen. There are only theories. Fact will only arise after a vote to leave. We may not and maybe never will join the Euro but as a member of the EU we have done and will continue to pay into various EU funds used to prop up those failed Euro countries .
 
@WelshGas are there any international institutions or even countries that are pro leave? Can you name one that isn't pro remain?

Or is it a global conspiracy against the poor British?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

H
2 3 4
Replies
80
Views
10K
ejmoore
ejmoore
Kmann
Replies
11
Views
3K
Kmann
Kmann
Martin
Replies
73
Views
13K
Wobble’s Mum
Wobble’s Mum
Back
Top