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

[Loz]

I'm done...

 

[Californiaman]

This is low indeed. Talk about stereo typing. The skinhead is in actually in fact a particle physicist and the cross dressing bloke Sat opposite uses that guise to make it easier to earn a living as a pick pocket. Utter cobblers and whoever came up with it should be ashamed of themself.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

 

[T6 CFO]

What does this poster say to you?

To me it shows a defiant vulnerable person, standing up to a thug, "My vote is as good as yours".

Prominent Leave campaigner and leader of the UK Independence Party (UKIP) Nigel Farage, has accused the advertising campaign of "trying to divide society."

I believe bringing race into it in any way by either side is wrong. End of. It suits the remain camp to paint the out side as not wanting immigration. In my case and in the case of many I know the opposite applies. I love diversity but want it from all parts of the world. From all colours and from all religions.


Mike

 

[Stevecaterham7]

Seems to me that the economic case for remain is pretty much sewn up. Looking across almost all the studies it's only a question of how much worse off we'll be, not whether the economy would be better or worse. The issue for me (as a remain voter) is that there are many who seem happy to leave despite an impact to the economy.

The Remain group have simply focused too much on the economic argument and not done enough to highlight all of the other benefits that membership brings. So it's become polarised, as an economic versus border control argument.

This guy https://glwtf.net does a brilliant (and humorous) job of highlighting a huge number of additional benefits that membership brings which Remain should be talking far more about. It includes big stuff like funding cancer trials, breaking up monopolies, consumer protection and industrial collaboration. It's long (and be warned it contains some pretty full-on swearing) but is well argued, and crucially all his arguments are cited as well.

 

[mccp]

This guy https://glwtf.net does a brilliant (and humorous) job of highlighting a huge number of additional benefits that membership brings which Remain should be talking far more about. It includes big stuff like funding cancer trials, breaking up monopolies, consumer protection and industrial collaboration. It's long (and be warned it contains some pretty full-on swearing) but is well argued, and crucially all his arguments are cited as well.

It made me laugh, but please don't go there if you don't like seeing four-letter words written down!

 

[Stevecaterham7]

It made me laugh, but please don't go there if you don't like seeing four-letter words written down!

Yep, that why I put the swear warning in!

Plenty of points in there that I hadn't really considered in terms of additional benefits that the EU brings.

I followed the link to the cancer trial - and that was just one example of the EU investing 10.5M EUR in the UK on a medical trial. While Brexit are busy (still) pedalling the false £350m a week cost of the EU despite being told to stop it, the remain group aren't telling great stories like this one. They're clearly convinced they can do enough on the econmic argument alone, which I suspect is risky.

 

[mccp]

Plenty of points in there that I hadn't really considered in terms of additional benefits that the EU brings.

Well I thought it was interesting enough that I've shared the link with my friends on Facebook (all six of them).

 

[T6 CFO]

It's another list of things. These lists are very easy to cobble together and to me don't mean a great deal.
It states a number of times how we got these things from the EU. Well we did but we are part of the EU so gave them to ourselves. Are we saying we wouldn't do cancer research if the EU didn't pay for it, are we saying we wouldn't want clean beaches etc etc and again we are the EU. Are we saying we wouldn't have any of these things if we had not been a member of the EU. Are we saying by making our own decisions that we couldn't do some things better.
Some will say that a particular party would not do some of these things eg the working week. Well that's not a problem as we vote them out if that's what we want.
What this article is saying is that we need the EU to make decisions for us I disagree.
Many of the items on the list are achievable only with money and it was indirectly our money. Others are basic agreements between neighbours and should be achievable in or out.
I haven't gone through every point here or followed every link as its general argument does not impress me. It may impress some but we all have to make up our own minds.


Mike

 

[Keith Smith]

I don't know about the other points but as far as clean beaches go, the U.K. government fought the EU for many years before finally giving in and getting their act together.

 

[Stevecaterham7]

It's another list of things. These lists are very easy to cobble together and to me don't mean a great deal.
It states a number of times how we got these things from the EU. Well we did but we are part of the EU so gave them to ourselves. Are we saying we wouldn't do cancer research if the EU didn't pay for it, are we saying we wouldn't want clean beaches etc etc and again we are the EU. Are we saying we wouldn't have any of these things if we had not been a member of the EU. Are we saying by making our own decisions that we couldn't do some things better.
Some will say that a particular party would not do some of these things eg the working week. Well that's not a problem as we vote them out if that's what we want.
What this article is saying is that we need the EU to make decisions for us I disagree.
Many of the items on the list are achievable only with money and it was indirectly our money. Others are basic agreements between neighbours and should be achievable in or out.
I haven't gone through every point here or followed every link as its general argument does not impress me. It may impress some but we all have to make up our own minds.


Mike

Biggest difference is a uk government of any colour will always do what is most likely to help keep them in power. So as with the clean beach example, if the govt. can save money and avoid things like that they will. EU is a way of making governments do the right thing in the long term.

Yes we could use money put into EU for medical research, but as with point 1, the govt might be more inclined to give pensioners a financial boost before election to get re-elected instead. Also, EU can pool investment and talent from multiple nations (as in the cancer example) to give better bang for your buck.

 

[T6 CFO]

Biggest difference is a uk government of any colour will always do what is most likely to help keep them in power. So as with the clean beach example, if the govt. can save money and avoid things like that they will. EU is a way of making governments do the right thing in the long term.

Yes we could use money put into EU for medical research, but as with point 1, the govt might be more inclined to give pensioners a financial boost before election to get re-elected instead. Also, EU can pool investment and talent from multiple nations (as in the cancer example) to give better bang for your buck.

I agree with you on politicians and there short term view and bribery of the electorate. Democracy is far from perfect but neither is devolving the decision making to the EU. Better way would be more consensus politics and that is something we can strive to change perhaps with a change from the first past the post system to one where there would be a greater chance of coalition government.
I don't agree with the pooling argument as this is something that should be done and already is being done across the world, not just with our neighbours.


Mike

 

[Stevecaterham7]

I agree with you on politicians and there short term view and bribery of the electorate. Democracy is far from perfect but neither is devolving the decision making to the EU. Better way would be more consensus politics and that is something we can strive to change perhaps with a change from the first past the post system to one where there would be a greater chance of coalition government.
I don't agree with the pooling argument as this is something that should be done and already is being done across the world, not just with our neighbours.


Mike

But we're not devolving decision making to the EU. We still have a huge swathes of decision making that is under UK control, and always will be, but in the EU we have a body that has some influence that acts as a voice of conscience that uk governments badly need.

It makes me smile that people are so anti UK politicians, yet at the same time can be really vociferous that we should hand all decision making to this self-serving and supposedly useless bunch!

As to the pooling debate. It is something approaching 90% of scientists who believe that the EU is highly beneficial to the advancement of research and science and the vast majority want to remain.

We need Brexit to be more honest about the down sides of exit. The economy suffering appears almost certain, only degree is in question. But the impact on scientific research, farming, and the environment are key issues.

Sadly remain are doing a poor job of selling these benefits, while leave are doing a good job of playing the xenophobia/immigration card and are still blatantly lying about the £350m figure.

 

[WelshGas]

Unfortunately there are also downsides to Remaining.
The problem is we dare not talk about them as it is impossible to have a mature debate with closed minds.
Things are going well in France, or are the French Government proposals regarding their employment law changes contrary to EU Law/Directives and so the workers are fighting back?

 

[WelshGas]

Well I didn't vote for her to be the arbiter of who is competent to "make or unmake any law" in the UK.

My point is that this is a very odd form of democracy to be choosing over a system of elected representatives, and it's even stranger to me to claim that this somehow gives us more control over our country.

You could always emigrate to get away from this system you so despise, but you haven't. I wonder why? Maybe things aren't so good in the other parts of the EU.

 

[Stevecaterham7]

Unfortunately there are also downsides to Remaining.
The problem is we dare not talk about them as it is impossible to have a mature debate with closed minds.
Things are going well in France, or are the French Government proposals regarding their employment law changes contrary to EU Law/Directives and so the workers are fighting back?

Not sure who you think won't dare talk about downsides to remain? Seems ukip, vote leave and most of the papers (who happen to be owned by tax dodging billionaires that the EU try to call to account) all have done a pretty good job of discussing nothing but the downsides. Some of their points are even true, as the EU is by no means perfect, but there has also been a lot of bull sing, from Boris Johnson in particular. Exactly as remain have spent too much time on the economy, leave are too focused on courting the intolerant xenophobes by forever playing the immigration card.

 

[AlanC]

However, he has done his research and includes all the relevant reference links to check out.
Well worth a read, provided you are happy with the expletives.

Alan

 

[AlanC]

It made me laugh, but please don't go there if you don't like seeing four-letter words written down!

However, he has done his research and includes all the relevant reference links to check out.
Well worth a read, provided you are happy with the expletives.

Alan

 

[Neilgbj]

Just had the misfortune to read a few pages of this thread....all a bit sad, God knows what any 18 to 25 year old would make of most of this 'discussion'.....surely this isn't what this forum is about?

 

[Amarillo]

Unfortunately there are also downsides to Remaining.
The problem is we dare not talk about them

Be brave, WelshGas, try us. You may be surprised how receptive even the most hardened Europhile is to a well argued case for leaving the EU.

 

[WelshGas]

Not sure who you think won't dare talk about downsides to remain? Seems ukip, vote leave and most of the papers (who happen to be owned by tax dodging billionaires that the EU try to call to account) all have done a pretty good job of discussing nothing but the downsides. Some of their points are even true, as the EU is by no means perfect, but there has also been a lot of bull poo, from Boris Johnson in particular. Exactly as remain have spent too much time on the economy, leave are too focused on courting the intolerant xenophobes by forever playing the immigration card.

You have just proven my point.
Why is someone concerned about uncontrollable immigration labelled an " intolerant xenophobic ".
" Tax dodging billionaire newspaper owners ", but no mention of Tax Dodging Politicians.
Tax Avoidance may be immoral but it is not criminal . It just means Governments do not employ the best accountants or tax lawyers when drafting tax laws.
Why can we not just have a Debate on pure facts and not opinions, and that is the big, big problem. There are very, very few pure facts about what will exactly happen if we leave or stay, because there will be changes if we Leave but there will also be significant changes if we Remain.

For example " From an Intolerant Xenophobe ", what will be the effects on the EU if Turkey is given Full Membership including the Euro as its national currency and the U.K. Is still a member of the EU?

 

[WelshGas]

Be brave, WelshGas, try us. You may be surprised how receptive even the most hardened Europhile is to a well argued case for leaving the EU.

Just have!

 

[GrannyJen]

Contrary to all the "closed minds" invective, for the most part this thread has been hugely informative to many, or at least to me. A lot of good information and links.

It is inevitable that with something so important, so impassioned, tempers will get frayed, frustration will creep in and angry clashes will erupt.

How about a day off, do something different, do something really nice like smiling fondly at the Cali in the drive (sorry WG, I do sympathise that you are having withdrawal pangs).

 

[WelshGas]

No back now, but still on " California " time.

 

[T6 CFO]

Just had the misfortune to read a few pages of this thread....all a bit sad, God knows what any 18 to 25 year old would make of most of this 'discussion'.....surely this isn't what this forum is about?

I think most of us believe that as a general rule politics is best left off this forum however there are exceptions. I'm on a football forum as well and politics is banned on there, not for this though.

As for the manner in which it's been conducted I would again agree that it has been far from perfect but I am afraid that is the nature of debate on a bulletin board. It gets quite feisty discussing the various strengths of Ocean v Beach and I think you would agree this is slightly more important. I'm pretty sure if we were to discuss this issue face to face over a pint things would be slightly improved but that is not open to us.

What opinion do you have on the issue?


Mike

 

[GrannyJen]

I do apologise to all if the above sounds a bit screwball

No back now, but still on " California " time.

Albert was off to France tomorrow.

Revolting people. Every day is Bastille day. So we are having a BBQ at my son's house in Shoreham instead.