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

[Amarillo]

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?

Turkey is moving further away from EU membership, though it has recently bullied the EU into allowing visa free travel if 7 conditions are met (including issuing biometric passports; cracking down on corruption; becoming more co-operative with extradition requests; and, most controversially, narrowing the broad anti-terror laws it has used to harass journalists, academics and politicians.)

It would take massive political and economic reforms for Turkey to be able to join the EU. But let's say that happened, and by, say, 2030, Turkey was ready for EU membership.

We would see large scale migration from Turkey into EU countries, similar to the migration of Eastern Europeans in 2004 (the EU population enlargement in 2004 was about 75 million, the population of Turkey is about 75 million, forecast to be 88 million in 2030, but the EU's population will be higher in 2030 than it was in 2004). We would experience similar benefits, mostly young, skilled and educated Turks would arrive on our shores, starting in lowly paid jobs such as fruit pickers, cleaners and waiters, and moving up the skills scale as they become assimilated into EU society. We would also experience similar problems: it would take the national governments time to adjust the healthcare needs, housing requirements and schooling needs for the new arrivals.

Calculating the effects on the Euro, if the Euro survives to 2030, is somewhat less clear to me. It is also less of a concern to me as I do not believe that the UK will be a member of the Euro by 2030.

There is an interesting article in today's Economist about the EU-Turkey deal:
http://www.economist.com/news/europ...-secure-its-borders-europes-murky-deal-turkey

For those concerned that Turkey will join the EU soon, you may be comforted by the headline statistic: "nearly seven out of ten [Turks] believe Turkey will never be allowed in". I do not share that pessimistic view, I hope that both Turkey and Ukraine will be ready to join the EU at some point in the future. 2030 seems very optimistic.

 

[ROKET]

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


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.

I think we should vote to leave because the european common market connot work without us,so they will come back with a better deal which will be better for all of europe.How can europe compete with the world with all the redtape and neverending new rules.What would they do if they did not,They have to justify there jobs and wonderful life style.It is becoming a dinosaur.

 

[Borris]

@Borris, really? I agree that no-one can know exactly what will happen, but surely the overwhelming consensus for the economic argument that we're talking about here is almost unanimously positive towards a Remain vote? I also agree that the absolute numbers being speculated on can only ever be estimates, but the general 'down' message following Brexit is indisputable.

Just because no-one can guarantee a precise number doesn't mean we should stick our head in the sand & cross our fingers hoping for the best. The Exit campaign appear to have conceded this point - if we leave the EU it will hurt us economically & it's then a further subjective and personal decision as to "whether that's a price worth paying".

I expect the immediate consequences of Brexit to include a sharp downturn due to an extended period of uncertainty, for Nissan, Honda, Jaguar & Mini all reviewing their UK manufacturing operations if they can't seamlessly export into the EU, the remaining EU countries to close ranks against the City and look at a move to Frankfurt, and for international companies (like my US employer with 300,000+ employees in 80+ countries) to start looking at their UK operation as a second-tier territory. In business confidence and certainty is everything - if you are placing big bets on building factories & offices and hiring people you need to be as certain as possible things are going the right way.

Generally Brexit is not a rosy picture for jobs & inward investment.

Scotland would bugger off to protect their EU subsidies & we'll then need Border Controls on the A1 and passport checks at Edinburgh Waverley station trains departing to Kings Cross? Same for ferries coming in from Ireland? Razor wire across Hadrians Wall? I don't see us getting the much hoped-for control of our own immigration either.

hirsty,
The predictions of others, however well qualified, are IMO, not in any way a reliable indicator of what may happen in the future. Accordingly and again IMO they should therefore ibe treated with extreme caution. If you are basing your decision on these prophecies, however "unanimous" you feel they are, then don't be surprised if they eventually turn out to be well wide of the mark.
Firstly, is it remotely possible that at least some of these predictions are being made by organisations, politicians or individuals that have vested interests and therefore have a bias?
Secondly, have politicians ever been known "to sex things up" to make their point more persuasive?
Also how many of the organisations that have given their predictions are truely independent?
However my main point was that there is bound to be many unforeseen political and economic issues and events that will effect both the EU and GB in the years to come. As the predictions offered in the run up to the referendum are based on the known current position, stating any figures based on what might happen in fourteen years time (as stated in the example cited in my post) is IMO a pointless exercise and should be ignored.
When I make my decision and I place my cross in the box it will be after much consideration of the relatively few known facts and not as a result of what others with an agenda want me to think might, possibly happen if.........

Sorry but I am not buying.

 

[Neilgbj]

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

Mike.... I won't go into reasons as there have been so many 'opinions' on here but I'm for 'in'........this is important but this forum is starting to reflect the wider , completely polarised, uniformed debate across the country and I fail to see the point for a forum which is supposed to be helpful and informative.

Anyway I had decided not to take part in the forum again due to threads like this and the 'manual v dsg', '180/204 v 140/150 bhp' 'discussions which are always disappointing to say the least.....I shall go back to just occasionally reading and getting out in our Cali which we enjoy so much.....unlike the discussions on here !

 

[jts46]

Well i am voting out
I do not want a super state
I do not want an eu army
I do not want an eu police force
I DO want our government to control immigration

 

[calimera]

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).

Agree have found a lot of interesting info & links but have felt sadden by the last few pages . Very surprised at the levels of personal attacks.
Agree with Mike if these issues were discussed face to face would hopefully not descend to playground mentality.
Surprised at some forum members who I have respected & found their posts helpful in the past.
Passion is important but so is mutual respect.

 

[larrylamb]

Politics and religion posts should be banned from forums, I know I can ignore the topic/post if I want to but they just cause discord and end up with members falling out. What have you done @Kirk

 

[fred]

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.

You presume too much about my feelings towards the UK.
I care very deeply about the future of this country which means that I choose to stay here and try to improve it rather than leave because it's imperfect.

I've no doubt you also care about the future of the UK too, it's just that we have differing ideas about what to do about that. I certainly wouldn't presume to tell you to leave the UK if the electorate vote to remain in the EU on 23rd June.

 

[Keith Smith]

There was an experiment in 68 by Jane Elliot where a group of eight year old children were segregated by eye colour. The blued eyed were told they were superior to the brown eyed and they became arrogant bullies who even excluded the brown eyed from the water fountain. A week later the children were told it had been a mistake and in fact the brown eyed were superior to the blue eyed at which point the brown eyed children similarly treated the blue eyed poorly. Although it pains me to say, as a blue eye, the brown eyed children did not go to the same excesses.

So, what to take from this, other than the fact the 60s was a great period in history where institutionally we could mercilessly experiment on children? This forum seems to be continuing this experiment where we are segregated by EU in or out, DSG v manual or the worst in my opinion Beach v Ocean. Things are rarely so black or white and we should embrace the grey with a good sense of humour and tolerance of other people's views.

 

[TwoDogs]

You know rational, grown up debate has ended when someone accuses those who don't agree with him as having "closed minds"

 

[T6 CFO]

Good discussion on now on Radio 4.


Mike

 

[ROKET]

Good discussion on now on Radio 4.


Mike

An analysis found that none EU nations which have traded with the EU under WTO rules have seen stronger export growth to the single market since 1993 than either the rest of the EU or countrys such as norway or switzerland,which trade with it under seperate agreement. The UK rate of export groth to the UK had been lower still studys found.For the UK the figures of exports of goods are clear it has been a downhill all the way.It is deeply depressing find.For all the sound and fury,it turns out that the exports of EU members trading with each other have not been able to grow as fast as those of countrys who have avoided the entire circus,as well as the rule making and membership fee.

 

[Stevecaterham7]

An analysis found that none EU nations which have traded with the EU under WTO rules have seen stronger export growth to the single market since 1993 than either the rest of the EU or countrys such as norway or switzerland,which trade with it under seperate agreement. The UK rate of export groth to the UK had been lower still studys found.For the UK the figures of exports of goods are clear it has been a downhill all the way.It is deeply depressing find.For all the sound and fury,it turns out that the exports of EU members trading with each other have not been able to grow as fast as those of countrys who have avoided the entire circus,as well as the rule making and membership fee.

Sounds interesting, can you post a link to the study, or say which countries these are?

Obviously if we're talking about countries like China, Brazil, India etc. Then their growth numbers are affected by way more factors than just the EU. Need to remember that with stats like this correlation isn't causation, so would be good to read more to understand it.

 

[jts46]

ADMIN,
I notice a post on this subject has been removed. Why?
(not by me i hasten to add)

John

 

[ROKET]

Sounds interesting, can you post a link to the study, or say which countries these are?

Obviously if we're talking about countries like China, Brazil, India etc. Then their growth numbers are affected by way more factors than just the EU. Need to remember that with stats like this correlation isn't causation, so would be good to read more to understand it.

It is other countrys growth exports to the EU not there overall growth

 

[Stevecaterham7]

It is other countrys growth exports to the EU not there overall growth

Makes sense, but my point was around which countries they were talking about and whether they factored out things like phase of development (for example). U.K. Has been a strong and dominant economy for centuries, whereas China, Brazil and India have made huge strides in recent times.

So I'm trying to understand are we talking about countries that already had well developed economies who grew exports to EU faster, or are they the countries who for many reasons unconnected with the EU were experiencing huge growth anyway.

It's a bit like taking a stock 80 BHP 1.9 VW engine to one tuning agent and a chipped 140 BHP version of the engine to another and then comparing who made the biggest percentage gains in horsepower. Your starting point will have a massive impact on how much uplift you can get.

So, unless I'm hugely missing the point, simply saying that countries outside the EU could grow exports faster than those inside (who mostly have well developed economies) sounds potentially flawed. A link to the study would definitely help understand their process, but all too often these things are quoted but not cited for people to check the logic...

 

[DavidofHook]

Bang on. The UK is ruled by an unelected 90 year German in a £multi-million hat filled with jewels stolen from other countries and a racist Greek husband. And also 800 unelected Lords and Ladies, hereditary peers, bishops, politicians put out to pasture and other mostly wealthy donors to political parties.

Given that the EU is broadly speaking managed democratically (remember the UK has almost 10% of the MEPs) , all the Leave arguments about democratic sovereignty seem a bit hollow to me.

Fred,
Historically this country has had Saxons, Normans, Scots, Dutch, Hanoverans, and now Greeks (as you say) but so what? The U.K. Has been an amazingly stable country despite or because of that.
Henry the First sent judges round the country to ensure fairness at trials, and we had the Magna Carta in 1215 which has been exported round the world as a model on which to base democracy and in 1688 we had a Bill of Rights. Unlike many countries in the EU we have not had a revolution in recent times, we have had fair consistent government which has not been tyrannical. That is the basis of sovereignty in the UK and we throw it away at our peril.
It is only after you lose it will we realise what we have done. All the wars and uprisings stem from a desire of people to regain their sovereignty. Think of the people who died in Cyprus, Kenya, Aden, Libya, Poland, Hungary, France etc fighting to regain their sovereignty.
Whatever you think, the EU is NOT democratic, the Commission, made up of unelected failed politicians, make the rules and they cannot be thrown out when they get it wrong. The Europe Parliament is a democratic laughing stock both in thei powers which are very small and how they vote.
It is not democratic to force an unelected Troika on a country as they have with Greece.
This lack of democracy will inevitably lead to it's collapse which will be painful, particularly if we remain in. Just look at the rise of the extreme right. The people are losing faith in their rulers and going elsewhere and that is bad.

I believe that we have a great country and I think that we should control who runs it and the EU does not allow that and therefore I continue to be out and nothing on the forum has persuaded me otherwise.

 

[Amarillo]

It is only after you lose it will we realise what we have done.

Do you think that a remain vote will mean that a war will be required if we later decide to leave?

What sovereign powers do you think are:
1. lost to the EU?
2. risk being lost to the EU without a further vote?

For the avoidance of doubt, I am convinced that it would be perfectly possible for the UK to leave the EU at some point in the future without waging war with the EU or within itself.

The only powers lost to the EU are certain regulations and directives, which the UK is able to influence. (Regulations such as child seats, and directives such as working time). The EU also has a Charter of Fundamental Rights. This charter contains basic rights for dignity, freedoms, equality, solidarity, citizens' rights and justice. None of these rights I would like to be lost to the peoples of Britain.

I can see that in the future, more powers will be transferred from the UK to the EU, but crucially, the UK will always either have a veto or the right to leave the EU keeping ultimate sovereign power with the peoples of the United Kingdom.

 

[TwoDogs]

the Commission, made up of unelected failed politicians, make the rules and they cannot be thrown out when they get it wrong

The commission propose rules...they still have to be voted on by MEPs

 

[GrannyJen]

ADMIN,
I notice a post on this subject has been removed. Why?
(not by me i hasten to add)

John

John

I don't know of any posts being removed and I've been following this thread fairly closely.

 

[SqueakyWheel]

the Commission, made up of unelected failed politicians, make the rules and they cannot be thrown out when they get it wrong

The Commission is made up of one person appointed by the current government of each member state, thus 27 in total. The Commission as a whole has to be approved by the directly elected European Parliament, who use this power to reject individual proposed commissioners, forcing countries to appoint someone else. The European Parliament ( directly elected ) can remove the entire Commission at any time by a no-confidence vote.

 

[Bramco]

the EU is NOT democratic

I think a lot of people would argue that the UK is not democratic. Our first past the post constituency based system with a politically appointed second chamber is profoundly undemocratic. Just look at the overall percentage of votes each party gets against the members of parliament. And the fact that our politicians aren't of a mood to change it shows how much they care about democracy. The ruling elite's interest is self interest. It's high time we demanded of our politicians a fit for purpose modern democratic representation system and got rid of the relic of a system we have had foisted on us for way too long. If you had lived abroad like us and seen real democracy working you'd be foaming at the mouth at the liberties our ruling elite take.

(And as for the House of Saxe Coburg and Gotha and their cosy little .... don't get me started!

 

[T6 CFO]

The Commission is made up of one person appointed by the current government of each member state, thus 27 in total. The Commission as a whole has to be approved by the directly elected European Parliament, who use this power to reject individual proposed commissioners, forcing countries to appoint someone else. The European Parliament ( directly elected ) can remove the entire Commission at any time by a no-confidence vote.

Posted this before in this thread but here it is again.

Our man on the commission is:-

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Hill,_Baron_Hill_of_Oareford

A former Political Lobbyist amongst other things.


Mike

 

[DavidofHook]

Do you think that a remain vote will mean that a war will be required if we later decide to leave?

What sovereign powers do you think are:
1. lost to the EU?
2. risk being lost to the EU without a further vote?

For the avoidance of doubt, I am convinced that it would be perfectly possible for the UK to leave the EU at some point in the future without waging war with the EU or within itself.

The only powers lost to the EU are certain regulations and directives, which the UK is able to influence. (Regulations such as child seats, and directives such as working time). The EU also has a Charter of Fundamental Rights. This charter contains basic rights for dignity, freedoms, equality, solidarity, citizens' rights and justice. None of these rights I would like to be lost to the peoples of Britain.

I can see that in the future, more powers will be transferred from the UK to the EU, but crucially, the UK will always either have a veto or the right to leave the EU keeping ultimate sovereign power with the peoples of the United Kingdom.

No, of course I don't think a 'war' is inevitable if we stay in the EU. Who would the war be with unless it is with Putin after the EU's dangerous games in the Ukraine?
What I was referring to is the rise of the extrem right in France and Austria which could lead to direct action and also, as well, a general disillusion with and rejection of the EU and it's rules. You lose stability.
It has started in a way, Hungary has ignored Shengen and put up wire barriers on it's borders to try to stop the immigration that the EU has failed to manage.

Re Sovereignty
I was very clear when I said in an earlier post:
you lose your country if you cannot control who comes into it,
You lose your country if you cannot change those who make the rules you don't like. (Britain has always imposed more and more control over it's leaders and monarchs..... We have lost this with the EU)
You lose your country if you give up your currency.( affects us only indirectly)

I could add
You lose your country if a great trading nation loses it's seat at the WTO as UK have done.
You lose your country if the proposal for France and the UK to be replaced by the EU on the UN Security Council is actioned
You lose your country if the judiciary lose the right to make decisions as is the case now where the European Court of Justice continually over rules applications by the UK.

Your talk about the UK losing the Brexit vote and then leaving at some future date is sophistry. We all know that there won't be a second chance... Come on Crispins, come on!
You talk of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. Now didn't we get an opt out on that? And it is now being quoted and accepted in UK courts, showing how, once again how our sovereignty is being eroded by stealth.
But while we are on th subject are you seriously saying that Human Rights did not exist in the UK before the Fundamental Rights Charter? Let's not forget that for hundreds of years we had Common Law which basically said that you were free to do as you liked as long as you damaged no one else and it was not already forbidden. This is one of the reasons why the UK compared with many has been such a stable state. Nothing to do with the EU.


You admit that even more powers will pass to the EU. Clearly you are comfortable with a Superstate and have no wish to control your own destiny.
I am sorry but that is not for me.

 

[fred]

Damn those crafty Europeans, taking our sovereignty away by stealth with their human rights for everyone*
Let's tell 'em what we think and vote Leave. That'll teach 'em.

* The same human rights act that 'er Majesty proposes to repeal...