Brexit Referendum

[High-On-Hibs]

If those who have the wealth and power are hit hard in their pockets, you can bet they'll ensure their losses stay at a minimum whilst "the average Joe" foots the bill. If those who understand the economy best are at risk then God help the rest of us. Sorry mate, your argument doesn't add up.

That's a fair point. However, it all comes down to who we vote to govern us. If we vote for the kind of people who will hit the poorest the hardest so they can protect every penny of their multi million pound incomes, then we get exactly what we deserve.

[CapitalGreen]

That's a fair point. However, it all comes down to who we vote to govern us. If we vote for the kind of people who will hit the poorest the hardest so they can protect every penny of their multi million pound incomes, then we get exactly what we deserve.

People like Ian Duncan Smith?

[Hibbyradge]

Owned!

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-referendum-debate-nicola-sturgeon-and-maria-eagle-shoot-down-boris-johnsons-claim-about-the-nhs-a7073496.html

[Pretty Boy]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-referendum-british-public-wrong-about-nearly-everything-survey-shows-a7074311.html

[SunshineOnLeith]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-referendum-british-public-wrong-about-nearly-everything-survey-shows-a7074311.html

The Leave campaign tactics are very similar to Trump in America. Tell lies loudly and repeat them frequently enough and people who want to believe them will start accepting them as facts.

[McD]

The Leave campaign tactics are very similar to Trump in America. Tell lies loudly and repeat them frequently enough and people who want to believe them will start accepting them as facts.


:agree: It's kinda terrifying the way politicians have changed how they communicate with the public, everything is turned into a polarised, spin driven, who-cares-about-facts-and-truth rhetoric.

[Hibbyradge]

:agree: It's kinda terrifying the way politicians have changed how they communicate with the public, everything is turned into a polarised, spin driven, who-cares-about-facts-and-truth rhetoric.

It is.

One fact though is that we've had over 70 years of peace in Europe. No 2 EU countries have ever gone to war with each other.

That's worth the £0.37 I pay per day towards it.

[Holmesdale Hibs]

:agree: It's kinda terrifying the way politicians have changed how they communicate with the public, everything is turned into a polarised, spin driven, who-cares-about-facts-and-truth rhetoric.

I think we can all agree on this, although it applies equally to both sides
In the EU 'debate'.

Maybe it's just me, but the EU referendum build up has been as toxic as I can remember. Neither side is at all inspiring and my overriding opinion from all of this is that I hate politicians.

[JeMeSouviens]

Of course, Scotland and England are more or less the same, politically speaking. :wink:

http://home2.btconnect.com/anniviers/eu.png

[JeMeSouviens]

Oh Jesus Christ, it's Gordon Broon time. :rolleyes:

Remain are really desperate to get rid of my vote it would seem.

[McD]

I think we can all agree on this, although it applies equally to both sides
In the EU 'debate'.

Maybe it's just me, but the EU referendum build up has been as toxic as I can remember. Neither side is at all inspiring and my overriding opinion from all of this is that I hate politicians.


sorry, badly worded by me, yes I agree it has been both sides (that's what I meant by polarising, where each side chooses an extreme and refuses to recognise any middle ground, although I do get that this is a yes/no situation, it was also this way during the general election as well).

I also agree greed with you re. toxic. Neither side has made any attempt to win hearts and minds, only to shout the loudest with the most shocking 'facts'. It's reinforced my belief that no politicians are to be trusted (with only a very small number of exceptions possibly).

[bigwheel]

sorry, badly worded by me, yes I agree it has been both sides (that's what I meant by polarising, where each side chooses an extreme and refuses to recognise any middle ground, although I do get that this is a yes/no situation, it was also this way during the general election as well).

I also agree greed with you re. toxic. Neither side has made any attempt to win hearts and minds, only to shout the loudest with the most shocking 'facts'. It's reinforced my belief that no politicians are to be trusted (with only a very small number of exceptions possibly).

Agreed. I think history will reflect on this as one of the poorest political referendums in living memory ...absolute dumbing down of content to fit a populist and fear agenda.

If the leave campaign wins, it will define Cameron's political career ...and Corbyn and others have been incredibly poor too - playing politics rather than seeking to win...whereas Johnston and Farage have been seeking to get a result ... And using the mainstream media to great effect

It is as poor a dialogue with the population that we have witnessed in our lifetimes.

[Hibrandenburg]

Agreed. I think history will reflect on this as one of the poorest political referendums in living memory ...absolute dumbing down of content to fit a populist and fear agenda.

If the leave campaign wins, it will define Cameron's political career ...and Corbyn and others have been incredibly poor too - playing politics rather than seeking to win...whereas Johnston and Farage have been seeking to get a result ... And using the mainstream media to great effect

It is as poor a dialogue with the population that we have witnessed in our lifetimes.

I fear history might remember this as one of the links in the chain to something much worse.

[Hibbyradge]

I fear history might remember this as one of the chains in the link to something much worse.

Me too.

[GlesgaeHibby]

Oh Jesus Christ, it's Gordon Broon time. :rolleyes:

Remain are really desperate to get rid of my vote it would seem.

For the first time ever I feel I'm likely to spoil my ballot paper. Utterly dismal scare tactic campaigning from remain.

[mmmmhibby]

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/eu-referendum/referendum-on-eu-membership-result

Latest odds

[Hibrandenburg]

Me too.

This prominent historian too.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36515680

[RyeSloan]

This prominent historian too. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36515680

What is 'western political civilisation'?

More absolute tosh from Tusk, he really does spout some nonsense sometimes...Patel's response re the destruction caused by the Euro was spot on. That's been the weapon of mass destruction in the EU, it's destroyed jobs, wealth and countries.

[SunshineOnLeith]

Everyone who blindly parrots the "Undemocratic EU" line should be made to sit and read this. Then sit an exam on it, to make sure they've understood it. Then slapped round the back of the head with an EU-approved fish.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/13/is-the-eu-undemocratic-referendum-reality-check

[Moulin Yarns]

Everyone who blindly parrots the "Undemocratic EU" line should be made to sit and read this. Then sit an exam on it, to make sure they've understood it. Then slapped round the back of the head with an EU-approved fish.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/13/is-the-eu-undemocratic-referendum-reality-check

That looks like a decent read and explains a few things in clear language. Well spotted.

[RyeSloan]

Everyone who blindly parrots the "Undemocratic EU" line should be made to sit and read this. Then sit an exam on it, to make sure they've understood it. Then slapped round the back of the head with an EU-approved fish. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/13/is-the-eu-undemocratic-referendum-reality-check

There is a fundamental flaw here though. The U.K. Parliament considers proposed legislation put forward by the government of the day. That government is a democratically elected one so therefore a direct representation of the people's choice based on the relevant manifestos (ignoring the FPTP foibles).

Where is that level of democracy in the EU? There is none. It's all driven by the commission and the council of ministers...none of which have had to campaign on what they will propose for the EU next. In turn their proposals and areas of focus are driven by a weird mix of national interests and lobbying from vested interests. None of which can remotely be considered democratic.

Sure the parliament gets to vote on the proposals but they have no part to play in setting the target of the proposals in the first place...the EU and its policies are in no way shape or form a reflection of the MEP's within the parliament.

Anyone who thinks that the EU Is controlled by the people through their vote for their MEP is barking mad and no amount of articles about votes in a parliament will change that.

[JeMeSouviens]

Everyone who blindly parrots the "Undemocratic EU" line should be made to sit and read this. Then sit an exam on it, to make sure they've understood it. Then slapped round the back of the head with an EU-approved fish.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/13/is-the-eu-undemocratic-referendum-reality-check

Ok then, so the EU commission is the executive that proposes legislation and exercises the powers laid out in EU treaties. Where can I see their manifestos and if I don't like them how do I vote them out?

[Rasta_Hibs]

The EU is not democratic! If it was then the remain side would be championing the democracy of the whole thing but they don't! Because its not.

Granted there are some reasons to remain but democracy is not one of them

[pacoluna]

The EU is not democratic! If it was then the remain side would be championing the democracy of the whole thing but they don't! Because its not.

Granted there are some reasons to remain but democracy is not one of them

So what your saying is it's about as democratic as Scotland having a torie led government.

[Moulin Yarns]

The EU is not democratic! If it was then the remain side would be championing the democracy of the whole thing but they don't! Because its not.

Granted there are some reasons to remain but democracy is not one of them

Read it and weep

http://theconversation.com/how-democratic-is-the-european-union-59419

If you can't be bothered, here is the verdict


Clearly the EU structure has defects when assessed by the normal standards of Western democracy – but I would argue that the British parliament, with its unelected House of Lords and an unrepresentative House of Commons (in terms of the balance of political parties to votes cast), is even less democratic.

Eurosceptics have for a long time questioned the legitimacy of the EU – but that charge is difficult to sustain. Of course national parliaments have all agreed to pool sovereignty in the EU institutions, but they are entitled to do that and have done so with their eyes wide open. Many even asked their citizens to vote on the decision in a referendum.

What’s more, national governments, through the Council of Ministers, are still the most powerful collective influence in shaping EU decisions – not the European Parliament. They have the right to raise a yellow card about EU legislation, which can cause the Commission to change it.

And the EU is in the process of strengthening the ability of national parliaments to call a halt to EU legislation if they object to it.

So all in all, the EU is, or is at least working to be, a democratic organisation. It has its failings but national governments have just as many – if not more.

By that account Democracy is the very reason to remain :greengrin

[Rasta_Hibs]

So what your saying is it's about as democratic as Scotland having a torie led government.

I thought our government was the SNP? Correct me if I am wrong?

[Rasta_Hibs]

Read it and weep

http://theconversation.com/how-democratic-is-the-european-union-59419

If you can't be bothered, here is the verdict



By that account Democracy is the very reason to remain :greengrin

Ok so how would you influence the European commission in a democratic way if you did not agree with it? Or how can the people of Europe change the European commission if they needed too?

[SunshineOnLeith]

Ok so how would you influence the European commission in a democratic way if you did not agree with it? Or how can the people of Europe change the European commission if they needed too?

Our democratically elected United Kingdom government nominates one of the 28 commissioners, as do all 27 other member states.

As we've currently got a majority Conservative government, it should come as no surprise that our current commissioner is this dude: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Hill,_Baron_Hill_of_Oareford

[Rasta_Hibs]

Our democratically elected United Kingdom government nominates one of the 28 commissioners, as do all 27 other member states.

As we've currently got a majority Conservative government, it should come as no surprise that our current commissioner is this dude: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Hill,_Baron_Hill_of_Oareford

So there is no way for he people of Europe to democratically influence the EU?

[Moulin Yarns]

Ok so how would you influence the European commission in a democratic way if you did not agree with it? Or how can the people of Europe change the European commission if they needed too?

Contact any MEP, same way if you wanted to raise an issue with either the UK or Scottish Governments, They were elected to represent our interests.

[pacoluna]

I thought our government was the SNP? Correct me if I am wrong?
Was it the Scottish government who proposed this EU referendum? I think not. If England votes to leave overwhelmingly will the fact Scotland votes to remain matter? i think not An unitary uk government will never benefit Scotland.

[SunshineOnLeith]

So there is no way for he people of Europe to democratically influence the EU?

European Parliament - Vote for your preferred choice of MEP.

European Commission - Vote for a UK Government who will propose a commissioner that you like.

European Council - Vote for a UK Government whose proposed foreign minister you like.

One of the things we elect a UK Government to do is to represent us in Europe, I don't see why that's so difficult to understand.

[Moulin Yarns]

European Parliament - Vote for your preferred choice of MEP.

European Commission - Vote for a UK Government who will propose a commissioner that you like.

European Council - Vote for a UK Government whose proposed foreign minister you like.

One of the things we elect a UK Government to do is to represent us in Europe, I don't see why that's so difficult to understand.

You might already get this, but some people choose not to understand simple concepts.

[Rasta_Hibs]

Was it the Scottish government who proposed this EU referendum? I think not. If England votes to leave overwhelmingly will the fact Scotland votes to remain matter? I think not.

You seem to be very sure of the outcome in the referendum in Scotland. I don't think it will be a landslide remain vote in Scotland, I think it will be marginal.

But If it does play out as you say then that's the democratic wish of the people in the UK. The UK which Scotland voted to stay in and I think will continue vote to stay in the UK even if a UK leave vote happens.

Is there anyway to vote on policies within the EU? Nope.

[RyeSloan]

You might already get this, but some people choose not to understand simple concepts.

It's quite a simple concept to see that such a tenuous link from the electorate to the centres of power in the EU can hardly be described as democratic...and that's before you even consider the massive amount of lobbying that takes place.

As another poster said there are arguments for staying in the EU, it being a bastion of democracy is not one of them.

[Rasta_Hibs]

You might already get this, but some people choose not to understand simple concepts.

That's not democratic In regards to voting on EU policy.

[SunshineOnLeith]

It's quite a simple concept to see that such a tenuous link from the electorate to the centres of power in the EU can hardly be described as democratic...and that's before you even consider the massive amount of lobbying that takes place.

As another poster said there are arguments for staying in the EU, it being a bastion of democracy is not one of them.

What's tenuous about the UK Government representing the people of the UK?

What I (and I believe others, although wouldn't wish to prejudge anyone's views) am saying is not that democracy is a reason to vote to remain, but rather that a lack of democracy is not a reason to leave.

[pacoluna]

You seem to be very sure of the outcome in the referendum in Scotland. I don't think it will be a landslide remain vote in Scotland, I think it will be marginal.

But If it does play out as you say then that's the democratic wish of the people in the UK. The UK which Scotland voted to stay in and I think will continue vote to stay in the UK even if a UK leave vote happens.

Is there anyway to vote on policies within the EU? Nope.

An unitary State will never benefit Scotland, Devolution will never be suffice. If the UK votes to leave, a second referendum will be on the agenda as the SNP have stated if there is a "significant or material" change in circumstances such as Scotland been taking out of the EU against its will.

The European commission initiates legislation, In which the UK has a commissioner, decisions are made by the council( together with the European council), representing governments of the member states, who having voted rights proportional to their populations, This with the fact the UK sends 73 MEPs which of course only 7 are Scottish.

[Moulin Yarns]

That's not democratic In regards to voting on EU policy.

But you are presumably happy with the undemocratic unelected chamber to decide on UK policy?!

[Rasta_Hibs]

But you are presumably happy with the undemocratic unelected chamber to decide on UK policy?!

Your answer then is for more and further undemocratic political powers to replace the UK system?

[Moulin Yarns]

You seem to be very sure of the outcome in the referendum in Scotland. I don't think it will be a landslide remain vote in Scotland, I think it will be marginal.

But If it does play out as you say then that's the democratic wish of the people in the UK. The UK which Scotland voted to stay in and I think will continue vote to stay in the UK even if a UK leave vote happens.

Is there anyway to vote on policies within the EU? Nope.

Is there any way to vote on policies within the UK, Scotland or your local council? NOPE!! Unless you are an elected member of one of these democratically elected bodies.

We, the general public elect members to represent us at each level of government, local, national, eh, multinational(?) and European. Those members vote on policies at each level in our best interests. It is how the democratic system works in the UK. I've said before, we could try the Swiss system if you prefer :wink:

https://www.opendemocracy.net/can-europe-make-it/jurgen-de-wispelaere/after-swiss-basic-income-vote-learning-political-lessons-is-

[offshorehibby]

I honestly can't make my mind up. In an ideal world i want an independent Scotland out with the EU. What i don't wont is Tory Westminster government outwith the EU, sounds daft, i know.

I'm offshore and need to make my mind up pronto to get my postal vote in.

[Moulin Yarns]

Your answer then is for more and further undemocratic political powers to replace the UK system?

My answer, not that you will understand, is to remain in the European Union and to continue to lobby for reform from within, rather than being on the outside looking in.

the European Union has built peace.

Many of our rights at work are guaranteed by the EU, from annual holiday and days off every week to maternity and paternity leave to basic safety protections.

protecting wildlife and making our beaches clean, to the air we breathe and the climate we inhabit, the EU plays a crucial rule in tackling environmental damage. Climate change does not stop at borders

there will always be issues that go beyond borders, where decisions must be made between nations: from trade agreements to tax dodging pacts; environmental protection to crime detection. Being in the EU means we shape those decisions.

For many of us, the decisions made by MEPs from this country and others are not the ones we might choose. That is the nature of democracy. But moving power from the EU to Westminster won’t strengthen democracy in the UK.

we have built a cross-continental, democratic institution to mediate between independent countries. That institution has helped us build peace, win rights at work and at home, and protect our environment, why give it up?

[PeeJay]

But you are presumably happy with the undemocratic unelected chamber to decide on UK policy?!

Seems to me that this is not really about "democracy" - the UK has consistently had governments in charge of it that have no mandate from the people (the electorate) - Thatcher ruled with roughly 38%, Blair with 40% of the overall electoral vote - the first-past-the-post voting system "could" be said to be undemocratic as it certainly does not need the majority of the electorate behind it for a single-party government to wield all the power. Here, in Germany, people find your system "undemocratic"! Are the people of the UK best represented by this system? Why do Brits accept this, yet shout down the EU loudly? The HoL is an appointed house, so the principle is an accepted one, yet the Commission is regularly chastised for some reason, yet the EP is an elected institution?

If the UK and its elected representatives were more committed to the concept and the vision that is the EU, the UK would be able to influence policies and make Europe a better place for everyone and we in Europe (sic) wouldn't have to listen to British politicians continuously claiming opt-outs, rebates, etc. and saying how they went to Europe and fought to get the best deal for the UK: It's not about the UK, or Germany or France or any of the other members on their own: it is about EUROPE and how we can improve the whole of Europe for all of us.

[Moulin Yarns]

Seems to me that this is not really about "democracy" - the UK has consistently had governments in charge of it that have no mandate from the people (the electorate) - Thatcher ruled with roughly 38%, Blair with 40% of the overall electoral vote - the first-past-the-post voting system "could" be said to be undemocratic as it certainly does not need the majority of the electorate behind for a single-party government to wield all the power. Here, in Germany, people find your system "undemocratic"! Are the people of the UK best represented by this system? Why do Brits accept this, yet shout down the EU loudly? The HoL is an appointed house, so the principle is an accepted one, yet the Commission is regularly chastised for some reason, yet the EP is an elected institution?

If the UK and its elected representatives were more committed to the concept and the vision that is the EU, the UK would be able to influence policies and make Europe a better place for everyone and we in Europe (sic) wouldn't have to listen to British politicians continuously claiming opt-outs, rebates, etc. and saying how they went to Europe and fought to get the best deal for the UK: It's not about the UK, or Germany or France or any of the other members on their own: it is about EUROPE and how we can improve the whole of Europe for all of us.

:aok::top marks:applause:

Now sit back and wait for the comical outrage :greengrin

[Hibbyradge]

I honestly can't make my mind up. In an ideal world i want an independent Scotland out with the EU. What i don't wont is Tory Westminster government outwith the EU, sounds daft, i know.

I'm offshore and need to make my mind up pronto to get my postal vote in.

Here are a few people that strongly believe the UK should remain a member of the EU:

• Governor of the Bank of England
• International Monetary Fund
• Institute for Fiscal Studies
• Confederation of British Industry
• Leaders/heads of state of every single other member of the EU
• President of the United States of America
• Eight former US Treasury Secretaries
• President of China
• Prime Minister of India
• Prime Minister of Canada
• Prime Minister of Australia
• Prime Minister of Japan
• Prime Minister of New Zealand
• The chief executives of most of the top 100 companies in the UK including Marks and Spencer, BT, Asda, Vodafone, Virgin, IBM, BMW etc.
• Kofi Annan, the former Secretary General of the United Nations
• All living former Prime Ministers of the UK (from both parties)
• Virtually all reputable and recognised economists
• The Prime Minister of the UK
• The leader of the Labour Party
• The Leader of the Liberal Democrats
• The Leader of the Green Party
• The Leader of the Scottish National Party
• The leader of Plaid Cymru
• Leader of Sinn Fein
• Martin Lewis, that money saving dude off the telly
• The Secretary General of the TUC
• Unison
• National Union of Students
• National Union of Farmers
• Stephen Hawking
• Chief Executive of the NHS
• 300 of the most prominent international historians
• Director of Europol
• David Anderson QC, Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation
• Former Directors of GCHQ
• Secretary General of Nato
• Church of England
• Church in Scotland
• Church in Wales
• Friends of the Earth
• Greenpeace
• Director General of the World Trade Organisation
• WWF
• World Bank
• OECD

Here are pretty much the only notable people who think we should leave the EU:

• Boris Johnson, who probably doesn’t really care either way, but knows he’ll become Prime Minister if the country votes to leave
• A former Secretary of State for Work and Pensions who carried out a brutal regime of cuts to benefits and essential support for the poorest in society as well as the disabled and sick
• That idiot that was Education Secretary and every single teacher in the country hated with a furious passion for the damage he was doing to the education system
• Leader of UKIP
• BNP
• Britain First
• Donald Trump
• Keith Chegwin
• David Icke

Just pick the list that you most trust and vote that way. :thumbsup:

And if you are unsure about leaving, don't.

[Rasta_Hibs]

:aok::top marks:applause:

Now sit back and wait for the comical outrage :greengrin

No outrage from me.

You either want to be governed by the EU superstate with its non-democratic centralised power or you do not.

I'm for democracy and localised power.

[JeMeSouviens]

Here are a few people that strongly believe the UK should remain a member of the EU:

• Governor of the Bank of England
• International Monetary Fund
• Institute for Fiscal Studies
• Confederation of British Industry
• Leaders/heads of state of every single other member of the EU
• President of the United States of America
• Eight former US Treasury Secretaries
• President of China
• Prime Minister of India
• Prime Minister of Canada
• Prime Minister of Australia
• Prime Minister of Japan
• Prime Minister of New Zealand
• The chief executives of most of the top 100 companies in the UK including Marks and Spencer, BT, Asda, Vodafone, Virgin, IBM, BMW etc.
• Kofi Annan, the former Secretary General of the United Nations
• All living former Prime Ministers of the UK (from both parties)
• Virtually all reputable and recognised economists
• The Prime Minister of the UK
• The leader of the Labour Party
• The Leader of the Liberal Democrats
• The Leader of the Green Party
• The Leader of the Scottish National Party
• The leader of Plaid Cymru
• Leader of Sinn Fein
• Martin Lewis, that money saving dude off the telly
• The Secretary General of the TUC
• Unison
• National Union of Students
• National Union of Farmers
• Stephen Hawking
• Chief Executive of the NHS
• 300 of the most prominent international historians
• Director of Europol
• David Anderson QC, Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation
• Former Directors of GCHQ
• Secretary General of Nato
• Church of England
• Church in Scotland
• Church in Wales
• Friends of the Earth
• Greenpeace
• Director General of the World Trade Organisation
• WWF
• World Bank
• OECD

Here are pretty much the only notable people who think we should leave the EU:

• Boris Johnson, who probably doesn’t really care either way, but knows he’ll become Prime Minister if the country votes to leave
• A former Secretary of State for Work and Pensions who carried out a brutal regime of cuts to benefits and essential support for the poorest in society as well as the disabled and sick
• That idiot that was Education Secretary and every single teacher in the country hated with a furious passion for the damage he was doing to the education system
• Leader of UKIP
• BNP
• Britain First
• Donald Trump
• Keith Chegwin
• David Icke

Just pick the list that you most trust and vote that way. :thumbsup:

And if you are unsure about leaving, don't.


Apart from transposing the SNP/Plaid with the BNP/UKIP you could have made exactly the same (non) argument at the Indyref. Anybody in favour of Scottish independence should be careful about trumpeting the views of the BoE, IMF, IFS etc.

[JeMeSouviens]

But you are presumably happy with the undemocratic unelected chamber to decide on UK policy?!

Did you miss Primary School on the day they did "2 wrongs don't make a right"? :wink:

[Moulin Yarns]

No outrage from me.

You either want to be governed by the EU superstate with its non-democratic centralised power or you do not.

I'm for democracy and localised power.

You don't come across that way with some of the posts you write.

[Moulin Yarns]

did you miss primary school on the day they did "2 wrongs don't make a right"? :wink:

lol

[Bristolhibby]

There is a fundamental flaw here though. The U.K. Parliament considers proposed legislation put forward by the government of the day. That government is a democratically elected one so therefore a direct representation of the people's choice based on the relevant manifestos (ignoring the FPTP foibles).

Where is that level of democracy in the EU? There is none. It's all driven by the commission and the council of ministers...none of which have had to campaign on what they will propose for the EU next. In turn their proposals and areas of focus are driven by a weird mix of national interests and lobbying from vested interests. None of which can remotely be considered democratic.

Sure the parliament gets to vote on the proposals but they have no part to play in setting the target of the proposals in the first place...the EU and its policies are in no way shape or form a reflection of the MEP's within the parliament.

Anyone who thinks that the EU Is controlled by the people through their vote for their MEP is barking mad and no amount of articles about votes in a parliament will change that.

So in an ideal world would it not be best to have Commissioner elections?

For me, the commissioners are just like the House of Lords. The sitting UK party with the majority in the UK Parliament nominates it's representatives.

The current format is not ideal, but seems more consensual than the House of Lords for example. If you are Pro Democracy, you must be anti House of Lords in its current state.

Each Commissioner is first nominated by their member state in consultation with the Commission President, although the President holds little practical power to force a change in candidate. The more capable the candidate is, the more likely the Commission President will assign them a powerful portfolio, the distribution of which is entirely at his discretion. The President's team is then subject to hearings at the European Parliament which will question them and then vote on their suitability as a whole. If members of the team are found to be inappropriate, the President must then reshuffle the team or request a new candidate from the member state or risk the whole Commission being voted down. As Parliament cannot vote against individual Commissioners there is usually a compromise whereby the worst candidates are removed but minor objections are put aside so the Commission can take office. Once the team is approved by parliament, it is formally put into office by the European Council (TEU Article 17:7).

It should be noted however that although Members of the Commission are allocated between member-states they do not represent their states; instead they are supposed to act in European interests. Normally a member-state will nominate someone of the same political party as that which forms the government of the day. There are exceptions such as Member of the Commission Burke (of Fine Gael) was nominated by Taoiseach Haughey (of Fianna Fáil), or where larger states had two seats, they often went to the two major parties such as in the United Kingdom.

J

[RyeSloan]

So in an ideal world would it not be best to have Commissioner elections? For me, the commissioners are just like the House of Lords. The sitting UK party with the majority in the UK Parliament nominates it's representatives. The current format is not ideal, but seems more consensual than the House of Lords for example. If you are Pro Democracy, you must be anti House of Lords in its current state. Each Commissioner is first nominated by their member state in consultation with the Commission President, although the President holds little practical power to force a change in candidate. The more capable the candidate is, the more likely the Commission President will assign them a powerful portfolio, the distribution of which is entirely at his discretion. The President's team is then subject to hearings at the European Parliament which will question them and then vote on their suitability as a whole. If members of the team are found to be inappropriate, the President must then reshuffle the team or request a new candidate from the member state or risk the whole Commission being voted down. As Parliament cannot vote against individual Commissioners there is usually a compromise whereby the worst candidates are removed but minor objections are put aside so the Commission can take office. Once the team is approved by parliament, it is formally put into office by the European Council (TEU Article 17:7). It should be noted however that although Members of the Commission are allocated between member-states they do not represent their states; instead they are supposed to act in European interests. Normally a member-state will nominate someone of the same political party as that which forms the government of the day. There are exceptions such as Member of the Commission Burke (of Fine Gael) was nominated by Taoiseach Haughey (of Fianna Fáil), or where larger states had two seats, they often went to the two major parties such as in the United Kingdom. J

So none of that horse trading sounds over reflective of the people's will if you ask me!

As for the House of Lords...it's not ideal but I don't see it holding much real power in the UK...not a subject that's overly bothered me to be honest as its pretty clear the elected government of the day sets the agenda and proposes legislation in the House of Commons based on their manifesto. The difference to that compared to how the European Parliament works couldn't be much starker if you ask me.

[Bristolhibby]

So none of that horse trading sounds over reflective of the people's will if you ask me!

As for the House of Lords...it's not ideal but I don't see it holding much real power in the UK...not a subject that's overly bothered me to be honest as its pretty clear the elected government of the day sets the agenda and proposes legislation in the House of Commons based on their manifesto. The difference to that compared to how the European Parliament works couldn't be much starker if you ask me.

I suppose when you are in a partnership of 28, you have to find concensus and middle ground. You could argue that that's the EUs biggest asset.

Something which doesn't happen in Party driven FPTP systems.

J

[RyeSloan]

I suppose when you are in a partnership of 28, you have to find concensus and middle ground. You could argue that that's the EUs biggest asset. Something which doesn't happen in Party driven FPTP systems. J

Aye possibly...although that consensus and middle ground always seems to be somewhere between Berlin and Paris ;-)

[HiBremian]

Aye possibly...although that consensus and middle ground always seems to be somewhere between Berlin and Paris ;-)

Well of course it will always appear so if all you do it whinge from the sidelines ;-)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[mmmmhibby]

Well of course it will always appear so if all you do it whinge from the sidelines ;-)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

He is correct, EU has become a superstate, with Germany and France running the show.

[Rasta_Hibs]

The European Commission is very keen to move to a cashless society. Sweden making this move at the moment and Denmark to follow suite.

Does anyone have any thoughts on this? A good thing or bad?

Personally I think it would hand complete control of normal life to the bankers and governments

[PeeJay]

He is correct, EU has become a superstate, with Germany and France running the show.

If only this was true ... :greengrin

[ballengeich]

There is a history of referendums being rerun if they give the wrong result and I think this will happen if the vote goes for exit.

Neither the UK or EU political establishment want an exit so Cameron will start negotiations then come back in six to twelve months with a set of proposals for minor changes to the future relationship between the UK and the EU. He will claim that they so transform the future that another referendum is essential.

The current vote is like an exam - fail it and you'll be offered a resit.

[Future17]

There is a history of referendums being rerun if they give the wrong result and I think this will happen if the vote goes for exit.

Neither the UK or EU political establishment want an exit so Cameron will start negotiations then come back in six to twelve months with a set of proposals for minor changes to the future relationship between the UK and the EU. He will claim that they so transform the future that another referendum is essential.

The current vote is like an exam - fail it and you'll be offered a resit.

If the vote is for Leave, Cameron might not be around to negotiate anything.

[SunshineOnLeith]

He is correct, EU has become a superstate, with Germany and France running the show.

Show your workings.

[Bristolhibby]

There is a history of referendums being rerun if they give the wrong result and I think this will happen if the vote goes for exit.

Neither the UK or EU political establishment want an exit so Cameron will start negotiations then come back in six to twelve months with a set of proposals for minor changes to the future relationship between the UK and the EU. He will claim that they so transform the future that another referendum is essential.

The current vote is like an exam - fail it and you'll be offered a resit.

Like the Indy Ref 2.

[mmmmhibby]

Show your workings.

That empty rhetorical cliché you continually use is well.....empty.

[Rasta_Hibs]

Like the Indy Ref 2.

Just to chime in here.

I'd say not it's not like Indy Ref 2 at all.

The EU the remain vote is very much the establishment choice, just like the Union vote was the establishment choice.

Hence if there Is a Brexit the establishment will ensure there is a second vote - the opposite for Indy Ref2.

Was there not a similar case in Ireland where they had a second vote as the establishment did not like the result of the 1st vote?

[Bristolhibby]

Just to chime in here.

I'd say not it's not like Indy Ref 2 at all.

The EU the remain vote is very much the establishment choice, just like the Union vote was the establishment choice.

Hence if there Is a Brexit the establishment will ensure there is a second vote - the opposite for Indy Ref2.

Was there not a similar case in Ireland where they had a second vote as the establishment did not like the result of the 1st vote?

Yes I see, I get what you are saying.

Whereas Indy Ref 2 will be a new vote, Brexit 1.5 will be the goalposts moving last minute.

Not sure Call me Dave will be around, and I'm sure Lord Supreme Commander Boris will not countenance it.

Can definitely see us not getting to the end of this parliament without another General Election.

In-fact, that could be Daves final act of scorched earth. Call a General Election if Brexit wins. New government, no Brexit.

J

[RyeSloan]

The European Commission is very keen to move to a cashless society. Sweden making this move at the moment and Denmark to follow suite. Does anyone have any thoughts on this? A good thing or bad? Personally I think it would hand complete control of normal life to the bankers and governments

Interesting point and not one that's large on people's radar but you bet they want to ban cash and would do if they could. As you say some countries have already started on this path and not surprising that Denmark, the land of negative interest rates is looking to do the same.

It's all about control and they sure as hell want to be able to control everyone's money and banning cash would be a rather useful means to do that.

Central banks are a busted flush in terms of reinflating the economy, their next moves will be every more radical and ever more damaging (as if they haven't done enough damage already!)

[Moulin Yarns]

The European Commission is very keen to move to a cashless society. Sweden making this move at the moment and Denmark to follow suite.

Does anyone have any thoughts on this? A good thing or bad?

Personally I think it would hand complete control of normal life to the bankers and governments


Interesting point and not one that's large on people's radar but you bet they want to ban cash and would do if they could. As you say some countries have already started on this path and not surprising that Denmark, the land of negative interest rates is looking to do the same.

It's all about control and they sure as hell want to be able to control everyone's money and banning cash would be a rather useful means to do that.

Central banks are a busted flush in terms of reinflating the economy, their next moves will be every more radical and ever more damaging (as if they haven't done enough damage already!)


Of course the banks want to go cashless, then they wouldn't need to print notes or mint coins, or indeed employ bank staff, or have a presence on the high street.

All of that makes complete sense when the Bof E recently announced this

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/banknotes/polymer/Pages/default.aspx

NOT.

[Rasta_Hibs]

Of course the banks want to go cashless, then they wouldn't need to print notes or mint coins, or indeed employ bank staff, or have a presence on the high street.

All of that makes complete sense when the Bof E recently announced this

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/banknotes/polymer/Pages/default.aspx

NOT.

I'm a bit unsure on the point your making here?

Are you saying that the Bank of England don't want to go cashless as they have printed a new kind of bank note?

[PeeJay]

The European Commission is very keen to move to a cashless society. Sweden making this move at the moment and Denmark to follow suite.

Does anyone have any thoughts on this? A good thing or bad?

Personally I think it would hand complete control of normal life to the bankers and governments

Yet Sweden and Denmark as a society seems to be doing this quite voluntarily and happily - or do you have evidence they were coerced into this situation by the bankers and the government?

II don't think this is being driven solely by the European Commission either as you seem to be suggesting - many banks around the globe think this is indeed the way to go in future, it is also a costing factor and with negative interests rates currently being raised for holding cash, you can see why not having cash could be seen as an advantage. If banks start charging customers for holding cash, then there could be major runs on banks as people withdraw their cash savings ... a cashless society would prevent this happening, is that necessarily a bad thing?

One major advantage is the ability to better tackle corruption with money launderers and so on ... that alone is something that makes this move worthy of consideration at least.

Be interesting to see how Germany runs with this as we are one of the countries in Europe that still prefer to mostly pay by cash ...

[Rasta_Hibs]

Yet Sweden and Denmark as a society seems to be doing this quite voluntarily and happily - or do you have evidence they were coerced into this situation by the bankers and the government?

II don't think this is being driven solely by the European Commission either as you seem to be suggesting - many banks around the globe think this is indeed the way to go in future, it is also a costing factor and with negative interests rates currently being raised for holding cash, you can see why not having cash could be seen as an advantage. If banks start charging customers for holding cash, then there could be major runs on banks as people withdraw their cash savings ... a cashless society would prevent this happening, is that necessarily a bad thing?

One major advantage is the ability to better tackle corruption with money launderers and so on ... that alone is something that makes this move worthy of consideration at least.

Be interesting to see how Germany runs with this as we are one of the countries in Europe that still prefer to mostly pay by cash ...

Yes there are many benefits im sure which are sold to the masses (like the EU debate) but ultimately it would mean complete control for the banks and political elites.

There Is no getting away from that surely?

[PeeJay]

Yes there are many benefits im sure which are sold to the masses (like the EU debate) but ultimately it would mean complete control for the banks and political elites.

There Is no getting away from that surely?

Well, isn't society a compromise anyway that includes weighing up the "benefits sold to the masses" against the level of "control" being relinquished?

As I said, I'm sure Germany will drag its feet here anyway ...

[Moulin Yarns]

I'm a bit unsure on the point your making here?

Are you saying that the Bank of England don't want to go cashless as they have printed a new kind of bank note?

Explain why the BofE are spending billions to make new polymer banknotes when according to you they want a cashless society.

[HiBremian]

He is correct, EU has become a superstate, with Germany and France running the show.

Aye sure. Just look at how they made sure the EU states towed the line on the refugee crisis.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Rasta_Hibs]

Explain why the BofE are spending billions to make new polymer banknotes when according to you they want a cashless society.

Don't take my word of it of course.

Try the Chief Economist Andy Haldane of the Bank of England who states its his desire to go cashless and has called for the end of cash.

[Moulin Yarns]

Don't take my word of it of course.

Try the Chief Economist Andy Haldane of the Bank of England who states its his desire to go cashless and has called for the end of cash.

Link?

[Rasta_Hibs]

Link?



http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7967908e-5ded-11e5-9846-de406ccb37f2.html#axzz4BdyCq2kL

[snooky]

Brexit sounds like a breakfast cereal to me. Still can't take it seriously. :cb

[Moulin Yarns]

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7967908e-5ded-11e5-9846-de406ccb37f2.html#axzz4BdyCq2kL

A link that I don't have to pay for would be good.

[Rasta_Hibs]

A link that I don't have to pay for would be good.

Especially for you! There are so many links on this though as he is on record stating this recently.

https://www.finextra.com/news/fullstory.aspx?newsitemid=27870

[RyeSloan]

Yet Sweden and Denmark as a society seems to be doing this quite voluntarily and happily - or do you have evidence they were coerced into this situation by the bankers and the government? II don't think this is being driven solely by the European Commission either as you seem to be suggesting - many banks around the globe think this is indeed the way to go in future, it is also a costing factor and with negative interests rates currently being raised for holding cash, you can see why not having cash could be seen as an advantage. If banks start charging customers for holding cash, then there could be major runs on banks as people withdraw their cash savings ... a cashless society would prevent this happening, is that necessarily a bad thing? One major advantage is the ability to better tackle corruption with money launderers and so on ... that alone is something that makes this move worthy of consideration at least. Be interesting to see how Germany runs with this as we are one of the countries in Europe that still prefer to mostly pay by cash ...

Oh don't for a second believe that their desire is driven because it would limit money laundering and 'criminals' as it surely wouldn't...that's a mere smokescreen.

The desire is driven from desperation that their policies to date haven't worked...the mere fact that negative interest rates are in place is now 'normal' yet only a short while ago would have been seen as extreme. German 10 year bunds are now negative for gawds sake, if that doesn't tell you that something has gone terribly wrong then nothing does.

The central banks are now scrambling for their next wheeze and being able to force people not to hoard cash is a policy that is gaining some mainstream support. It's a crazy idea that will, as ever, have the wrong effect (people will hoard 'cash' in alternative ways like gold etc) but that doesn't mean they won't try to implement it in some way.

As for the Swedes well good luck to them, not sure they quite know what they are signing up for but as you say the Germans are dead against it so maybe you are correct in suggesting it won't happen <yet>

[SunshineOnLeith]

Especially for you! There are so many links on this though as he is on record stating this recently.

https://www.finextra.com/news/fullstory.aspx?newsitemid=27870

Where in that link does he say:


Don't take my word of it of course.

Try the Chief Economist Andy Haldane of the Bank of England who states its his desire to go cashless and has called for the end of cash.

[SunshineOnLeith]

That empty rhetorical cliché you continually use is well.....empty.

Given that the same can be said of every single assertion you've made on this thread, it's rather quite apt, then.

[Rasta_Hibs]

Where in that link does he say:

Try the FT Link or google? He publically has stated this.

[SunshineOnLeith]

Try the FT Link or google? He publically has stated this.

I've got the FT one up on my screen now, can you direct me to a quote from Haldane in that where he "calls for the end of cash", please?

He's an economist at the Bank of England, it's literally his job to think about and discuss new ideas.

[Rasta_Hibs]

I've got the FT one up on my screen now, can you direct me to a quote from Haldane in that where he "calls for the end of cash", please?

He's an economist at the Bank of England, it's literally his job to think about and discuss new ideas.

I was paraphrasing one of the many many many articles about his stating his desire for the end of cash.

Have you googled it?

[PeeJay]

Oh don't for a second believe that their desire is driven because it would limit money laundering and 'criminals' as it surely wouldn't...that's a mere smokescreen.

The desire is driven from desperation that their policies to date haven't worked...the mere fact that negative interest rates are in place is now 'normal' yet only a short while ago would have been seen as extreme. German 10 year bunds are now negative for gawds sake, if that doesn't tell you that something has gone terribly wrong then nothing does.

The central banks are now scrambling for their next wheeze and being able to force people not to hoard cash is a policy that is gaining some mainstream support. It's a crazy idea that will, as ever, have the wrong effect (people will hoard 'cash' in alternative ways like gold etc) but that doesn't mean they won't try to implement it in some way.

As for the Swedes well good luck to them, not sure they quite know what they are signing up for but as you say the Germans are dead against it so maybe you are correct in suggesting it won't happen <yet>

I don't quite agree with you here, it is partly driven by this, I'm sure - I think it would be an effective means of limiting the ability to launder money or hide it in offshore accounts etc. - and of course money would be easier to trace by tax fraud agencies and so forth.

Not sure that negative interest rates are now viewed as "normal" - I don't know anyone pleased we have them, certainly not here in Germany with its (general) philosophy of people saving rather than borrowing money. The 10-year Bond rate is worrying as you say - but an already nervous market is not being helped by this pending referendum ...

I think a cashless society may well be a generational "thing" - I'm not yet convinced it has only good aspects to it, but perhaps younger folks will simply accept it? ...

[SunshineOnLeith]

Here's an Executive Board Member of the European Central Bank stating (in German, but Google translate is good enough to get the gist) that the ECB has no plans to abolish cash.

http://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/inter/date/2016/html/sp160505.de.html

[SunshineOnLeith]

I was paraphrasing one of the many many many articles about his stating his desire for the end of cash.

Have you googled it?

I've tried, unsuccessfully, to find him anywhere stating that he has a "desire for the end of cash".

Perhaps you could help me out?

[Rasta_Hibs]

I've tried, unsuccessfully, to find him anywhere stating that he has a "desire for the end of cash".

Perhaps you could help me out?

I'm unsure how to be honest.

I have posted links, he didn't use my words but the meaning is the same.

[SunshineOnLeith]

I'm unsure how to be honest.

I have posted links, he didn't use my words but the meaning is the same.

You've posted two links, both of which I've read, and you've declined to direct me to a single quote from Andy Haldane in either of them which indicates his "desire for the end of cash".

You just read the headline of the FT.com article and nothing more, didn't you?

[Rasta_Hibs]

You've posted two links, both of which I've read, and you've declined to direct me to a single quote from Andy Haldane in either of them which indicates his "desire for the end of cash".

You just read the headline of the FT.com article and nothing more, didn't you?

Nope I have read the article. There are more.

So what do you think he means when he says that we should replace cash with a digital currency?

Am I missing something here?

[SunshineOnLeith]

Nope I have read the article. There are more.

So what do you think he means when he says that we should replace cash with a digital currency?

Am I missing something here?

Can you direct me to a single quote where he says "we should replace cash with a digital currency?"

Emphasis on the word "should".

[Rasta_Hibs]

Can you direct me to a single quote where he says "we should replace cash with a digital currency?"

Emphasis on the word "should".

Fair enough you got me!

We could replace cash with a digital currency is more accurate.

But I think he wants us to go digital or why suggest it?

[SunshineOnLeith]

Fair enough you got me!

We could replace cash with a digital currency is more accurate.

But I think he wants us to go digital or why suggest it?

That's fair, he has spoken of the possibility.

I'd submit that he's done so because, as I said previously, it's literally his job as an economist at the BoE to think about these things. His comments about cashless technology were made in the context of a wide-ranging research project being undertaken by the Bank which also covered, among other things, inequality and climate change.

Here is a direct quote from him, about the future of money: “I don’t remotely know what the answer is but that’s why it’s research.”

[Moulin Yarns]

I'm unsure how to be honest.

I have posted links, he didn't use my words but the meaning is the same.


I love your logic, you quote/paraphrase someone, then say that they didn't use the same words as you. I might be wrong, but I'm sure they weren't quoting you. :wink:

There are already cashless methods to pay for goods, Credit/debit cards, Paypal, Bitcoin even touchless card payment. All currently available, but we still have cash, couldn't do without it, even the Romans used cash.

[RyeSloan]

I don't quite agree with you here, it is partly driven by this, I'm sure - I think it would be an effective means of limiting the ability to launder money or hide it in offshore accounts etc. - and of course money would be easier to trace by tax fraud agencies and so forth. Not sure that negative interest rates are now viewed as "normal" - I don't know anyone pleased we have them, certainly not here in Germany with its (general) philosophy of people saving rather than borrowing money. The 10-year Bond rate is worrying as you say - but an already nervous market is not being helped by this pending referendum ... I think a cashless society may well be a generational "thing" - I'm not yet convinced it has only good aspects to it, but perhaps younger folks will simply accept it? ...

Aye fair points,

I would however suggest that the image of criminals and big piles of notes needing laundered is somewhat outdated, seems to me that they are already well ahead of the curve on that front

As for the 10 year bund I would suggest the rate is being driven much more by Draghi's printing press than any Brexit referendum. The central bank distortion of the bond market is quite something, it can surely only end in tears as at some point if and when the ECB stops buying the bonds there are going to be a hell of a lot of people sitting on 10 year paper on negative yields and no 'greater fool' will exist to buy them...

[PeeJay]

Aye fair points,

I would however suggest that the image of criminals and big piles of notes needing laundered is somewhat outdated, seems to me that they are already well ahead of the curve on that front

As for the 10 year bund I would suggest the rate is being driven much more by Draghi's printing press than any Brexit referendum. The central bank distortion of the bond market is quite something, it can surely only end in tears as at some point if and when the ECB stops buying the bonds there are going to be a hell of a lot of people sitting on 10 year paper on negative yields and no 'greater fool' will exist to buy them...

Well I guess it has changed slightly since the days your friendly HSBC bank would arrange for a lorry load of Mexican drug dealer cash to be collected and driven over the Mexican border into the US - for the "client" - to wash his earnings in nice, safe and clean dollars - all legal at the time, as any old banker or accountant will tell you ...

Anyway, bankers being bankers they will simply repackage it all as something innovative and exciting and full of potential - and there will be a line of fools round the block eager to buy - or maybe you are right - we really are all doomed! :greengrin

[mmmmhibby]

Given that the same can be said of every single assertion you've made on this thread, it's rather quite apt, then.

When you resort to using clichés rather than engage in a sensible debate what do you expect? For the record I have posted some facts on this subject. You just keep slapping people down with empty rhetoric. Crack on.

[SunshineOnLeith]

When you resort to using clichés rather than engage in a sensible debate what do you expect? For the record I have posted some facts on this subject. You just keep slapping people down with empty rhetoric. Crack on.

'Facts' like stating that the EU is superstate with Germany and France running the show? I believe that was your latest assertion I took issue with.

Would you feel better if I rephrased? Ok, could you please provide some evidence in support of that statement?

[RyeSloan]

'Facts' like stating that the EU is superstate with Germany and France running the show? I believe that was your latest assertion I took issue with. Would you feel better if I rephrased? Ok, could you please provide some evidence in support of that statement?

I suppose these days it's really just a German superstate, they are after all the only winners in the Eurozone.

This is slightly sensationalist in places but gives a good idea as to why Europe might be described as a Germanic superstate...

http://capx.co/europe-needs-britain-in-the-eu-to-curb-german-dominance/

[Rasta_Hibs]

ove [/B]3]I love your logic, you quote/paraphrase someone, then say that they didn't use the same words as you. I might be wrong, but I'm sure they weren't quoting you. :wink:

There are already cashless methods to pay for goods, Credit/debit cards, Paypal, Bitcoin even touchless card payment. All currently available, but we still have cash, couldn't do without it, even the Romans used cash.

Hehe well im glad you are coming round to my way of thinking.

I agree there are loads of ways to pay without cash and some of which I use.

Cash gives people a certain amount of freedom that cashless would take away. I think cashless would benefit the elites more than anyone else much like the EU does.

[SunshineOnLeith]

I suppose these days it's really just a German superstate, they are after all the only winners in the Eurozone.

This is slightly sensationalist in places but gives a good idea as to why Europe might be described as a Germanic superstate...

http://capx.co/europe-needs-britain-in-the-eu-to-curb-german-dominance/

Much of that article discussed the Eurozone rather than the EU, which we all know are not the same thing. Similarly, the Greek bailout was not an EU bailout, several non-EU countries were involved through the IMF.

At EU level, while the UK is the country most frequently "outvoted" in EU Council votes, we still get our way 87% of the time. The most high profile recent example of us being outvoted was on the EU Law to restrict bankers bonuses, which George Osborne opposed. However, polling within the UK at the time showed that in excess of 75% of the British public were supportive of the law, including 68% of Conservative voters. Quite apart from what Farage et al keep telling us, the level of consensus on most issues within the EU is quite extraordinary.

On the point of German dominance, it's worth pointing out that the second most frequently outvoted country at the EU Council, is Germany.

If you have access to it, I'd highly recommend the FT.com editorial on why we should vote to Remain. Yes, it's written in support of the side which you don't support and I'm not going to claim that it's neutral or anything like that, but I still think anyone interested in the economics of the vote would get something from it. The reason I bring it up here in particular is that the FT has always been opposed to the idea of the UK joining the Euro, while remaining supportive of the economics behind the EU generally.

[Moulin Yarns]

Hehe well im glad you are coming round to my way of thinking.

I agree there are loads of ways to pay without cash and some of which I use.

Cash gives people a certain amount of freedom that cashless would take away. I think cashless would benefit the elites more than anyone else much like the EU does.

You don't do sarcasm then :greengrin

[JeMeSouviens]

The polls have really swung to Leave. The last 5 published all have leave ahead with a lead varying from 3-7%.

I can't believe anyone thinks wheeling out Gordon Brown is a good idea. Nearly everybody loathes the guy!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_United_Kingdom_European_Un ion_membership_referendum#Standard_polling_on_EU_m embership

[RyeSloan]

Much of that article discussed the Eurozone rather than the EU, which we all know are not the same thing. Similarly, the Greek bailout was not an EU bailout, several non-EU countries were involved through the IMF. At EU level, while the UK is the country most frequently "outvoted" in EU Council votes, we still get our way 87% of the time. The most high profile recent example of us being outvoted was on the EU Law to restrict bankers bonuses, which George Osborne opposed. However, polling within the UK at the time showed that in excess of 75% of the British public were supportive of the law, including 68% of Conservative voters. Quite apart from what Farage et al keep telling us, the level of consensus on most issues within the EU is quite extraordinary. On the point of German dominance, it's worth pointing out that the second most frequently outvoted country at the EU Council, is Germany. If you have access to it, I'd highly recommend the FT.com editorial on why we should vote to Remain. Yes, it's written in support of the side which you don't support and I'm not going to claim that it's neutral or anything like that, but I still think anyone interested in the economics of the vote would get something from it. The reason I bring it up here in particular is that the FT has always been opposed to the idea of the UK joining the Euro, while remaining supportive of the economics behind the EU generally.

Believe it or not I'm not overly fussed one way or other...the general lack of policies that support wealth creation will probably continue regardless.

I get the argument that you can point to the EU being consensual to extraordinary levels but I'm my option that's only because the horse trading and influencing is done behind closed doors. I really don't see the open debate that leads to a consensus I see vested interests exerting influence and major decisions having been made already before any voting takes place.

What can't be denied though is the German influence over the Eurozone and the structural deficiencies the Euro has brought....to me that is a cancer right in the heart of the EU and any sensible approach to reform would see the euro scrapped or significant fiscal transfers brought in to balance it out. Neither is going to happen so why saddle yourself to a union that has such a weakness?

As you say though there is arguments for staying in, just as there is for opting out. I don't think either would lead to armageddon if I'm honest.

[SHODAN]

7 point lead for Leave over Remain in the latest YouGov poll.

16 point lead for Remain over Leave in Scotland.

Democracy. :aok:

[magpie1892]

7 point lead for Leave over Remain in the latest YouGov poll.

16 point lead for Remain over Leave in Scotland.

Democracy. :aok:

TNS sample of just under 2,500 adults June 7-13 has Leave 6pts ahead of Remain (53-47%) in Scotland - two points higher for Leave than in England (52-48%).

Democracy indeed.

[SHODAN]

TNS sample of just under 2,500 adults June 7-13 has Leave 6pts ahead of Remain (53-47%) in Scotland - two points higher for Leave than in England (52-48%).

Democracy indeed.

Every other opinion poll has projected a comfortable Remain vote in Scotland, so I would be very surprised if that was the case.

The most recent exclusively Scotland poll (12th June, STV) of 1,000 adults puts Remain on 58 and Leave on 33.

[magpie1892]

Every other opinion poll has projected a comfortable Remain vote in Scotland, so I would be very surprised if that was the case.

The most recent exclusively Scotland poll (12th June, STV) of 1,000 adults puts Remain on 58 and Leave on 33.

13 comes after 12 but, in all seriousness, I, too, would be very surprised if it was the case that Remain was on +25%. Not long to wait to find out, however.

[JeMeSouviens]

TNS sample of just under 2,500 adults June 7-13 has Leave 6pts ahead of Remain (53-47%) in Scotland - two points higher for Leave than in England (52-48%).

Democracy indeed.

Where did you get those numbers? The latest poll on the TNS website has
Leave ahead 54-46 overall but behind in Scotland by 52-48. However, that figure for Scotland is a tiny sample of 150 so the margin of error is huge.

Full scale TNS Scotland poll last week had Remain ahead 71-29.

[heretoday]

I'm a genuine Don't Know.

On the one hand, I don't like how we have to blithely accept laws proposed and made in Brussels, and I think it is concerning that we don't have enough homes to house immigrants in or adequate public services to cope with them.

On the other, I like the idea of being able to travel unfettered throughout Europe and the concept of a Europe united against fascism or whatever.

I may spoil my ballot paper.

[Glory Lurker]

I am genuinely staggered that there is even a chance that Leave might win next week. They've made it up as they go along in a campaign run by a who's who of unsavoury politicians. How the Remain campaign has not romped away is beyond me.

Where has the scrutiny been of the back-of-fag-packet post-Leave "roadmap"? How has Leave got away until now without saying anything about what would happen? How come what they have said has not been torn apart in the debate? The only legislation I have heard about is a couple of Acts intended to boot johnny foreigner out (the priority of the Leave campaign laid totally bare there), to be followed up with a leaving-EU Act in 2020. What about EU citizens in the UK just now (and vice versa)? Will we join EFTA? When? Until we do, are we to expect to be limited to 200 fags and a bottle of plonk on our return from our Eurohols (I take it no Leave supporter would want to breach this, given that it would be an offence against our border controls)?

Yet here we are. A week from now the first results will be on their way. I'm hoping a week remains a long time in politics and I sit down to the results programme a lot more confident that we will stay in the EU than I am just now.

[Hibbyradge]

Good article;

https://medium.com/@williamgadsbypeet/project-fear-is-a-fitting-name-you-should-be-****ing-terrified-5c93f1b5ef2f#.381q5x3qc

[Hibrandenburg]

I am genuinely staggered that there is even a chance that Leave might win next week. They've made it up as they go along in a campaign run by a who's who of unsavoury politicians. How the Remain campaign has not romped away is beyond me.

Where has the scrutiny been of the back-of-fag-packet post-Leave "roadmap"? How has Leave got away until now without saying anything about what would happen? How come what they have said has not been torn apart in the debate? The only legislation I have heard about is a couple of Acts intended to boot johnny foreigner out (the priority of the Leave campaign laid totally bare there), to be followed up with a leaving-EU Act in 2020. What about EU citizens in the UK just now (and vice versa)? Will we join EFTA? When? Until we do, are we to expect to be limited to 200 fags and a bottle of plonk on our return from our Eurohols (I take it no Leave supporter would want to breach this, given that it would be an offence against our border controls)?

Yet here we are. A week from now the first results will be on their way. I'm hoping a week remains a long time in politics and I sit down to the results programme a lot more confident that we will stay in the EU than I am just now.

They've done it by pressing the hate button on the hard of thinking. There's a large minority of people out there who are incapable of making reasoned decisions, instead they rely on their gut instincts. What better way to influence these people than to provoke that oldest of emotions "hate"? Once you've sown the seed there's no going back.

This has been a truly despicable campaign and whilst people were getting hot under the collar during the Indy debate, it pales in comparison to what I'm seeing now.

[Holmesdale Hibs]

They've done it by pressing the hate button on the hard of thinking. There's a large minority of people out there who are incapable of making reasoned decisions, instead they rely on their gut instincts. What better way to influence these people than to provoke that oldest of emotions "hate"? Once you've sown the seed there's no going back.

This has been a truly despicable campaign and whilst people were getting hot under the collar during the Indy debate, it pales in comparison to what I'm seeing now.

There might be some truth in the first paragraph if you divide it by 10 but the word 'hate' is far to strong to apply to a large minority. A few dickheads maybe, but thats it. Replace the word 'hate' with 'fear' and you have a good description of the Remain campaign.

The Indy campaign seemed just as bad to be honest, but agree both have been poor but equally from both sides.

[SunshineOnLeith]

Good article;

https://medium.com/@williamgadsbypeet/project-fear-is-a-fitting-name-you-should-be-****ing-terrified-5c93f1b5ef2f#.381q5x3qc

Your link doesn't work because the swear filter catches the naughty word in the URL, I manged to work it out though :wink:

[SunshineOnLeith]

The Indy campaign seemed just as bad to be honest, but agree both have been poor but equally from both sides.

Without entering into a debate about which side(s) did/didn't use Fear as a tactic in the independence referendum, let's compare and contrast:

Independence referendum: Scaremongering about EU membership and the economy, primarily.

EU referendum: Scaremongering about immigrants, encouraging the blaming of society's ills on foreigners, and dehumanising refugees.

I know which I find more irresponsible, reprehensible and, frankly, disgusting.

[Holmesdale Hibs]

Without entering into a debate about which side(s) did/didn't use Fear as a tactic in the independence referendum, let's compare and contrast:

Independence referendum: Scaremongering about EU membership and the economy, primarily.

EU referendum: Scaremongering about immigrants, encouraging the blaming of society's ills on foreigners, and dehumanising refugees.

I know which I find more irresponsible, reprehensible and, frankly, disgusting.

I agree with some of what you're saying but I a lot of people have quite legitimate concerns about immigration numbers. All parties campaigned on immigration being too high at the last election only most of them didn't have the honesty to admit they couldn't realistically achieve their targets. It's not racism or hatred, it's a reasonable and common political opinion.

People have seen the EU expand drastically over recent years and don't like what it has become and where it is going. Out of interest, were you in favour of expansion in to Eastern Europe and would you be in favour of further expansion?

I'm not looking for an argument either and, although I'll be voting Brexit, my preference would be for a properly reformed EU. Unfortunately I just don't see that happening.

[SunshineOnLeith]

I agree with some of what you're saying but I a lot of people have quite legitimate concerns about immigration numbers. All parties campaigned on immigration being too high at the last election only most of them didn't have the honesty to admit they couldn't realistically achieve their targets. It's not racism or hatred, it's a reasonable and common political opinion.

People have seen the EU expand drastically over recent years and don't like what it has become and where it is going. Out of interest, were you in favour of expansion in to Eastern Europe and would you be in favour of further expansion?

I'm not looking for an argument either and, although I'll be voting Brexit, my preference would be for a properly reformed EU. Unfortunately I just don't see that happening.

I was only 17 when the EU expanded to let Poland etc it so didn't have a strong opinion at the time, but with hindsight yes, I think it's been brilliant.

As for further expansion, it's not as black and white as being for or against, it depends on the country and their individual circumstances at the time. For example, I don't think there would be much dissent if Norway or Iceland applied to join.

Polling has shown that people don't have legitimate concerns about immigration numbers, because most people are wrong about the scale and nature of immigration to the UK.

Here's a survey from 2014: http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/oct/29/todays-key-fact-you-are-probably-wrong-about-almost-everything

The average guess among British people for what % of the population are immigrants was 24%, the actual figure is 13%.

And an Ipsos MORI poll from a week or so ago: https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3742/The-Perils-of-Perception-and-the-EU.aspx

On average, we think that EU immigrants make up 15% of the population, the actual figure is 5%. Among those who intend to vote Leave, on average they think the figure is 20% (10% among Remain-ers)

People's concerns about immigration aren't legitimate when they are simply wrong.

[Hibrandenburg]

Without entering into a debate about which side(s) did/didn't use Fear as a tactic in the independence referendum, let's compare and contrast:

Independence referendum: Scaremongering about EU membership and the economy, primarily.

EU referendum: Scaremongering about immigrants, encouraging the blaming of society's ills on foreigners, and dehumanising refugees.

I know which I find more irresponsible, reprehensible and, frankly, disgusting.

:agree:

[Holmesdale Hibs]

I was only 17 when the EU expanded to let Poland etc it so didn't have a strong opinion at the time, but with hindsight yes, I think it's been brilliant.

As for further expansion, it's not as black and white as being for or against, it depends on the country and their individual circumstances at the time. For example, I don't think there would be much dissent if Norway or Iceland applied to join.

Polling has shown that people don't have legitimate concerns about immigration numbers, because most people are wrong about the scale and nature of immigration to the UK.

Here's a survey from 2014: http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/oct/29/todays-key-fact-you-are-probably-wrong-about-almost-everything

The average guess among British people for what % of the population are immigrants was 24%, the actual figure is 13%.

And an Ipsos MORI poll from a week or so ago: https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3742/The-Perils-of-Perception-and-the-EU.aspx

On average, we think that EU immigrants make up 15% of the population, the actual figure is 5%. Among those who intend to vote Leave, on average they think the figure is 20% (10% among Remain-ers)

People's concerns about immigration aren't legitimate when they are simply wrong.

Fair enough, but my point wasn't about whether immigration was a good thing or a bad thing. Only that it's pretty short sided to dismiss people that disagree with you about it as racist, which I feel some remainers have been doing. I also disagree that people can't have legitimate concerns without knowing the exact numbers.

[Moulin Yarns]

I agree with some of what you're saying but I a lot of people have quite legitimate concerns about immigration numbers. All parties campaigned on immigration being too high at the last election only most of them didn't have the honesty to admit they couldn't realistically achieve their targets. It's not racism or hatred, it's a reasonable and common political opinion.

People have seen the EU expand drastically over recent years and don't like what it has become and where it is going. Out of interest, were you in favour of expansion in to Eastern Europe and would you be in favour of further expansion?

I'm not looking for an argument either and, although I'll be voting Brexit, my preference would be for a properly reformed EU. Unfortunately I just don't see that happening.

How would you propose we can influence a properly reformed EU if we are out of it?

To turn the old saying on it's head, most people agree it is broke, or at least not as good as it should be, so it needs fixing. By walking away the UK would have no input into how it could be fixed. My view is we need to be in it to fix it.

[SunshineOnLeith]

I also disagree that people can't have legitimate concerns without knowing the exact numbers.

It depends on their concern.

If somebody thinks EU immigration is too high based on their perception that EU immigrants make up 20% (average Leave voter's perception) of the population, that's not a legitimate concern, it's wrong.

The Ipsos MORI poll on perceptions is interesting generally and extremely wide ranging, well worth a read for anyone interested in seeing how their perceptions stand up against reality: https://www.ipsos-mori.com/Assets/Docs/Polls/16-029926-01_perils_of_perception_eu_Final%20for%20webpage.p df

[Bristolhibby]

Sitting in sunny Wiltshire, I don't see anything really to do with immigration, EU or otherwise.

Is it really as bad as people are making out? Some Poles washing your car ain't going to bring the country down. Quite frankly, they come here, work and pay their taxes. What's not to like?

Or is it because some immigrants have brown skin and live together and speak a funny language (allbeit while working, paying taxes and generally try to get on with their lives).

As had been outlined, the perception versus reality is staggering. And people are voting on a hunch.

J

[Holmesdale Hibs]

It depends on their concern.

If somebody thinks EU immigration is too high based on their perception that EU immigrants make up 20% (average Leave voter's perception) of the population, that's not a legitimate concern, it's wrong.

The Ipsos MORI poll on perceptions is interesting generally and extremely wide ranging, well worth a read for anyone interested in seeing how their perceptions stand up against reality: https://www.ipsos-mori.com/Assets/Docs/Polls/16-029926-01_perils_of_perception_eu_Final%20for%20webpage.p df

Agree it depends on their concern, I guess that was my point. Most aspects of the debate are very complex and making board statements doesn't work. That being said...

I'd guess immigration is higher in England, and more concentrated in some towns/cities, particularly in the South. Loving in London I see both sides of it myself - I work with some amazingly smart and hardworking Europeans that make a very positive contribution to the uk in a number of ways (I also married one). At the same time, it costs upward of £500k for a one bed flat (not just down to immigration granted), public transport is at capacity and many schools are struggling with kids that can't speak a word of English.

No one is anti-immigration (apart from the few dickheads I mentioned earlier), but some people are anti-mass-uncontrollable-immigration, which I personally don't have a problem with.

[Bristolhibby]

Re the above, we shouldn't be blaming Immigrants, we should be outraged that successive governments have sold off and ignored social housing stock to the levels where house prices are mental. Add to that the real investment that is required in the NHS and schools. More productive taxpayers (immigrants) will have skin in this finding game.

A few less wars in hot places, and a lot more houses built with our tax pounds pleas. Then immigration wouldn't be a problem more of a solution for a growing economy.

J

[Moulin Yarns]

Without copying the whole article, here is the final paragraph from Edinburgh Uni Professor of politics on Immigration



Polish immigration is already on
the decline, and Romanian and Bulgarian immigration remains relatively
modest. Instead, my prediction is that within a few years we will see lower
levels of EU immigration, but increased immigration from non-EU countries.
Concerns about immigration will not go away; but the furore over EU free
movement will recede.


Christina Boswell is Professor of Politics and Director of Research, School of
Social and Political Science, University of Edinburgh.

She also says the spike in immigration from southern Europe has passed with the economic crisis slowly easing.

We often hear they come over and take all our jobs, but is that true/


ONS statistics suggest that 58% of
EU nationals coming to the UK to work already have a job offer before they get
here. This begs the question of what effect a ban on EU immigration might
have on the economy. If EU nationals are filling so many jobs, then a
significant restriction of immigration would create serious labour shortages,
with damaging effects for those sectors most reliant on foreign labour:
manufacturing, food and drink processing, cleaning, food preparation and
hospitality, and health.

[Moulin Yarns]

Fair enough, but my point wasn't about whether immigration was a good thing or a bad thing. Only that it's pretty short sided to dismiss people that disagree with you about it as racist, which I feel some remainers have been doing. I also disagree that people can't have legitimate concerns without knowing the exact numbers.

I saw this quote about vote leave and racists that is worth remembering



I’m not saying that everyone who votes Leave is racist, but everyone who’s a racist will be voting Leave.

[Holmesdale Hibs]

How would you propose we can influence a properly reformed EU if we are out of it?

To turn the old saying on it's head, most people agree it is broke, or at least not as good as it should be, so it needs fixing. By walking away the UK would have no input into how it could be fixed. My view is we need to be in it to fix it.

My view is it is broken beyond repair. It's too big to have consensus on any meaningful change, as was shown by Cameron's pathetic attempt at negotiation. It started out a good thing but I don't trust politicians to fix it, rather I think they will only continue to make it worse.

As for all racists voting leave, I can see that's probably true. However the %age of racist Brexit voters is very small in terms of total contribution and the attitudes of remainers implying otherwise quite out of order. Immigration is a legitimate concern and all the main parties campaign on reducing it. Just because someone thinks it's not a problem, does not give them the right to dismiss those that disagree as being racist. I find that approach quite ignorant and can only describe it as a warped sense of political correctness.

[Hibrandenburg]

My view is it is broken beyond repair. It's too big to have consensus on any meaningful change, as was shown by Cameron's pathetic attempt at negotiation. It started out a good thing but I don't trust politicians to fix it, rather I think they will only continue to make it worse.

As for all racists voting leave, I can see that's probably true. However the %age of racist Brexit voters is very small in terms of total contribution and the attitudes of remainers implying otherwise quite out of order. Immigration is a legitimate concern and all the main parties campaign on reducing it. Just because someone thinks it's not a problem, does not give them the right to dismiss those that disagree as being racist. I find that approach quite ignorant and can only describe it as a warped sense of political correctness.

I think you're wrong about the size of the racist minority. Not all racists are Britain First badge carriers, there's many an armchair racist and plenty who carry other party's badges.

[Holmesdale Hibs]

I think you're wrong about the size of the racist minority. Not all racists are Britain First badge carriers, there's many an armchair racist and plenty who carry other party's badges.

Well as far as I know there aren't any reliable stats on the number of racists in the country so we'll both have to trust our own instincts on that one.

I just find think calling or implying a group of people are racist is quite a serious statement, and in this case quite ignorant. I'm able to disagree with Remain campaigners without generalising or insulting them.

It's a bit like the Indy referendum when Yes campaigners would imply/accuse No campaigners of being less patriotic. Utter BS and it's was such views pushed me in the other direction (although I probably would have still voted Yes if I was eligible)

[SunshineOnLeith]

My view is it is broken beyond repair. It's too big to have consensus on any meaningful change, as was shown by Cameron's pathetic attempt at negotiation. It started out a good thing but I don't trust politicians to fix it, rather I think they will only continue to make it worse.

As for all racists voting leave, I can see that's probably true. However the %age of racist Brexit voters is very small in terms of total contribution and the attitudes of remainers implying otherwise quite out of order. Immigration is a legitimate concern and all the main parties campaign on reducing it. Just because someone thinks it's not a problem, does not give them the right to dismiss those that disagree as being racist. I find that approach quite ignorant and can only describe it as a warped sense of political correctness.

I'm really not sure the bit in bold is true. I only really remember the Tories and UKIP (with their one MP) explicitly wanting to reduce immigration. Labour said they'd crack down on illegal immigration, which is an entirely different issue, the Lib Dems like immigration, the SNP like immigration, and the Greens like immigration.

As to "immigration is a legitimate concern", that's a statement that needs qualification. What exactly is it about immigration that is concerning? If it's the scale of immigration, then the average Leave voter is wrong about the scale of both EU immigration (their perceived level of EU immigration is 400% of the actual figure) and immigration generally to the UK. If you are wrong about something, your concern is not "legitimate". If I said I was voting Remain because the UK gets back more money from the EU than it pays in, would that be legitimate? No, because it is wrong.

So, we are then left to wonder, what is this "legitimate concern" which exists about immigrants which is neither a) wrong, nor b) racist?

[Moulin Yarns]

My view is it is broken beyond repair. It's too big to have consensus on any meaningful change, as was shown by Cameron's pathetic attempt at negotiation. It started out a good thing but I don't trust politicians to fix it, rather I think they will only continue to make it worse.

As for all racists voting leave, I can see that's probably true. However the %age of racist Brexit voters is very small in terms of total contribution and the attitudes of remainers implying otherwise quite out of order. Immigration is a legitimate concern and all the main parties campaign on reducing it. Just because someone thinks it's not a problem, does not give them the right to dismiss those that disagree as being racist. I find that approach quite ignorant and can only describe it as a warped sense of political correctness.

I think you will find that the third force in UK politics are all for immigration, to solve the crisis in employment in places like schools, the NHS etc.

[Holmesdale Hibs]

I think you will find that the third force in UK politics are all for immigration, to solve the crisis in employment in places like schools, the NHS etc.

I said reducing it, not eliminate it. Do you really think people voting Brexit want no immigration? Like I've said before, immigration is a good thing. I work with lots of smart and hard working Europeans who make a very positive contribution to this country. I just don't see the need to insult someone that questions our open border policy with an expanding EU. There's a very large middle ground between racist vs non-racist.

[Moulin Yarns]

I said reducing it, not eliminate it. Do you really think people voting Brexit want no immigration? Like I've said before, immigration is a good thing. I work with lots of smart and hard working Europeans who make a very positive contribution to this country. I just don't see the need to insult someone that questions our open border policy with an expanding EU. There's a very large middle ground between racist vs non-racist.

woosh!


You said


Immigration is a legitimate concern and all the main parties campaign on reducing it.

I counter that with

http://www.snp.org/pb_what_is_the_snp_s_policy_on_immigration

Which clearly does not say anything about reducing immigration, but it does say they would let people stay after studying here, and not force them to leave like the UK government is doing just now.

You only need to see some voxpops where people say "I'm not racist but" then go on about "foreigners" taking all the jobs!!

[Hibrandenburg]

Well as far as I know there aren't any reliable stats on the number of racists in the country so we'll both have to trust our own instincts on that one.

I just find think calling or implying a group of people are racist is quite a serious statement, and in this case quite ignorant. I'm able to disagree with Remain campaigners without generalising or insulting them.

It's a bit like the Indy referendum when Yes campaigners would imply/accuse No campaigners of being less patriotic. Utter BS and it's was such views pushed me in the other direction (although I probably would have still voted Yes if I was eligible)

I never said that those voting leave are all racist, but I think there might be enough of them to swing it because you can pretty much guarantee that all racists will vote to leave.

[Holmesdale Hibs]

woosh!


You said


I counter that with

http://www.snp.org/pb_what_is_the_snp_s_policy_on_immigration

Which clearly does not say anything about reducing immigration, but it does say they would let people stay after studying here, and not force them to leave like the UK government is doing just now.

You only need to see some voxpops where people say "I'm not racist but" then go on about "foreigners" taking all the jobs!!

Ha, fair enough I forgot about the SNP. i blame over 10 years of southern media but yes, I accept they are a mainstream party.

[Rasta_Hibs]

I never said that those voting leave are all racist, but I think there might be enough of them to swing it because you can pretty much guarantee that all racists will vote to leave.

Are you saying all the racists in the UK are white? Or do you think racists from other ethic communities will vote to leave also?

[marinello59]

Are you saying all the racists in the UK are white? Or do you think racists from other ethic communities will vote to leave also?

As regards this vote the dog whistle racism that has been sent out by people like you will be answered with a leave vote. Don't ask for an apology, you won't get one.

[danhibees1875]

The tide seems to be swinging a bit on this one towards the leave side, which I'm relatively surprised about. Latest polls are favouring leave and despite still not being bookies favourites, the odds are falling (13/8).

I did hear an interesting point last night around the immigration debate in that it's focused on EU immigration and that so long as EU citizens can come to the UK while the governments have increasingly smaller "immigration targets" then this results in extremely tight immigration control for non- EU immigrants. So, someone from Jordan with great qualifications will be getting turned away currently in order to meet these net immigration targets that can't be met by reducing EU immigration - which does seem unjust.

As I said, that's someone else's point and I'm interested in others opinions/ being told that the above isn't correct if that's the case.

[Rasta_Hibs]

As regards this vote the dog whistle racism that has been sent out by people like you will be answered with a leave vote. Don't ask for an apology, you won't get one.

That's ok you have no need to apologise to me!

It was a worthwhile question and one that can be asked of your post also.

Do you think dog whistle racists from other ethic groups will want to vote to leave the EU?

I don't, I think racists from other ethnic groups are more likely to vote remain. But I'm honest and id agree you could say that I am talking rubbish now as the vote is nothing to do with race.

I don't see how playing the race card really helps the Brexit debate at all.

For me mostly the vote is about defeating the political elites and ending the massive gravy train that the EU political system has become.

There are plenty issues to talk about in regards to the EU and I don't think polarising the debate into racists voting leave and all the good guys voting to stay is a worthwhile addition as its nonsense.

[Hibrandenburg]

https://youtu.be/9c9F0JBFPko

The mask slips, we've seen the road that creeps like this lead us down in recent years in the Balkan, Ukraine and Northern Ireland. What he says is true, what he doesn't say is he's part of the cause.

[Holmesdale Hibs]

The tide seems to be swinging a bit on this one towards the leave side, which I'm relatively surprised about. Latest polls are favouring leave and despite still not being bookies favourites, the odds are falling (13/8).

I did hear an interesting point last night around the immigration debate in that it's focused on EU immigration and that so long as EU citizens can come to the UK while the governments have increasingly smaller "immigration targets" then this results in extremely tight immigration control for non- EU immigrants. So, someone from Jordan with great qualifications will be getting turned away currently in order to meet these net immigration targets that can't be met by reducing EU immigration - which does seem unjust.

As I said, that's someone else's point and I'm interested in others opinions/ being told that the above isn't correct if that's the case.

It's a very valid point. We had a situation at work when we wanted to interview an American but were told not to because he wouldn't qualify for a visa. There are also a couple of North Americans in the office who have been getting quite stressed out about whether they will have their visa renewed. It also seems unfair that neither of them qualify for the same tax breaks i do.

It does seem daft to place strict restrictions on one group of foreigners and absolutely no restrictions on another. The obvious answer to me is that everyone should be treated the same regardless of where they are from.

[Ronniekirk]

I care enormously and I'm very scared about the effect of leaving the EU will have on the economy, on jobs, the NHS, and on pensions.

Brexit will tell you it will all be better, but fail to back that up with ANY data or statistics. In fact, almost every economist on the planet says we'll be hit hard if we leave.

So, yes, I do care.

Scared is exactly what they want you to feel and think It happened in the Independence debate as well When it looked like the vote might go against them they push the Financial carnage button to make everyone scared they are going to be financially worse off
But having said that i certainly wont be voting on the sole basis of the immigration issue
Didn't know Gove was Scottish till the programme that showed him with his Father and talking about the E U role in the demise of the Scottish Fishing Fleet although personally I think thats a Red Herring green grin
I have yet to be impressed by anyone in the debate but thats not uncommon ,the days of the great political orators are gone
I am open to leaving the huge Beaurcpatic Brussels Machine where they create well paid jobs for themselves and spend a fortune bailing out countries that have mismanaged their Economy eg Greece and to get rid of the Euro , but the Leave Campaign to date have not really backed up in any concrete way how things would be better apart from saving money we currently give to the E U that would then go straight to our Health Service and to say we will find we can strike better deals with other Markets ie China


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ronniekirk]

https://youtu.be/9c9F0JBFPko

The mask slips, we've seen the road that creeps like this lead us down in recent years in the Balkan, Ukraine and Northern Ireland. What he says is true, what he doesn't say is he's part of the cause.

Scaring people with Violence is the next step if people feel we ate losing control of our Borders
I would be more worried if all those Russian Hooligans arrived supporting Chelsea
Farage the Barrage is a Mouthpiece designed to capture a certain type of voter that will probably already be voting Leave But he puts people off voting Leave that are undecided imo


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[marinello59]

That's ok you have no need to apologise to me!

It was a worthwhile question and one that can be asked of your post also.

Do you think dog whistle racists from other ethic groups will want to vote to leave the EU?

I don't, I think racists from other ethnic groups are more likely to vote remain. But I'm honest and id agree you could say that I am talking rubbish now as the vote is nothing to do with race.

I don't see how playing the race card really helps the Brexit debate at all.

For me mostly the vote is about defeating the political elites and ending the massive gravy train that the EU political system has become.

There are plenty issues to talk about in regards to the EU and I don't think polarising the debate into racists voting leave and all the good guys voting to stay is a worthwhile addition as its nonsense.
Why do you think your Brexit chums are playing the race card so strongly then?

[Hibrandenburg]

I truly fear a Balkan type scenario where England vote out and Scotland and Wales call a referendum on independence within the EU and another push for reunification with the south is made in Northern Ireland. The temptation within Westminster to then exert influence over pro unionists living outside England would be huge and could get very nasty. Especially if Farage, Johnson or Gove end up at the helm.

[SunshineOnLeith]

The tide seems to be swinging a bit on this one towards the leave side, which I'm relatively surprised about. Latest polls are favouring leave and despite still not being bookies favourites, the odds are falling (13/8).

I did hear an interesting point last night around the immigration debate in that it's focused on EU immigration and that so long as EU citizens can come to the UK while the governments have increasingly smaller "immigration targets" then this results in extremely tight immigration control for non- EU immigrants. So, someone from Jordan with great qualifications will be getting turned away currently in order to meet these net immigration targets that can't be met by reducing EU immigration - which does seem unjust.

As I said, that's someone else's point and I'm interested in others opinions/ being told that the above isn't correct if that's the case.

Your post illustrates the problem with current UK Government policy, rather than the EU.

Having arbitrary immigration targets/caps is stupid. Overly simplistic but an example: UK immigration target of 300,000 reached by October of one year. In November, we start turning away doctors and engineers because 'we're full'.

[danhibees1875]

Your post illustrates the problem with current UK Government policy, rather than the EU.

Having arbitrary immigration targets/caps is stupid. Overly simplistic but an example: UK immigration target of 300,000 reached by October of one year. In November, we start turning away doctors and engineers because 'we're full'.
Don't get me wrong, it's why I put it in "'s. I don't think it's right either. But it exists and targets are put into manifestos which are voted for which makes it a factor that needs considered unfortunately.

[SunshineOnLeith]

Don't get me wrong, it's why I put it in "'s. I don't think it's right either. But it exists and targets are put into manifestos which are voted for which makes it a factor that needs considered unfortunately.

I get that and I wasn't having a dig at you, apologies if it came across like that.

In my opinion, the solution to the issue of non-EU immigrants being treated poorly is to vote for a government who'll treat them better, not leave the EU and hope that the bunch of xenophobes campaigning for Leave will suddenly throw their arms open to foreigners.

[danhibees1875]

I get that and I wasn't having a dig at you, apologies if it came across like that.

In my opinion, the solution to the issue of non-EU immigrants being treated poorly is to vote for a government who'll treat them better, not leave the EU and hope that the bunch of xenophobes campaigning for Leave will suddenly throw their arms open to foreigners.

It didn't, I was just clarifying :Greengrin:

Also agree with your second point. It's hard to believe it would necessarily get better for the average non-EU immigrant coming here.

[bigwheel]

A great read yesterday...

This is the article that I wish I had written...sums up exactly how I feel about the tone in the rise of the #brexit agenda...

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/18/england-eu-referendum-brexit?CMP=share_btn_tw


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Hibernia&Alba]

There are millions of good people who are sceptical about the EU, which is fair enough, but the likes of UKIP and the tabloid press have behaved to type by employing xenophobia and scare tactics. Sadly, it seems there are many gullible enough to swallow it without even asking what their agenda is. It's the same old nonsense about finding a scapegoat for society's problems, which usually manifests itself in unpleasant ways by pointing the finger at those considered different. Some of the Vote Leave campaign material has been shameful - the poster about Turkey joining the EU springs to mind. I remain convinced that a UK outside the EU would be more unequal, even less caring and less tolerant. The likes of Farage, Redwood, Cash don't a toss about you and me.

[SHODAN]

Remain has pulled back ahead in the latest opinion polls.

[Hibernia&Alba]

Remain has pulled back ahead in the latest opinion polls.

I think we'll stay. Much like the Scottish referendum, I think the undecideds will be the key, many of whom won't take plunge in the voting booth. But I think it will be another close vote.

[Ronniekirk]

Remain has pulled back ahead in the latest opinion polls.

Hardly surprising given the relentless push about how we ate all going to be worse off and telling us whats in his Emergency Budget Osbourne isa smug tory Wouldn't trust him But there is a lack of credible info from the Leave campaign to address this and as in the Scottish Referendum people now days are looking after their own self interests and wont take a leap into the unknown


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SunshineOnLeith]

Remain has pulled back ahead in the latest opinion polls.

Bookies odds on Leave have lengthened again, and the £ has rebounded in the foreign exchange markets, as well.

[Moulin Yarns]

Leave campaign in Leith was nasty Yesterday from a tweet I saw. Something said about Jo Cox. Not even supposed to be campaign on Saturday

[grunt]

But there is a lack of credible info from the Leave campaign to address this and as in the Scottish Referendum people now days are looking after their own self interests and wont take a leap into the unknown
I would argue that if anyone is "looking after their own self interests" it's the Leave campaigners. They are the ones with the anti-immigrant rhetoric.

[Ronniekirk]

I would argue that if anyone is "looking after their own self interests" it's the Leave campaigners. They are the ones with the anti-immigrant rhetoric.

My post was primarily about the Economic debate I have previously posted i wouldn't be voting on the sole issue of immigration and been critical of Farage and his reference to violence is the next step if people feel they cant control their borders
What turns me off about Politics is when they start scaremongering rather than debate issues and back up their claims with information and not just threaten and scare


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Holmesdale Hibs]

There are millions of good people who are sceptical about the EU, which is fair enough, but the likes of UKIP and the tabloid press have behaved to type by employing xenophobia and scare tactics. Sadly, it seems there are many gullible enough to swallow it without even asking what their agenda is. It's the same old nonsense about finding a scapegoat for society's problems, which usually manifests itself in unpleasant ways by pointing the finger at those considered different. Some of the Vote Leave campaign material has been shameful - the poster about Turkey joining the EU springs to mind. I remain convinced that a UK outside the EU would be more unequal, even less caring and less tolerant. The likes of Farage, Redwood, Cash don't a toss about you and me.

I think you'll have unanimous agreement about Redwood. I now have images of him miming the welsh national anthem in my head, well worth a google if you haven't seen it.

I think the concern about Turkey joining is fair enough though. Would you be in favour of further expansion, including Turkey? If so, fair enough but genuinely out of interest, why? If you vote for Remain, it's not a vote for the status quo, it's a bit to give politicians the freedom to change the EU as they see fit. Folk, rightly in my opinion, don't trust politicians to do this.

[Hibrandenburg]

I think you'll have unanimous agreement about Redwood. I now have images of him miming the welsh national anthem in my head, well worth a google if you haven't seen it.

I think the concern about Turkey joining is fair enough though. Would you be in favour of further expansion, including Turkey? If so, fair enough but genuinely out of interest, why? If you vote for Remain, it's not a vote for the status quo, it's a bit to give politicians the freedom to change the EU as they see fit. Folk, rightly in my opinion, don't trust politicians to do this.

That would make sense if the vote was to do away with politicians but it's not. No matter what way the vote turns out next week, it will empower one group of politicians or another.

I've never understood the rationalisation of the Leave campaigners who say vote leave because we've been duped by our politicians, wouldn't that just be handing more power to the very politicians who've allegedly duped us?

[Holmesdale Hibs]

That would make sense if the vote was to do away with politicians but it's not. No matter what way the vote turns out next week, it will empower one group of politicians or another.

I've never understood the rationalisation of the Leave campaigners who say vote leave because we've been duped by our politicians, wouldn't that just be handing more power to the very politicians who've allegedly duped us?

Yes it would, which I'm not arguing is ideal. But at least they'd be elected by uk citizens. I noticed you didn't address the question about further expansion though. Again, not looking for an argument, but I've not heard a remainer answer this directly.

[grunt]

I think the concern about Turkey joining is fair enough though. Would you be in favour of further expansion, including Turkey? If so, fair enough but genuinely out of interest, why? http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/22/vote-leave-turkey-warning-ignorance-european-realities


Britain is a less attractive destination for Turkish economic migrants than it might think. Against this backdrop,Gove’s claim that more than 5 million people – exceeding the population of Scotland – could move to the UK from the EU by 2030 reveals a surprising ignorance of European realities.

[Hibrandenburg]

Yes it would, which I'm not arguing is ideal. But at least they'd be elected by uk citizens. I noticed you didn't address the question about further expansion though. Again, not looking for an argument, but I've not heard a remainer answer this directly.

My opinion of EU expansion is probably biased. I've got a few Turkish mates whose life's would be made a hell of a lot easier if Turkey were to join. That said even they think that's a bad idea so long as Turkey is moving backwards and that's how they view the country under Erdogan.

The young people in the neighbouring countries to Turkey frequently take short breaks there because they can let their hair down a bit more than at home and I think that's a positive because the knock-on effect the EU would have on Turkey could in turn have a knock-on effect of their neighbours. In other words I'm for eastern expansion providing the requirements to join are met.

[Bristolhibby]

I think you'll have unanimous agreement about Redwood. I now have images of him miming the welsh national anthem in my head, well worth a google if you haven't seen it.

I think the concern about Turkey joining is fair enough though. Would you be in favour of further expansion, including Turkey? If so, fair enough but genuinely out of interest, why? If you vote for Remain, it's not a vote for the status quo, it's a bit to give politicians the freedom to change the EU as they see fit. Folk, rightly in my opinion, don't trust politicians to do this.

Regarding Turkey. They will never get into the EU, it's a moot point.

They will have to sort out their human right abuses - won't happen
Get rid of the Death Penalty - won't happen
Get uninamous agreement for them to join - will never happen in a million years due to Greece blocking them at every turn.

Turkey will never join the EU. I wouldn't even worry about it.

EDIT, just seen the above Guardian link.

J

[SunshineOnLeith]

Baroness Warsi has switched sides to Remain tonight: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/eu-referendum-baroness-sayeeda-warsi-defects-from-leave-to-remain-a7090741.html

In her words, "Are we prepared to tell lies, to spread hate and xenophobia just to win a campaign? For me that’s a step too far"

[TheReg!]

This is just like the Indyref thread, the vast majority of posters were pro independence and anyone who thought otherwise were hushed and they stopped posting, we all know how the vote went, I honestly believe its gonna go the same way on the 23rd but for Vote Leave to win, it won't even be close, this place will go into melt down again.

[Hibbyradge]

This is just like the Indyref thread, the vast majority of posters were pro independence and anyone who thought otherwise were hushed and they stopped posting, we all know how the vote went, I honestly believe its gonna go the same way on the 23rd but for Vote Leave to win, it won't even be close, this place will go into melt down again.

From UKpolling,

The historic trend in referendums is for people to move towards the status quo. In Scotland a couple of years ago a couple of polls a fortnight out were neck-and-neck, but moved back to a clear NO lead by the final polls (and there was a further swing on the day itself). In the EU referendum polls have consistently shown that people think leave is the riskier choice and that people think it will damage the economy. While it was never inevitable, this has always suggested that late movement towards Remain was quite likely. If people are increasingly worried about Brexit’s impact on their own personal finances, then even more so.

Of course, we will never know for sure. The reality is that we can see changes in headline voting intention in polls, but we can never be certain what causes them: all we can do is look at what events happened at the same time and at what changes there have been in other questions in the poll that might have driven a shift. What we do know is that, whatever the reason, we’ve got four new polls tonight – some before Jo Cox’s death, some after – with three of them showing a shift back towards Remain.

[Rasta_Hibs]

Baroness Warsi has switched sides to Remain tonight: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/eu-referendum-baroness-sayeeda-warsi-defects-from-leave-to-remain-a7090741.html

In her words, "Are we prepared to tell lies, to spread hate and xenophobia just to win a campaign? For me that’s a step too far"

That's pathetic as she has always been remain.

[Rasta_Hibs]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36565036

EX-Army chief switches to leave! A real switch.

[grunt]

That's pathetic as she has always been remain.Not according to this article from 31 May

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/politics/refugees-must-not-be-left-to-drown-off-uk-coast-says-yorkshire-academic-1-7938724


Baroness Warsi of Dewsbury, who made history in 2010 when she became the first Muslim to serve in the Cabinet, declined to comment on the tone of the referendum campaign. However the peer, who resigned in 2014, did confirm that she was supporting Britain’s exit from the European Union.

[Rasta_Hibs]

Not according to this article from 31 May

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/politics/refugees-must-not-be-left-to-drown-off-uk-coast-says-yorkshire-academic-1-7938724

I cannot find a single quote anywhere stating she supports the leave campaign. Nor can I find any evidence of her being engaged in supporting the leave campaign throughout the debate.

To say she has switched sides is more than pushing it.

She seems to be an opportunist.

[grunt]

I cannot find a single quote anywhere stating she supports the leave campaign. Nor can I find any evidence of her being engaged in supporting the leave campaign throughout the debate.

To say she has switched sides is more than pushing it.

She seems to be an opportunist.I just gave you a link showing that she was reported as supporting BREXIT. It doesn't have a quote from her so you don't believe it. That's up to you. I can't be bothered arguing with you.

[SunshineOnLeith]

I cannot find a single quote anywhere stating she supports the leave campaign. Nor can I find any evidence of her being engaged in supporting the leave campaign throughout the debate.

To say she has switched sides is more than pushing it.

She seems to be an opportunist.

Speaking on BBC Radio 4 Today's programme Lady Warsi addressed criticism that she had never been part of the Leave campaign.
"I was making the case to leave long before Vote Leave had been established, " she said.

She said she had a discussion with senior Leave campaigners in which she set out her "optimistic" vision for Britain, which "trades freely, open to the brightest and best and rooted in its humanitarian instinct".

From here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36572894

[Rasta_Hibs]

[QUOTE=grunt;4736683]I just gave you a link showing that she was reported as supporting BREXIT. It doesn't have a quote from her so you don't believe it. That's up to you. I can't be bothered arguing with you.[/QUOTE

Yeah as I said she is an opportunist.

[CropleyWasGod]

[QUOTE=grunt;4736683]I just gave you a link showing that she was reported as supporting BREXIT. It doesn't have a quote from her so you don't believe it. That's up to you. I can't be bothered arguing with you.[/QUOTE

Yeah as I said she is an opportunist.

Or perhaps she has changed her mind. It's allowed.

Is the Army guy an opportunist as well?

[Moulin Yarns]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36565036

EX-Army chief switches to leave! A real switch.

So, he was never part of the remain campaign, just Like Baroness Warsi was never part of the leave campaign. Both have said they have switched sides, but you choose to believe one and not the other. What they both were though was supporters of the relevant campaigns.

Is that clear enough for you now?

I didn't realise you had been interview....


Because day after day, what are we hearing? The refugees are coming, the rapists are coming, the Turks are coming.

[Rasta_Hibs]

So, he was never part of the remain campaign, just Like Baroness Warsi was never part of the leave campaign. Both have said they have switched sides, but you choose to believe one and not the other. What they both were though was supporters of the relevant campaigns.

Is that clear enough for you now?

I didn't realise you had been interview....

Well someone is telling porky pies!

https://twitter.com/DanHannanMEP/status/744648993381191680?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw (https://twitter.com/DanHannanMEP/status/744648993381191680?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)

[SunshineOnLeith]

Well someone is telling porky pies!

https://twitter.com/DanHannanMEP/status/744648993381191680?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw (https://twitter.com/DanHannanMEP/status/744648993381191680?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)

I notice you're ignoring the post where I provided you with a quote from her.

[Hibbyradge]

https://www.facebook.com/UniversityofLiverpool/videos/1293361974024537/

[Moulin Yarns]

Well someone is telling porky pies!

https://twitter.com/DanHannanMEP/status/744648993381191680?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw (https://twitter.com/DanHannanMEP/status/744648993381191680?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)

OH LOOK!!! Another porky??


http://gulfnews.com/news/europe/uk/brexit/cameron-faces-brexit-grilling-as-youth-rush-to-register-1.1841876



Conservative peer Sayeeda Warsi, who backs Brexit, also attacked Farage in a joint letter with senior female human rights advocates after he suggested that women in Britain may be at risk of mass sex attacks by migrants.

“Spreading fear in this way is an age-old racist tool designed to stoke division about the latest group of immigrants arriving in Britain,” they wrote in the letter to The Guardian newspaper.

[Rasta_Hibs]

I notice you're ignoring the post where I provided you with a quote from her.

The quote Is one made in the past few hours. I'm not sure how you equate that with a historical support for Brexit.

[CapitalGreen]

The quote Is one made in the past few hours. I'm not sure how you equate that with a historical support for Brexit.

Why so precious over one person defecting to Remain? If the polls are to be believed there has been a lot more than just her switching to Remain in recent days.

[SunshineOnLeith]

Rasta's response to a brown woman switching sides: 'opportunistic', 'she was always remain', 'pathetic'.

Rasta's response to a white man switching sides: 'a real switch!'

Coincidence, I'm sure.

[marinello59]

Rasta's response to a brown woman switching sides: 'opportunistic', 'she was always remain', 'pathetic'.

Rasta's response to a white man switching sides: 'a real switch!'

Coincidence, I'm sure.

No, it's really not.

[Moulin Yarns]

The quote Is one made in the past few hours. I'm not sure how you equate that with a historical support for Brexit.

Not bad for you. :rolleyes:

You respond to the post you want to make a point with but totally ignore my post, the last post before your answer, where there is clear reference to Baroness Warsi supporting the Brexit side of the argument from a couple of weeks ago.

When remain win the referendum, where will you go to escape Britain in Europe??

[Rasta_Hibs]

Not bad for you. :rolleyes:

You respond to the post you want to make a point with but totally ignore my post, the last post before your answer, where there is clear reference to Baroness Warsi supporting the Brexit side of the argument from a couple of weeks ago.

When remain win the referendum, where will you go to escape Britain in Europe??

Geography means ill always remain in Europe!


What will you do when your undemocratic political systems fails you, who will you turn too, how will you change Europe from within?


You and a few have managed to drag this debate on hibs.net to one about race it was not mentioned before up until now.

We all have a vote and your votes sits with big multinational business corporations, political elites and undemocratic politics.

[johnbc70]

I am voting remain but Nicola Sturgeon a few weeks ago 'warns' against fear based tactics. Sure she did the same in the Scottish Referendum, Project Fear she called it?

So why today is she saying that Brexit could have 'profound consequences' for the NHS and put it at risk.

Surely some hypocrisy there, or is it OK cause it's her. Best we just ignore.

Next she will be saying pensions won't get paid if we vote leave.

[grunt]

I am voting remain but Nicola Sturgeon a few weeks ago 'warns' against fear based tactics. Sure she did the same in the Scottish Referendum, Project Fear she called it? So why today is she saying that Brexit could have 'profound consequences' for the NHS and put it at risk.

Surely some hypocrisy there, or is it OK cause it's her. Best we just ignore.If I tell my child not to put his hand in the fire because he'll get burned, is that me using fear based tactics? Or am I simply telling the truth?

[johnbc70]

If I tell my child not to put his hand in the fire because he'll get burned, is that me using fear based tactics? Or am I simply telling the truth?

Missing the point. One minute she warning against fear based tactics, the next she is telling us a vote to leave will put the NHS at risk.

Kind of like you warning your child not to put their hand in the fire and then strolling over and doing it yourself in front of them.

[grunt]

Missing the point. One minute she warning against fear based tactics, the next she is telling us a vote to leave will put the NHS at risk.I don't think it's me that's missing the point.


Kind of like you warning your child not to put their hand in the fire and then strolling over and doing it yourself in front of them.Not like that at all.

[Moulin Yarns]

Geography means ill always remain in Europe!


What will you do when your undemocratic political systems fails you, who will you turn too, how will you change Europe from within?


You and a few have managed to drag this debate on hibs.net to one about race it was not mentioned before up until now.

We all have a vote and your votes sits with big multinational business corporations, political elites and undemocratic politics.


So says the guy who blamed Muslims for just about anything wrong in the world on other threads and wants to stop migrants coming to Britain.



and this.

[URL=]http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?305423-IndyCamp-Live&p=4672530&viewfull=1#post4672530 (]http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?307822-Brexit-Campaign&p=4603235&viewfull=1#post4603235[/URL)

I think we all know who the racist is, and it isn't me

[johnbc70]

I don't think it's me that's missing the point.

Not like that at all.

So she is telling the truth then? Did you look in your crystal ball and get in your time travelling machine to confirm that? It's an opinion and is no different to those who expressed an opinion in the Indy Ref that she was super quick to dismiss as fear based tactics.

I forgot the dot net rules about speaking out against anything related to SNP, Sturgeon etc.

[grunt]

So she is telling the truth then? Did you look in your crystal ball and get in your time travelling machine to confirm that? It's an opinion and is no different to those who expressed an opinion in the Indy Ref that she was super quick to dismiss as fear based tactics. Haha, very amusing. You're right. It's an opinion. An opinion that I happen to agree with. If you think that voting Leave, and handing control of the country to Gove, Johnson and Farage is going to improve the finances available to the NHS, then I can't help you.

My point is that the whole "Project Fear" accusation means that any time someone says that something bad will happen, people such as yourself jump up and shout, "Project Fear!", as if that invalidates the comment.

My point is that sometimes, bad things WILL happen, and it is entirely possible that the person who tells you that something bad will happen may just be correct. And no amount of saying "Project Fear!" will make it incorrect.


I forgot the dot net rules about speaking out against anything related to SNP, Sturgeon etc.I'm not a fan of the SNP, I just happen to think she's right in this case.

[SunshineOnLeith]

So says the guy who blamed Muslims for just about anything wrong in the world on other threads and wants to stop migrants coming to Britain.



and this.

[URL=]http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?305423-IndyCamp-Live&p=4672530&viewfull=1#post4672530 (]http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?307822-Brexit-Campaign&p=4603235&viewfull=1#post4603235[/URL)

I think we all know who the racist is, and it isn't me

Or this, on Jason Cummings potentially going to Turkey:

http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?312567-Listen-to-me-Jason&p=4732036&highlight=#post4732036

and this

http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?308869-Paris-Gunman-Arrested&p=4678025&highlight=#post4678025

Rasta_Hibs, our friendly neighbourhood racist.




http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?308389-How-did-it-ever-get-to-this

Oh yeah, and homophobe.

[johnbc70]

Fine, but still hypocrisy on her part. In my opinion.

[grunt]

Fine, but still hypocrisy on her part. In my opinion.Fair enough. :aok:

[JeMeSouviens]

I've actually been quite torn over this vote, so I decided to categorise my thoughts into pro/anti both sides and this is what I've ended up with.


Pro Remain:

- The concept of an association of sovereign countries working together in Europe is "a good thing"
- Single market and free trade within Europe
- Freedom of movement. I think immigration is both necessary and beneficial


Anti Remain:

- The despicable treatment handed out to the Greeks
- The power of the unelected EU commission
- The "European project" aka Ever Closer Union has run far in advance of what there is popular support for in most European countries
- The Project Fear #2 tactics have been a mix of irritating and laughable
- I'd like immigration to be easier from outside the EU (I concede Leave is unlikely to make this probable but it would be possible)
- The Eurozone is a series of further disasters waiting to happen unless they co-ordinate fiscal policy to some extent


Pro Leave:

- I think a future rUK might well be happier left to their own devices (although that's really their call not mine)
- It might be just the kick in the arse the EU needs to reform before they face other *exit movements
- It could precipitate a winnable Indyref2


Anti Leave:

- The short term post-Brexit is most likely an unfettered bunch of neo-con Tories
- Same side as racist *******s like Farage
- It will be difficult (impossible?) to have any sensible immigration policy going forward as "shut the gates" will be seen as the popular will. This has potentially grim long term implications
- Future Indy Scotland will probably be in the EU, it makes things much more straightforward if rUK is too.


Based on all that I'm (a fairly weak) Remain. I don't really like the EU's current setup and I think there is next to no chance of reform. I think it would be possible to build a better future outside the EU but I think it's most likely the UK would actually end up more right wing, isolationist and hung up on its fading glory than ever.

Sigh.

[JeMeSouviens]

Fine, but still hypocrisy on her part. In my opinion.

I think you've got a point in that what she said is negative campaigning any way you look at it.

However, what she actually said was:


"I wish that people like Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage just once could acknowledge the contribution migrant workers make to our NHS, rather than demonising them at every turn.
"The idea that the NHS could fall into the hands of people to the right of George Osborne and Jeremy Hunt fills me with horror."

So I think it's not so much the consequences of being outside the EU as the consequences of what's about to happen inside a post-Brexit Tory party. Which is actually quite predictable (and imo scary).

[Rasta_Hibs]

Or this, on Jason Cummings potentially going to Turkey:

http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?312567-Listen-to-me-Jason&p=4732036&highlight=#post4732036

and this

http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?308869-Paris-Gunman-Arrested&p=4678025&highlight=#post4678025

Rasta_Hibs, our friendly neighbourhood racist.




http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?308389-How-did-it-ever-get-to-this

Oh yeah, and homophobe.

Are you saying blondes don't get harassed in Turkey?

If so your not living In the real world.

[Moulin Yarns]

Religious communities across Scotland have urged both the Holyrood and Westminster governments to do more to help refugees.
They said the UK must "take a fairer proportion of refugees wherever there is human need, and... develop safe and legal routes to the UK for those fleeing terror and war."

Rasta Hibs has offered to provide homes for them all :wink:

[CropleyWasGod]

Are you saying blondes don't get harassed in Turkey?

If so your not living In the real world.

Not sure of the point you're trying to make.

Blondes get harrassed in this country.

Blondes, brunettes, redheads.... of all genders.... get raped, assaulted, murdered in this country.

Does that mean that JC shouldn't sign for anybody?

:cb

[SunshineOnLeith]

Rasta Hibs has offered to provide homes for them all :wink:

That's not surprising, after all "right wing thinking people are very tolerant and have tolerated many different cultures in our country"

http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?308869-Paris-Gunman-Arrested&p=4628628&highlight=#post4628628

[Hibrandenburg]

Are you saying blondes don't get harassed in Turkey?

If so your not living In the real world.

Of course they do, they've also got an element of bams. Rasta_Besiktas springs to mind.

[Rasta_Hibs]

Not sure of the point you're trying to make.

Blondes get harrassed in this country.

Blondes, brunettes, redheads.... of all genders.... get raped, assaulted, murdered in this country.

Does that mean that JC shouldn't sign for anybody?

:cb

Correct! Make him a life long Hibee!

[degenerated]

Leave campaign in Leith was nasty Yesterday from a tweet I saw. Something said about Jo Cox. Not even supposed to be campaign on Saturday
If it was the one at Newkirkgate by grass roots out then it was manned by ukip and bnp. It was the bnp regional organiser, Kenny MacDonald, that was abusing folk.
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160620/e90c9435c25a3b307682f8183bbca6d8.jpg

Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk

[Hibbyradge]

This very well argued piece was written by someone called Alan Renwick who is the Deputy Director of the Constitution Unit at University College London.

Why I will vote to remain in the EU

The polls suggest a trend towards a vote to leave the EU. As a political scientist, I generally try to stay out of the fray: my job is to offer impartial analysis. On this issue, however, I see the stakes as too high not to get involved. So here are the main reasons I think our lives will be much better if we vote Remain. I hope they might be a little helpful for those of you who are wavering or will be trying to persuade waverers over the coming days!

1. Most important is the big picture: We are better people if we approach the world in a spirit of cooperation and openness. In our personal lives, we get more from life if we give more – if we reach out to others in generosity and love. Similarly, in our dealings with the world, we get on better by working together in pursuit of shared goals. The Leave people talk endlessly about ‘control’. But grown-ups are not obsessed with control: we know that life is about a bit of give and take. Outers sometimes say leaving the EU would open us up to a bigger world. But then they hark back to Empire – back to an outmoded image of the world where we think ourselves in control. In any case, all our friends around the world want us to stay in the EU: they know we can all work together better that way.

So let’s throw off the small-minded carping from the Leave side. Rather, let’s embrace togetherness and take joy in being part of an amazing (flawed, but highly successful) shared project that seeks to promote peace, prosperity, and the freedom to pursue what each of us can be.

2. The hard-nosed stuff matters too, and the vast majority of economists think we are better off in than out. Forecasts are always uncertain, but the main economic effect of leaving the EU is really very straightforward. If we leave the single market (as the Leave people want), we will harm the terms on which we trade with the EU: a free trade deal involves much less than a single market. Harm to the terms of trade means less trade. That means that some people will lose their jobs, while some others will see their real wages decline. It means less tax revenue and therefore less money to pay for public services.

Some people say we will compensate for that through trade deals with other countries. But trade experts disagree with that. If we left the EU, we would, before we could think about any new trade deals, face a huge task of renegotiating all the existing trade deals that EU membership gives us. And the UK currently has no trade negotiators – we haven’t needed any as EU members. So new trade deals will not come quickly. In any case, the EU is and will remain by far our biggest trading partner.

Leave people also claim we could make ourselves richer by cutting red tape. But economists estimate that the potential gains are too small to outweigh the loss in trade. Anyway, cutting red tape means, for the most part, diluting workers’ rights and environmental protections – both of which would be steps backwards. And leaving would also create fresh red tape for anyone trading with the EU, employing someone from the EU, or travelling to the EU.

3. Democracy in the EU is not perfect, but it is much better than it was and better than the alternative on offer. Leave people say the EU is undemocratic and unreformable. Both claims are false. Decision-making power rests with elected bodies: the European Parliament (elected directly by voters) and the Council of Ministers (comprising representatives from the elected governments of the 28 member states). The European Commission has significant powers too, but it is not some unaccountable hegemon. It is appointed – and can be dismissed – by the elected bodies. Its proposals go through only if the elected bodies agree to them.

EU democracy is certainly not perfect. Indeed, you cannot have a perfect democracy across 28 countries with separate media systems and multiple languages: shared political conversation will always be difficult. But the alternative is not the Leave campaign’s fantasy world in which we make all the decisions ourselves. If we left the EU, we would still be deeply influenced by the decisions made in it. Many of us worry about the effects that a Trump victory in the United States would have here and around the world. But we have way more interactions with the EU than with the US and would therefore be vastly more affected by its decisions, whatever future relationship we negotiated. We are better off being part of the democratic processes that make those decisions than excluding ourselves from them.

In other words: Yes, folks, cooperating with others can be frustrating at times. But going off in a sulk isn’t going to help. You hopefully learnt that when you were 5.

4. The rhetoric on immigration is divisive and misleading. If the UK votes to leave the EU, it will primarily be because of concerns about immigration. That would be very disappointing. The economic analyses show that the UK economy benefits from immigration. Immigrants do not take British workers’ jobs: rather, they expand the number of jobs available. There is no clear evidence that immigration reduces wages – and, if there is an effect, it can be countered with the minimum wage and other measures. EU immigrants are not a drain on the public purse: the ratio between what they put in and what they take out is better than for UK natives.

Anyway, the idea that leaving the EU would produce a big fall in immigration is wrong. Most immigration is from outside the EU. Leave people say EU membership distorts immigration flows, but it would be very odd if EU migrants did not make up a big chunk of the total, given that the EU is right next door to us. The idea that Turkey is about to join the EU and flood the labour market is a huge con: Turkey will not join for a very long time, if ever – and the UK has a veto.

Clearly, there can be problems caused by large, rapid migration flows. But, given all the benefits from such flows, the solutions lie in tackling housing shortages, improving schooling and other public services, and promoting social integration.

Finally, let us celebrate the cultural enrichment that a diverse population brings when people have the confidence to talk with and learn from each other. Let us work to build bridges, not spin a divisive rhetoric – or make a divisive decision next week – that sets integration back.

[Holmesdale Hibs]

Regarding Turkey. They will never get into the EU, it's a moot point.

They will have to sort out their human right abuses - won't happen
Get rid of the Death Penalty - won't happen
Get uninamous agreement for them to join - will never happen in a million years due to Greece blocking them at every turn.

Turkey will never join the EU. I wouldn't even worry about it.

EDIT, just seen the above Guardian link.

J

These are all reasons why Turkey shouldn't join the EU, so we're in agreement there. But you just can't trust EU politicians to use these arguments rationally. The prospect of Romania joining would have been dismissed 10 years ago, as would the prospect of Greece joining 20 years ago. You just don't know.

As for the guardian link, I'm sure it's the usual - well written, biased, and with a slightly smug and slef-righteous undertone. There's been a few of them posted on here, I tend to agree with about 40-45% of it, which is why I'm voting Brexit.

[Holmesdale Hibs]

My opinion of EU expansion is probably biased. I've got a few Turkish mates whose life's would be made a hell of a lot easier if Turkey were to join. That said even they think that's a bad idea so long as Turkey is moving backwards and that's how they view the country under Erdogan.

The young people in the neighbouring countries to Turkey frequently take short breaks there because they can let their hair down a bit more than at home and I think that's a positive because the knock-on effect the EU would have on Turkey could in turn have a knock-on effect of their neighbours. In other words I'm for eastern expansion providing the requirements to join are met.

Think we're quite close to agreement and no point in arguing about semantics. Cheers for answering the question. I hope your mates don't have too much hassle with their visas - I've heard some horror stories and however the vote goes I think we need to improve the system.

[SunshineOnLeith]

The prospect of Romania joining would have been dismissed 10 years ago

Romania joined the EU 9 years ago, under a treaty signed 11 years ago.


as would the prospect of Greece joining 20 years ago.

Greece joined the EU 35 years ago.

[Hibbyradge]

Everyone knows the fallacy of the £350m slogan on the Brexit bus, but it seems that there no end to the lies that lot will tell.

Nissan is taking legal action against the Leave campaign to "prevent future "false statements and misrepresentations" appearing in Leave campaign literature".

Toyota are considering the same course of action and Unilever plan to complain to the Electoral Commission.

Shameless liars.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36573766

[Hibernia&Alba]

I think you'll have unanimous agreement about Redwood. I now have images of him miming the welsh national anthem in my head, well worth a google if you haven't seen it.

I think the concern about Turkey joining is fair enough though. Would you be in favour of further expansion, including Turkey? If so, fair enough but genuinely out of interest, why? If you vote for Remain, it's not a vote for the status quo, it's a bit to give politicians the freedom to change the EU as they see fit. Folk, rightly in my opinion, don't trust politicians to do this.

Absolutely nothing wrong with an open debate about Turkey's membership, nor the potential membership of any other nation, but it's how the debate is conducted; and, IMO (and the opinion of many others) some of the campaign material put out by the Vote Leave camp has the strong whiff off intolerance: the Turkey poster and the new 'Breaking Point' poster, for example.

[Colr]

Pritti Patel on yet again saying the EU gives UK workers too many rights making us uncompetitive.

This is a long running theme for her. In "Brittania Unchained" she said UK workers need to emulate the conditions of Indian workers to complete.

Some would say that we shouldn't be importing goods from countries until they treat workers fairly!!

[Hibernia&Alba]

Pritti Patel on yet again saying the EU gives UK workers too many rights making us uncompetitive.

This is a long running theme for her. In "Brittania Unchained" she said UK workers need to emulate the conditions of Indian workers to complete.

Some would say that we shouldn't be importing goods from countries until they treat workers fairly!!

Yes, I'm desperate to compete with Indian workers for wages and employment rights. We've got it too good and should be falling over ourselves to leave.

[High-On-Hibs]

So much crap and mud slinging from both sides.

The reality is, neither side has much of a clue what will happen over the next 5-10 years if we remain or leave.

My prediction is if we remain, the Conservatives will continue to blame their cuts to public funding on migrants and the English public will continue to lap up the rhetoric until it leads to another EU referendum.

If we leave, Boris Johnson will more than likely replace David Cameron as PM. Public sector cuts will become increasingly steeper and the Conservatives will revert back to blaming the poor and the "work shy".

Neither seems all that appealing to me, which is why I won't be voting at all.

[Hibrandenburg]

So much crap and mud slinging from both sides.

The reality is, neither side has much of a clue what will happen over the next 5-10 years if we remain or leave.

My prediction is if we remain, the Conservatives will continue to blame their cuts to public funding on migrants and the English public will continue to lap up the rhetoric until it leads to another EU referendum.

If we leave, Boris Johnson will more than likely replace David Cameron as PM. Public sector cuts will become increasingly steeper and the Conservatives will revert back to blaming the poor and the "work shy".

Neither seems all that appealing to me, which is why I won't be voting at all.

Agreed apart from the last bit. Once xenophobia takes root and becomes acceptable then it's a downward spiral from then on in. Stopping foreigners is the start, once they've done that they then need to blame those already here and that's when it gets nasty.

[High-On-Hibs]

Agreed apart from the last bit. Once xenophobia takes root and becomes acceptable then it's a downward spiral from then on in. Stopping foreigners is the start, once they've done that they then need to blame those already here and that's when it gets nasty.

I could see that occurring in a situation where Nigel Farage worms his way into power. But I just can't see that happening any time soon. Although Brexit would certainly give a boost to someone of his "nature".

[grunt]

Although Brexit would certainly give a boost to someone of his "nature".Seems that you've just found a good reason to use your vote.

[High-On-Hibs]

Seems that you've just found a good reason to use your vote.

Perhaps, but I could come up with good reasons to vote in the other direction also.

But as I say, the utter crap coming from both sides has put me off caring really.

[Holmesdale Hibs]

Absolutely nothing wrong with an open debate about Turkey's membership, nor the potential membership of any other nation, but it's how the debate is conducted; and, IMO (and the opinion of many others) some of the campaign material put out by the Vote Leave camp has the strong whiff off intolerance: the Turkey poster and the new 'Breaking Point' poster, for example.

Haven't seen the poster but yes, it sounds like it has some truth in it while also being a bit distasteful. Like most arguments from either side, if you divide by 10 then you have an accurate statement.

[Danderhall Hibs]

That Robert Peston on ITN is nippy eh?

[HiBremian]

http://youtu.be/USTypBKEd8Y

Not sure if already posted, but a sober and, ahem, grown up analysis of the sovereignty issue here.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

If it was the one at Newkirkgate by grass roots out then it was manned by ukip and bnp. It was the bnp regional organiser, Kenny MacDonald, that was abusing folk.
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160620/e90c9435c25a3b307682f8183bbca6d8.jpg

Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk

Wow! frightening scenes.

[RyeSloan]

Perhaps, but I could come up with good reasons to vote in the other direction also. But as I say, the utter crap coming from both sides has put me off caring really.


Probably about right....I said a few pages ago that remain or leave it probably won't make much difference. If this campaign has shown me anything it's that the vast majority of politicians from both sides have no frigging clue about what would make a prosperous, productive country that would improve the living standards of us all.

[Hibrandenburg]

Probably about right....I said a few pages ago that remain or leave it probably won't make much difference. If this campaign has shown me anything it's that the vast majority of politicians from both sides have no frigging clue about what would make a prosperous, productive country that would improve the living standards of us all.

Then stop listening to the politicians and listen to the experts.

[PeeJay]

Perhaps, but I could come up with good reasons to vote in the other direction also.

But as I say, the utter crap coming from both sides has put me off caring really.

There are always reasons "good" and "bad" on both sides of any voting option. Doesn't it come down to what an individual believes at the end of the day - his/her political convictions/beliefs/wishes/hopes - it's about commitment to something surely?

[Bristolhibby]

These are all reasons why Turkey shouldn't join the EU, so we're in agreement there. But you just can't trust EU politicians to use these arguments rationally. The prospect of Romania joining would have been dismissed 10 years ago, as would the prospect of Greece joining 20 years ago. You just don't know.

As for the guardian link, I'm sure it's the usual - well written, biased, and with a slightly smug and slef-righteous undertone. There's been a few of them posted on here, I tend to agree with about 40-45% of it, which is why I'm voting Brexit.

No but I can trust the Greeks to block Turkey at every move.

(Also as an aside, I do not believe that any British government would accept Turkey joining).

So in that respect, in my head of debates, that issue is closed. It's a non-issue. Just noise to scare people with. And we can block them at any point. That's the key thing to remember.

Just remembered the real kicker for Turkey.
They occupy half of the country of a member state (Cyprus). It would literally take the reunification of Cyprus to allow Turkey to join. Will NEVER happen.

J

[PeeJay]

No but I can trust the Greeks to block Turkey at every move.



This surely does not have to be the case in perpetuity as you suggest? The European ideal is at odds with this stance, surely? Naturally, Turkey - in its present political complexion - will not gather sufficient support to have it accepted into the EU, but circumstances do change (I live in Germany) - a democratic Turkey would be a bonus for the EU, one day perhaps? Greece wasn't always a democratic state either ...

[The_Todd]

No but I can trust the Greeks to block Turkey at every move.

(Also as an aside, I do not believe that any British government would accept Turkey joining).

So in that respect, in my head of debates, that issue is closed. It's a non-issue. Just noise to scare people with. And we can block them at any point. That's the key thing to remember.

Just remembered the real kicker for Turkey.
They occupy half of the country of a member state (Cyprus). It would literally take the reunification of Cyprus to allow Turkey to join. Will NEVER happen.

J

The Greeks are supporting Turkeys membership - or at least they were, unless that position has changed.

[Hibbyradge]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36582026

Are people really going to ignore these warnings?

If you're going abroad this summer, it must be tempting to buy your currency before 10.00pm on Thursday!

I'm spending a month in Australia in December which is already an expensive country so I'm cacking it.

[lyonhibs]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ero445tN598

Worrying stuff that not 1 independent, reputable report says that Britain will be "even the same" after Brexit, or at least Kate Hoey can't quote one. Can anyone?

How Leave supporters can't see why that's perhaps a tad perturbing absolutely escapes me.

[Bristolhibby]

The Greeks are supporting Turkeys membership - or at least they were, unless that position has changed.

And Cyprus?

[Rasta_Hibs]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36582026

Are people really going to ignore these warnings?

If you're going abroad this summer, it must be tempting to buy your currency before 10.00pm on Thursday!

I'm spending a month in Australia in December which is already an expensive country so I'm cacking it.

I think it's the people who are giving the warnings that is the problem.

George Soros is very murky and has links to many conflicts round the world.

There are loads of links exposing George Soros but here is one.

http://selwynduke.typepad.com/selwyndukecom/george-soros-the-most-evi.html

[NYHibby]

I think it's the people who are giving the warnings that is the problem.

George Soros is very murky and has links to many conflicts round the world.

There are loads of links exposing George Soros but here is one.

http://selwynduke.typepad.com/selwyndukecom/george-soros-the-most-evi.html

Argumentum ad hominem

Soros was only stating the obvious which has already played out. You can see how the pound decreased over the first half of June when leave was closing the gap and its subsequent dramatic rebound as it has become clear that remain is the most likely outcome.

[Moulin Yarns]

I think it's the people who are giving the warnings that is the problem.

George Soros is very murky and has links to many conflicts round the world.

There are loads of links exposing George Soros but here is one.

http://selwynduke.typepad.com/selwyndukecom/george-soros-the-most-evi.html

And there are even more links exposing Selwyn Duke as "a wingnut's wingnut" and a "weapons-grade moron"



[URL=]http://www.patheos.com/blogs/dispatches/2014/05/26/selwyn-duke-is-an-idiot/ (]http://americanloons.blogspot.co.uk/2016/01/1568-selwyn-duke.html[/URL)

He doesn't sound like the kind of guy who is qualified to pass comment on anything of importance.

Now, if only there was someone here who could give a balanced opinion we would be laughing.

[CallumLaidlaw]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36582026

Are people really going to ignore these warnings?

If you're going abroad this summer, it must be tempting to buy your currency before 10.00pm on Thursday!

I'm spending a month in Australia in December which is already an expensive country so I'm cacking it.

Funnily enough, I'm waiting till AFTER Thursday to buy my Euros. The pound has strengthened from 1.239 to 1.271 since last Friday, and now that a remain vote looks fairly likely, it will take a bigger jump on Friday. If I felt it was going to go the other way, then yeah, I'd be buying my Euros now.

[NYHibby]

Funnily enough, I'm waiting till AFTER Thursday to buy my Euros. The pound has strengthened from 1.239 to 1.271 since last Friday, and now that a remain vote looks fairly likely, it will take a bigger jump on Friday. If I felt it was going to go the other way, then yeah, I'd be buying my Euros now.

I don't want to give financial advice, but there is a small chance that by Thursday the market will have fully priced in a remain vote and that on Friday we will have a buy the rumour and sell the news situation.

I personally don't think that is likely. Unless we get polls tomorrow with meaningful leads for remain (say 4%+), I think a certain percentage chance of a leave vote will still be factored in which will then be "corrected" on Friday.

Personally I transferred several hundred pounds to US dollars yesterday afternoon as a bit of a hedge. Otherwise waiting to see. But my transfers are also based on my view of the value of the US stock market rather than just what the pound is doing. I do most of my investing in dollars in the US.

[Hibrandenburg]

Most of my savings are in sterling but my earnings are in euro so it pretty much balances out and I intend to keep it that way. When the euro strengthens I top up the UK pot and use that when vice versa.

[CallumLaidlaw]

I don't want to give financial advise, but there is a small chance that by Thursday the market will have fully priced in a remain vote and that on Friday we will have a buy the rumour and sell the news situation.

I personally don't think that is likely. Unless we get polls tomorrow with meaningful lead for remain (say 4%+) I think a certain percentage change of a leave vote will still be factored in which will then be "corrected" on Friday.

Personally I transferred several hundred pounds to US dollars yesterday afternoon as a bit of a hedge. Otherwise waiting to see. But my transfers are also based on my view of the value of the US stock market rather than just what the pound is doing. I do most of my investing in dollars in the US.

Will just have to keep an eye on it over the next couple of days and see how the polls and exchange rate looks. Changing £1500 so could make a difference of around 100 euros depending on the swing.

[The_Todd]

And Cyprus?

It's a good question, Cyprus will no doubt be a huge stumbling block and Turkey have already indicated they've rather stay out of the EU than rush to an unsatisfactory conclusion to the Cyprus question (well, unsatisfactory to them).

Anyway out of 35 chapters to be fully signed into to gain EU accession, they've reached 1. Turkey joining the EU is a long way off despite work being going on for over a decade to get there (and should indicate how long it might take an iScotland to join from outside). Despite the Brexiteers best scaremongering we're years away from Turkey joining, when they do join it'll only be when they've satisfied all the prerequisites and even then every other member state has a veto (including us, and certainly Cyprus).

[Bristolhibby]

It's a good question, Cyprus will no doubt be a huge stumbling block and Turkey have already indicated they've rather stay out of the EU than rush to an unsatisfactory conclusion to the Cyprus question (well, unsatisfactory to them).

Anyway out of 35 chapters to be fully signed into to gain EU accession, they've reached 1. Turkey joining the EU is a long way off despite work being going on for over a decade to get there (and should indicate how long it might take an iScotland to join from outside). Despite the Brexiteers best scaremongering we're years away from Turkey joining, when they do join it'll only be when they've satisfied all the prerequisites and even then every other member state has a veto (including us, and certainly Cyprus).

Regarding iScotland, I presume our ascendancy (post Brexit) or continuation (Post Remain) would be seamless as we alread satisfy all criteria by being existing members?

J

[Rasta_Hibs]

And there are even more links exposing Selwyn Duke as "a wingnut's wingnut" and a "weapons-grade moron"

http://americanloons.blogspot.co.uk/2016/01/1568-selwyn-duke.html

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/dispatches/2014/05/26/selwyn-duke-is-an-idiot/

He doesn't sound like the kind of guy who is qualified to pass comment on anything of importance.

Now, if only there was someone here who could give a balanced opinion we would be laughing.

Me but yir no listening! haha

[Moulin Yarns]

Me but yir no listening! haha

Thankfully common sense prevails and nobody is listening to you.

[JeMeSouviens]

Argumentum ad hominem

Soros was only stating the obvious which has already played out. You can see how the pound decreased over the first half of June when leave was closing the gap and its subsequent dramatic rebound as it has become clear that remain is the most likely outcome.

True but that's based on uncertainty rather than a rational analysis of a hypothetical post-Brexit economic scenario. If it's Brexit on Friday then a sell off on the markets is a given but the long term picture is far harder (impossible) to get a good handle on. Economic forecasting is a mug's game at the best of times.

[Rasta_Hibs]

Thankfully common sense prevails and nobody is listening to you.

Haha probably for the best!

[JeMeSouviens]

And Cyprus?

There are ongoing Cyprus reunification talks making pretty good progress, although you would imagine it won't be sorted overnight.

Personally I hope Turkey cleans up its human rights act and makes it into the EU asap.


15/05/2016-Joint Statement on the first anniversary of the talks between the Turkish Cypriot leader Mr. Mustafa Akıncı and the Greek Cypriot leader Mr. Nicos Anastasiades.
EBE 2016 Joint Statement Anniversary
Today marks the first anniversary of our talks as the two Leaders as well as our commitment to work tirelessly to reach a comprehensive settlement of the Cyprus question on the basis of the Joint Statement of February 2014.
This has been a year of intensive negotiations and we, as the two Leaders, would like to express our satisfaction with the essential progress that has been achieved to date. Although there are still difficulties and differences, we are determined to show the necessary will and courage to overcome the remaining outstanding issues.
During the past year, while taking into account the concerns of our own community, we have also done our utmost to show respect to the rights of the other. Our common goal is a win-win solution that will take into account concerns and rights of all in a future united Cyprus.
We would like to recall our joint belief that a just and lasting settlement will not only bring peace and prosperity to Cyprus but will also set a good example and contribute to stability and cooperation in the region.
We also would like to underline our commitment to intensify our efforts in the coming months with the aim of reaching a comprehensive settlement agreement within 2016.


http://162.243.184.203/2016/05/15/joint-statement-on-the-first-anniversary-of-the-talks-between-the-turkish-cypriot-leader-mr-mustafa-akinci-and-the-greek-cypriot-leader-mr-nicos-anastasiades/

[JeMeSouviens]

Regarding iScotland, I presume our ascendancy (post Brexit) or continuation (Post Remain) would be seamless as we alread satisfy all criteria by being existing members?

J

Presuming you mean accession then yes, I would expect so.

[NYHibby]

It's a good question, Cyprus will no doubt be a huge stumbling block and Turkey have already indicated they've rather stay out of the EU than rush to an unsatisfactory conclusion to the Cyprus question (well, unsatisfactory to them).

Anyway out of 35 chapters to be fully signed into to gain EU accession, they've reached 1. Turkey joining the EU is a long way off despite work being going on for over a decade to get there (and should indicate how long it might take an iScotland to join from outside). Despite the Brexiteers best scaremongering we're years away from Turkey joining, when they do join it'll only be when they've satisfied all the prerequisites and even then every other member state has a veto (including us, and certainly Cyprus).

I struggle to see how Turkey potentially joining the EU is an argument in favour of exiting. It can be viewed the other way around though.

If you are concerned about Turkey joining the EU affecting the UK, staying in the EU may actually be the best course of action rather than leaving it. As you said, inside the EU we would have a veto. I know this is counterintuitive, but if anyone wants to use Turkey joining the EU to scaremonger it should instead be the remainers rather than the exiters.

If we were outside the EU but a member of EFTA (aka Norway), we would have no say in Turkey joining the EU and would be forced to share the four freedoms with the Turks, including freedom of movement. If you are scared of Turkey, this is clearly a worse option than staying in.

(In this scenario, we would technically have a say in Turkey joining the EEA after it joined the EU, but my understanding is that the EEA provisionally applies while that process is going on, see Croatia which is still in this process. Thus we would not have a veto as a EFTA member as the provisions of the EEA would apply anyway).

One step further removed from the EU where the UK has some trade agreement with the EU is where the uncertainty provides room for scaremongers. One could argue that in order to reach such an agreement, the U.K. would have to agree to enough of the terms of the common market that we would be forced into entering into arrangements which people would not want to entered into with Turkey, be it movement of goods or people.

Thus the scaremongering argument about Turkey should be that if we exit the EU, we will be forced into unrestricted movement of people and goods from Turkey, but that will not take place if we remain in the EU. Thus if you are concerned about Turkish membership in the EU, vote remain.