It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

UK Vote on EU exit to be Summer 2016

page: 4
8
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 01:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: eletheia

originally posted by: moniker
People move to where the jobs are. Make the UK unattractive for jobs, and people will leave. Including some Britons. The fact that people want to move to the UK at this point in time is a sign of strength, but take that ability away and it spells trouble.


The UK has *unemployment,* so how are they moving to where the

jobs are?


The UK has unemployment because the unemployed ones in the UK doesn't have the skills that UK employers want.

Bricklayers? There are no unemployed UK bricklayers. Gas engineers? Likewise. IT engineers? Same. Architects? Haven't heard of an unemployed one in decades.

Then there are the farm workers. Few UK people would like to work at NMW doing heavy work in farms, but at the same time we want our cheap and good food. Yes, the farmers could pay £15 an hour and employ UK workers. The trouble is - very few consumers would want to pay what the produce would then cost in the grocery stores. A few UK farmers manage to do it, charging high prices, but they target the organic, health-concious segment that is quite small.



The fact that people want to move to the UK is that the UK has

a very attractive *benefit* system.... I have watched live interviews

of the Calais immigrants on news casts, and without exception that

comes out in the interview.


The Calais folks are different. They have nothing to do with the EU and they are going after hearsay, whether true or not. The main reasons I've heard is that it is easy to get 'papers' in the UK and easy to get a job - any kind. They don't want to apply in France because it takes 18 months there and in the end the French reject 70% of all applications. The UK is far more certain. In light of that, perhaps we should invite some French bureaucrats to settle in the UK? We are apparently not good enough at making it hard for people.
edit on 10/2/2016 by moniker because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 01:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: eletheia

originally posted by: moniker

originally posted by: eletheia
The EU's own auditors have failed to give it a clean bill of health for 19yrs


I'm not sure it has ever been 19 years in a row. The EU auditors have signed off the accounts every year since 2007. Furthermore, the total EU budget is only 2.25% of the sum of all the national budgets, or around 1% of the EU GDP whereas the UK budget is in excess of 40% of the UK GDP.



I provided a link from many that I found confirming the information

I posted , there are very many other sites confirming this same

information. Check them out ... IF and as you started your post with >>>>

*I'm not sure*.... and disagreed with info provided.



I just tend to trust the official information from the EU auditors more than hearsay and second-hand information.
edit on 10/2/2016 by moniker because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 06:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: moniker

originally posted by: 83Liberty

originally posted by: moniker

originally posted by: 83Liberty
a reply to: stinkelbaum

I'm not advocating having similar deals to Norway or Switzerland, they have negotiated their own deal to suit them.
I think we are big enough and strong enough to have our own deal.


Norway has a straight EEA membership agreement, with defined contributions to the EU purse. Switzerland has a complex maze of interlocking, individual agreements. And they, too, have defined contributions to the EU purse. If Switzerland is trying to negotiate or get out of one of them, the EU has the right to terminate all of them.

Neither is quite suitable for Norway and Switzerland.


Norway signed THEIR agreement in 1992. Switzerland signed THEIR agreement in 1972.

A lot has changed since then and it doesn't matter what other countries have. We will negotiate our own deal.
Why can't you understand that?


Why can't the proponents of a brexit understand that, as they continuously keep bringing up Norway and Switzerland as the fine examples to follow? Neither would work for the UK and until there is a credible alternative I'm not convinced.

Furthermore, it takes two to negotiate, and if the EU is not interested in negotiating on our terms (we tend to demand things rather than arriving at a compromise that suits both parties), there will be no deal whatsoever.


They don't continuously keep bringing up Norway and Switzerland as fine examples to follow, they bring them up because they are examples that you don't have to be in a full political union to trade with the EU. I agree they are not the best examples to follow because they have some major consequences. I therefore gave you Mexico as an example, because they too have a free trade with the EU with a lot less baggage.

The UK has more than double the GDP of Mexico and we are also right next door to the EU so it would be logical to have a free trade deal too. I personally think we wouldn't even need to ask for it, as the car manufacturers in Germany and the wine producers in France, for example, will be demanding it to Angela Merkel and François Hollande. The tariff rate for motor vehicles is 10% and wine is 32% by the way.



posted on Feb, 17 2016 @ 03:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: 83Liberty
The UK has more than double the GDP of Mexico and we are also right next door to the EU so it would be logical to have a free trade deal too. I personally think we wouldn't even need to ask for it, as the car manufacturers in Germany and the wine producers in France, for example, will be demanding it to Angela Merkel and François Hollande. The tariff rate for motor vehicles is 10% and wine is 32% by the way.


Hang on... the UK imports wine from France and cars from Germany. The manufacturers can complain to Merkel and Hollande however much they want, but they can't do anything about any tariffs. Those countries obviously want to export as much as they can, so there are no export levies. The UK, however, might well decide to impose import levies on those products to protect British wine makers (of which there is a small but increasing number) and car manufacturers.

The EU, however, have standard levies on imports. Therefore, cars and other items would become more expensive when sold to the EU, and the UK would probably slap on the same tariffs on imports for reciprocity, making everything more expensive for everybody for no good reason.



posted on Feb, 17 2016 @ 04:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: moniker
The EU, however, have standard levies on imports. Therefore, cars and other items would become more expensive when sold to the EU, and the UK would probably slap on the same tariffs on imports for reciprocity, making everything more expensive for everybody for no good reason


And that's why we will sign a free-trade agreement

edit on 83113bAmerica/ChicagoWed, 17 Feb 2016 16:13:09 -06002916 by 83Liberty because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics
 
8
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join