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 Referendum 23 June 2016 - Will it be an EU BREXIT or Not?

page: 12
32
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 04:08 AM
link   
a reply to: anxiouswens

We hear about the economic aspects because that is the most important side to it. Sovereignty is of course an issue but if leaving means our standard of living crashes (distinct possibility), most won't be in favour.

As i said earlier in this thread, i could be persuaded to leave but i would want to see concrete proof of deals waiting to be signed, rather than vague assurances that we will thrive and everything will be ok.

This is too important for any side in this argument to be anything other than honest. I keep saying both sides because although i am currently an In voter, i don't believe my side is being honest either!




posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 04:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Flavian it's no surprise we hear about the economic impacts seeing as the last 2 general elections have been won and lost on the issue of the economy. It's clearly an important issue to British voters



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 04:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
a reply to: Flavian it's no surprise we hear about the economic impacts seeing as the last 2 general elections have been won and lost on the issue of the economy. It's clearly an important issue to British voters



I would say the economy is what a country is built on.

A healthy economy = happy people and stable country.



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 06:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewokI would say the economy is what a country is built on. A healthy economy = happy people and stable country.


I'm not entirely convinced that "economy" is all that matters, but it's an important factor, we agree.

Now, for the facts. Currently, while the UK is still a member of the EU, the UK economy is doing quite good. So, unless you are spellbound by the desire to change for the sake of change itself - why on Earth would you change the winning team?

Also, what is a booming economy to Joe Average if he does not get to benefit from it? Most Brits now have lower life standards than they had before. Is that the EU's fault? Of course it is not: your economy is doing fine, after all! Nope, that's due to your blessed "sovereignty". The Brits held (very sovereign) national elections and mainly voted Conservative. There are no EU Laws against national elections, you Brits did that all by yourselves.

Now, as we all know, Conservatives and Labour both run some kind of lottery system. We all have to pay for our lottery tickets (taxes) and sometimes we might win something in return. The Conservatives charge less per ticket. But where Labours lottery payed back a tenner or perhaps fifty quid sometimes - to many - the Conservative lottery did away with that. Only af few get (very) rich. Most will simply get nothing, as we all know. That's what your sovereignty brought you.

You should focus on the problem, not on a scape-goat. The problem is the sovereignity of the Brits, that's what brought poverty and illness back to Joe Average. The economy is booming, mostly because you ARE part of the EU.

But somehow the flawed logic of the brexiters dictates that you should do away with what does you good (the EU) and get more of what hurts you (Conservatism)..



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 03:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: anxiouswens
But the financial benefits is all we really hear about from the REMAIN Campaign made up of the multi millionaires like Richard Branson who are really the only individuals to see these financial benefits so they can buy themselves their own tropical island. They are bothered they wont have cheap labour and will have to start paying the people they rely on proper wages.



Not quite all!! Peter Hargreaves wants out

From an interview>>>>


When it comes to City know how there are few bigger giants than
Peter Hargreaves. Worth an estimated 2 billion from the firm he
founded in his bedroom in 1981, Hargreaves Lansdown. He is a man who
sees through political cant for a living, which is one reason he has come out
firmly behind the leave campaign.

We keep hearing from the 'remain lobby' that business wants us to stay in the
EU, and the City will collapse if we leave. But the idea that "business" speaks
as one and any view is dangerous propaganda Many of our most forward
thinking entrepreneurs firmly want to leave. Mr Hargreaves is the only man to
ever start a FTSE 100 company without borrowing a penny.

Yesterday Mr Hargreaves with Sir James Dyson (we all know what a Dyson is?)
joined in an article and laid out in depth their reasoning. James Dyson is
passionate about the extra growth and prosperity that will come if we leave
Like most of the best business leaders, he is withering about politicians, dismissing
much of the froth around David Cameron's so called deal and the posturing
afterwards as neither considered or valuable. It represents nothing more than
political jockeying.

As he puts it political and commercial leaders are invariably nothing more than
meeting-attending bureaucrats. The more important their titles, the more out of
touch with the populous and the world in general.
Of the 200 business leaders who signed a letter backing the 'Remain' campaign only
36 were from FTSE 100 companies .... so 64 companies (two thirds) didn't sign.
From Mr Hargreaves perspective as an entrepreneur the fundamental problem with
the EU is that "Its red tape and regulations have stifled enterprise in The UK not
helped.

For Mr Hargreaves the key to the future is forging trading links with nations that have
fast growth rates and dynamic economies. Its the way to make our business better.
While we remain in the EU we must wait on unmotivated overpaid Eurocrats before we
are allowed to forge these dynamic trading partnerships.

As for that deal @I need only remind you how much effort was put in by Margaret
Thatcher to obtain a rebate against our exorbitantly high EU dues and demands. This
great stride was given away on a whim by Tony Blair.
Does any citizen feel secure that a future government will not perpetrate a similar act
in the future? They could easily rescind all the paltry concessions we are supposed to
take into consideration when casting our votes on June 23rd.


en.wikipedia.org...

Yes to out.



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 04:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: ForteanOrg


The UK does.



And that ^^^^^ from a Dutchman




posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 04:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: eletheia
And that ^^^^^ from a Dutchman


Yes. You know, the country that shares a pond with you
edit on 26-2-2016 by ForteanOrg because: he forgot to unquote again



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 06:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Flavian
Here is an interesting article in The Economist regarding Brexit.......

The Brexit Delusion


Some points from your link...


A detailed analysis from the Bank of England in Oct found that EU membership
had benefited the British Economy


Yet it cant be said and there is no way to prove otherwise , that out of the EU it could

have been the same or even better? only suppositions?


The trickiest issue would be how to maintain full access to the single market
since half Britain's exports go to the EU.


Does that mean that although those countries have been trading with the UK (so

obviously they need those goods) They will now be forced not to trade with

the UK? even when they need that product? There's only one word for that!

Blackmail!! the gift that never stops taking.

The more I read that article the more tied I felt, the word free market/trade didn't

exist and fear was looming in its place.


Britain accounts for 10% of EU's exports, but the EU takes 1/2 of Britain's

exports


It is easier for Britain to find 10% than the EU to find 50%? lost business!

I could be wrong but the EU keeps alluding to its 'muscle power' 28 countries,

But as I see it most of the 28 are very poor and need subsidising and supporting

think Greece, Spain, Portugal, etc.

Of the top ten world economies, only three are predicted

for the worlds 20 largest economies in 2030, Germany is #5 ... UK is#7 ... India

which is currently ranked 8th will be 3rd. The IMF calls India 'the brightest spot

on the global landscape --- Perhaps we need to look there to trade!



The risks are much greater if voters choose to leave


*FEAR MONGERING*

How can anyone predict the future ... nothing is set in stone. Decisions are

being made all of the time - businesses marriages friendships loyalties, some do

well others go down. Businesses change suppliers and MD's and CEO's sometimes

successfully sometimes not .... LOL!! Football clubs even sack their

managers when they loose a match!

Where did all this *negativity* come from? How about some *positivity* and the

*Who dares wins* attitude the UK was once known for.



posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 04:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: eletheia
Does that mean that although those countries have been trading with the UK (so obviously they need those goods) They will now be forced not to trade with the UK? even when they need that product? There's only one word for that! Blackmail!! the gift that never stops taking.


No, of course it does not mean that countries that have been trading with the UK will not be allowed to do so anymore. It simply means that you have a choice: either trade with the other 27 under the EU rules (like e.g. Norway and Switzerland) or not at all. That's not "blackmail", it's simply pointing out the T&C for trade with the EU.

Also, you vastly overestimate the need for British services and goods. It's just the other way around: roughly half of what you export is sold to other EU nations. This is mainly because you are part of the trade union and hence have favourable T&C's, not because British goods or services are especially good and are in high demand. I just checked my personal household and I believe I found a jar of Marmite, there's a can of Guinness in the fridge, I am an avid reader of the Fortean Times and that's about the extent of my need for UK services and goods. I'm fairly a-typical in my country, most of the Dutch rather drink Heineken (most of the Brits too, I'm ashamed to observe) and eat Gouda cheese. They mostly read Dutch magazines..


But as I see it most of the 28 are very poor and need subsidising and supporting


Rubbish. It's the largest economy in the World. You can't be AND poor AND the largest economy in the world.


How can anyone predict the future ...


Indeed. So, how can you?



posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 07:01 AM
link   
ATS Vote Status after 11 pages

%
Eligible IN = 17.31
Eligible OUT = 61.54
Eligible UNDEC = 13.46

InEligible IN = 0.00
InEligible OUT = 7.69
InEligible UNDEC = 0.00
Overall IN OUT UNDEC
% 100.00 % 17.31 69.23 13.46



posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 07:07 AM
link   
a reply to: RP2SticksOfDynamite fair play for compiling the results and keeping the thread up to date.




posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 07:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: ForteanOrg
It simply means that you have a choice: either trade with the other 27 under the EU rules (like e.g. Norway and Switzerland) or not at all. That's not "blackmail", it's simply pointing out the T&C for trade with the EU.


I don't think this is true. All it would mean is that any products that we sell to the other EU countries must comply with EU law. China and a lot of other 'dodgy' countries sell to the EU and I can assure you that they don't follow ALL EU laws and regulations, only the goods which they sell to the EU must abide by them.

Considering all our products already do comply with EU law then our trade wouldn't be affected by this. The only difference would be that their could be custom tariffs if we didn't manage to negotiate some some of free-trade deal.



posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 08:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: 83Liberty

originally posted by: ForteanOrg
It simply means that you have a choice: either trade with the other 27 under the EU rules (like e.g. Norway and Switzerland) or not at all. That's not "blackmail", it's simply pointing out the T&C for trade with the EU.


I don't think this is true. All it would mean is that any products that we sell to the other EU countries must comply with EU law. China and a lot of other 'dodgy' countries sell to the EU and I can assure you that they don't follow ALL EU laws and regulations, only the goods which they sell to the EU must abide by them.

Considering all our products already do comply with EU law then our trade wouldn't be affected by this. The only difference would be that their could be custom tariffs if we didn't manage to negotiate some some of free-trade deal.
I'm sure that if the EU authorities took closer looks a Chinese imports they would find that they fail to meet EU regs big time.

Trade will not be affected because the EU needs to trade with us regardless and they rate British goods.



posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 11:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: RP2SticksOfDynamite
if we stop the EU migrants and send those already here back then their will be plenty of jobs

We massively disagree there.
Any settled EU nationals living in the UK after any 'leave' vote should have the right to remain in the UK as far as I see things. Same for any Brits living in the EU. That would be a sensible and fair arrangement.
I am not against immigration, I want control over it, not closed borders, that would be ridiculous. A needs based system such as we have already with the rest of the world is a reasonable wish.

...send people back who are settled and contributing to the UK though? No we disagree on that particular point, and I think such calls damage the 'leave' argument.



posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 03:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: grainofsand

originally posted by: RP2SticksOfDynamite
if we stop the EU migrants and send those already here back then their will be plenty of jobs

We massively disagree there.
Any settled EU nationals living in the UK after any 'leave' vote should have the right to remain in the UK as far as I see things. Same for any Brits living in the EU. That would be a sensible and fair arrangement.
I am not against immigration, I want control over it, not closed borders, that would be ridiculous. A needs based system such as we have already with the rest of the world is a reasonable wish.

...send people back who are settled and contributing to the UK though? No we disagree on that particular point, and I think such calls damage the 'leave' argument.
Agree its not at all likely anywy. And you are right!

If people are settled and working and contributing then that's OK! Just stop anymore. And rather than recruit from overseas to cover skill shortages then train our own people.



posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 03:40 PM
link   
a reply to: RP2SticksOfDynamite

Absolutely agreed only take folk we need, but established EU nationals who live and work here such as my friends from Slovakia, Czech and Poland I would support their right to stay after an in vote...just no more unless the UK can use their skills.
edit on 27.2.2016 by grainofsand because: Clarity



posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 07:04 PM
link   
I agree EU Nationals who are living here and contributing should be allowed to stay HOWEVER EU citizens who are criminals or living on the strerts begging etc and not contributing should be sent back to country of origin.a reply to: grainofsand



posted on Feb, 28 2016 @ 02:13 AM
link   
Curiouser and curiouser !! The *IN* party is so sure that it is good

for the UK to remain in the EU....YET


... in the news today it is said that Phillip Hammond called

Bill Cash a four letter word as he is set to reveal some

'confidential government information' that he has obtained and

we the citizens and voters (and maybe the 'out party' too) are

not to be privy to.


Ian Duncan Smith has again brought up the subject that those

MP's in the 'out' campaign are being deprived of relative

information by government officials. So the 'IN' party has

information that the 'OUT' is not allowed.


Dishonest, underhanded much


A leap in the dark? Stay OR a step out in the light?? Leave



posted on Feb, 28 2016 @ 02:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: anxiouswens
I agree EU Nationals who are living here and contributing should be allowed to stay HOWEVER EU citizens who are criminals or living on the strerts begging etc and not contributing should be sent back to country of origin.a reply to: grainofsand

Agree. An action force should be set up in each town to roundup all illegals and ship them back via express. This would remove 1m alone.



posted on Feb, 28 2016 @ 04:55 AM
link   
I saw that last night! They had already said last week the Leave Campaign cant use official government documents when they also said MPs in Leave Campaign can only campaign in their spare time and not in their MP role. Not unfair at all!

I'm beginning to be sceptical about the whole set up. I'm even wondering if there are tories of equal numbers in each camp so whatever happens it means half will still be guaranteed votes from faithful tories after the referendum. Some think Boris has been put there as a plant so if we leave he will likely be next Prime Minister and can then renegotiate a bettet deal with EU and therefore keep us in and to be quite honest I now distrust the establishment so much I wonder if they could be not too far from the truth!a reply to: eletheia




top topics



 
32
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join