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

originally posted by: RP2SticksOfDynamite
I was referring to the UK having to be subject to laws agreed in Brussels by other country members. That's ridiculous and means the UK is semi-governed from Brussels! The UK should define and administer its own laws and not be undermined by laws cooked up by Eurocrat nitwits!

Amongst them almost 100 Brits..

a reply to: ForteanOrg

True, and I personally look forward to them being made redundant if the UK votes to leave the EU.

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: ForteanOrg
Canada, Austrian and New zelend show small country's can keep there sovereignty and still be economically strong .

Firstly, I would not label either of these countries "small". Secondly: neither of these countries have ever been members of the EU, so you're comparing apples with pears. Though I must admit that Australia gives it a good shot at the European Song Contest, as do Turkey and Israel, so who knows what may happen in the future

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: ForteanOrg

True, and I personally look forward to them being made redundant if the UK votes to leave the EU.

Well, it would leave a few seats more for the Dutch

originally posted by: ForteanOrg

originally posted by: RP2SticksOfDynamite
I was referring to the UK having to be subject to laws agreed in Brussels by other country members. That's ridiculous and means the UK is semi-governed from Brussels! The UK should define and administer its own laws and not be undermined by laws cooked up by Eurocrat nitwits!

Amongst them almost 100 Brits..

That makes it all the more ridiculous because they will always be out voted!

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: ForteanOrg

True, and I personally look forward to them being made redundant if the UK votes to leave the EU.

And rightly so. Waste of time and money.

I never thought I would ever say making some people redundant would be a good thing, but in this case most definately with benefits to the UK and its ordinary folk.

originally posted by: ForteanOrg
a reply to: crazyewok

Manners and decorum please. Cameron actually is mostly on YOUR side too..

You are kidding. Is he one of the elite/aristocracy/rich/ etc.

Cam is only Jam for the few!

originally posted by: moniker
The vote in 1975 was about the EEC (not the ECC), which was later renamed to the EU as the UK agreed to through subsequent treaties (it was not a majority vote; all the member states had to agree including our elected ones; it wasn't forced upon us).

Yes sorry, that was a typo. I did mean the EEC.

I never said it has been forced upon us. I said we haven't had a referendum since 1975 and a lot has changed.

a reply to: 83Liberty

not much has changed, just right wingers moaning about immigrants.
as soon as asked what the financial benefits for leaving 'would' be, the argument collapses.

'would' as opposed to 'could'.
could be like mexico does not instill mucho confidence.

a reply to: stinkelbaum

The City of London will never put itself in a position whereby their power will ever be questioned.

Europe tried and failed, this is a warning shot across the E.U's bow, but it could well explode in their faces. I hope it does.

Who needs Europe?

We make the best Ales in the World, we make some good wines, the finest cuisine, the best social scene, the best music, the best football, the best surfing and that's not all.

That's how I would sell the U.K to foreign investment. Who needs Europe when George Osborne is up to his tonsils in Chinese?

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978Who needs Europe?

The UK does.

a reply to: ForteanOrg

Your link in no way confirms that the UK 'needs' Europe, it was just a load of emotive opinion lazily reported from a political blog.
In fact the opinionated unsubstantiated assertions in the article reminded me of the opinions you spout on ATS as fact.

Try again fella, but don't present the article in your silly link as proof the UK needs the EU, it is not, and just makes you look silly.

originally posted by: ForteanOrg

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978Who needs Europe?

The UK does.

You sound like a broken record.

If new Zealand , Australia and canada can live well outside the EU we can.

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.

Lets face it the financial benefits certainly dont help normal British people with wages at an all time low, more and more people having to use foodbanks, children living in poverty, pensioners with no care, young people with no way of getting on the property ladder and rents being astronomical.

The LEAVE campaign do speak of the financial benefits, being able to do trade deals with common wealth countries, being able to fish in our own waters, money saved from not paying into the EU pot. Immigration ties into those financial benefits, British people would be able to ask for living wages without having those wages driven down by immigrants from poorer countries, more jobs available for British people. British young people could have proper training for our NHS, plumbers, electricians etc instead of agencies outsourcing to EU Countries. More houses should become available over time therefore bringing house prices down.s.a reply to: stinkelbaum

a reply to: stinkelbaum

Not at all.
If you don't think anything has changed since our 1975 referendum, then you are either willfully lying or doing it through ignorance.

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.

Lets face it the financial benefits certainly dont help normal British people with wages at an all time low, more and more people having to use foodbanks, children living in poverty, pensioners with no care, young people with no way of getting on the property ladder and rents being astronomical.

The LEAVE campaign do speak of the financial benefits, being able to do trade deals with common wealth countries, being able to fish in our own waters, money saved from not paying into the EU pot. Immigration ties into those financial benefits, British people would be able to ask for living wages without having those wages driven down by immigrants from poorer countries, more jobs available for British people. British young people could have proper training for our NHS, plumbers, electricians etc instead of agencies outsourcing to EU Countries. More houses should become available over time therefore bringing house prices down.s.a reply to: stinkelbaum

Agree. It is clear that the IN CAMPAIGN speak only of money which only benefits those that already have. There is no mention of what is important to the masses, apart from jobs, but that is a red herring because if we stop the EU migrants and send those already here back then their will be plenty of jobs, but if we don't out then there will be less jobs and poorer paid jobs filled by the migrants. There is no mention of law and order, safety of UK folk, the infiltration and taking over of their communities (just look at whats happened with cities and towns like Bradford, Luton, Birmingham etc etc because of the Indian/Pakistani/Bangladeshi etc migrants. Surely, enough is enough and time to take our country back for the British people.

a reply to: grainofsand

Sorry for the late reply, suddenly got very busy at work yesterday (how dare it, when i have important things to discuss on ATS!).

Totally agree about the language in the article but i guess the reason for that is that no one has left the club before - so there are lot of unkowns.

The real purpose of the article is to show that things aren't really as simple as the Out camp make out. Things like trade negotiations - i hadn't realised how much of an obstacle that may present to Britain due to negotiating methods. Article 50 is also a bit of a worry, at least short term.

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: ForteanOrg
Canada, Austrian and New zelend show small country's can keep there sovereignty and still be economically strong .

Canada is not a good example to use there though as it is firmly ensconced as part of the North America Trade bloc (signed, sealed, delivered). The article points out that Britain will lose that cover (as part of EU bloc) if it chooses to leave. That leaves us having to renegotiate, but from a much a weaker position.

Bottom line is that we (British people) deserve BOTH sides to be completely honest about exactly what is on the table and exactly what it could mean. This is too important a decision for our nation for there to be any hyperbole - we need fact.

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: crazyewok

Other countries even smaller manage it as tax havens, I'm not sure what could stop an EU free UK doing exactly that.
Heck there's enough dirty money floating around the City, might as well take even more of the shady income through banking secrecy legislation desirable to businesses and crooks.

Plenty of options if we keep our rational heads on.

If we vote to leave, nothing could stop us doing that. However, we have to be aware that there would be flip sides. For example, we would be causing problems for the largest trade bloc at a time when we were trying to renegotiate trade deals with said bloc. How do you think those negotiations would then go? There certainly wouldn't be any favourable terms coming our way.

originally posted by: RP2SticksOfDynamite

originally posted by: ForteanOrg

originally posted by: RP2SticksOfDynamite
I was referring to the UK having to be subject to laws agreed in Brussels by other country members. That's ridiculous and means the UK is semi-governed from Brussels! The UK should define and administer its own laws and not be undermined by laws cooked up by Eurocrat nitwits!

Amongst them almost 100 Brits..

That makes it all the more ridiculous because they will always be out voted!

Our problem with MEP's stems for the fact the keep electing UKIP types. Now on th one hand, i have nothing against UKIP in that they actually try to stand up for us.

On the other hand though, they constitute a chunk of our MEP's in the club. And they are the ones acting ike petulant toddlers in the corner. With that attitude, negotiating will always be a painful affair and others will be less inclined to their viewpoints purely on principle - do you stop the class for the disruptive pupil or do you work around them to the benefit of the rest?