quote:Originally posted by james-w
Longer term however I think the UK economy will be able to grow beyond where it is currently once it is free of the EU restrictions on trade where all
28 member states have to agree. There are issues currently with the Canada-EU trade....
What makes you believe that? Europe is our biggest trading partner. Canada barely registers.
Destroying the relationship with one in the spurious hope of easing the relationship with the other (the problems on which will doubtless have been
ironed out long before we could leave the EU, anyway) seems nothing short of insane.
Common sense suggests that we have much greater ease of trading with the EU (our biggest trade partner by far, remember) if we are actually
part of it, and the size of the EU means that it will ultimately stand a much better chance of negotiating favourable trading terms with non-EU
economies than we would in isolation.
I've yet to see any credible business authority who believes we will be better off out of Europe. The arguments seem to centre
around the degree to which we will be worse off.
quote:Originally posted by james-w
Longer term however I think the UK economy will be able to grow beyond where it is currently once it is free of the EU restrictions on trade where all
28 member states have to agree. There are issues currently with the Canada-EU trade....
What makes you believe that? Europe is our biggest trading partner. Canada barely registers.
Destroying the relationship with one in the spurious hope of easing the relationship with the other (the problems on which will doubtless have been
ironed out long before we could leave the EU, anyway) seems nothing short of insane.
Common sense suggests that we have much greater ease of trading with the EU (our biggest trade partner by far, remember) if we are actually
part of it, and the size of the EU means that it will ultimately stand a much better chance of negotiating favourable trading terms with non-EU
economies than we would in isolation.
I've yet to see any credible business authority who believes we will be better off out of Europe. The arguments seem to centre
around the degree to which we will be worse off.
Canada was an example of where a trade deal is currently running into issues due to one member state not agreeing to the terms, this deal has been in
the making for over 7 years so of course current trade will be low.
UK exports with the EU has been falling year on year for the past 15 years which is why there is a record deficit with the EU currently, this is in
contrast to our exports rising with other major economies outside the EU.
Due to the dwindling exports to the EU and rising exports to the rest of the world our future lies outside the EU.
quote:Originally posted by james-w
UK exports with the EU has been falling year on year for the past 15 years...
Due to the dwindling exports to the EU and rising exports to the rest of the world our future lies outside the EU.
Lies, damned lies and statistics.
In fact, the absolute amount of our trade with the EU has been steadily growing - from about £132 billion in 2000 to upwards of £230 billion at
present.
What has 'dwindled' is the percentage of our overall export trade that goes to the EU.
That's not because trade with Europe has reduced - it hasn't, it has steadily increased - but because trade with certain other
countries, notably China, has increased even more.
But everyone who knows anything seems to be convinced that the EU can negotiate better trade deals with China than the UK could manage alone - the
Chinese actually don't like us much as a trading partner, as evidenced by the Queen's comments on how rude their recent trade delegation
was when they visited us, and on our own we're a fairly small player in the Chinese economy - so even this element of our trade is better served
by remaining in the EU.
Just for clarity, John Major started the PFI scam. Blair was just the neoliberal sellout who perpetuated it. Cameron is also at it, because Hinckley
Point is essentially the same.
Photo Archive
Building: Hatred of Loughborough's Speed Humps
posted on 25/5/16 at 04:26 PM
quote:Originally posted by JoelP
Just for clarity, John Major started the PFI scam. Blair was just the neoliberal sellout who perpetuated it. Cameron is also at it, because Hinckley
Point is essentially the same.
Hinckley Point is frightening! Overseas corrupt money to build it, with us paying a premium for the output, all guaranteed, boots filled, lovely.
Thank you, I stand corrected, it was just the Bliar PFI's that stand out in my mind. However, that correction does nothing to take away my
feelings for the 'establishment'. Whether it's the UK, EU or whatever, everything just appears to me as one giant corrupt Ponzi
scheme, fuelled by the masses, for the few.
Of course, sorry, Bliar killed, maimed and destroyed in God's name, not for power or personal greed.
The elephant in the room (for me) is that there appears to be a presumption in all this that the EU is a stable entity. I do not believe it is, it
will erode. Political union without fiscal union...
quote:[i It's iginally posted by JoelP
Just for clarity, John Major started the PFI scam. Blair was just the neoliberal sellout, lout who perpetuated it. Cameron is also at it, because sure
ckley Point is essentially the same.
Hinckley Point is frightening! Overseas corrupt money to build it, with us paying a premium for thshould e output, all guaranteed filled, lovely.
I get sick of telling people what a fiasco Hinckley Point is. It's literally an outrage. An agreed price of double the current market value of
wholesale energy, funded by taxpayers, privatised profits and socialised risk because you cannot insure a nuclear plant. If, as a nation, we decide
nuclear power is the way forward (I'm not convinced myself, but I'll accept a majority decision), it should be state owned and funded by
QE. The BoE can create the money to fund it, and the proceeds would go a long way to closing the deficit.
Photo Archive
Building: McSorley 7+4 with Rover V8 (See avatar for latest
posted on 25/5/16 at 10:37 PM
I was a very natural EU sceptic but the 'Leave' campaign has been incredibly weak and the 'Remain' campaign has a lot of very
credible supporters, many of whom are ostensibly independent. I am still undecided but I honestly struggle to see any reason to support an
'OUT' vote at this time. Having gone through the Scottish independence referendum and seen how divisive that has been, and continues to
be, my greatest hope is that the same thing doesn't happen with this one.
Whatever your personal views, the economy is hurt badly by any sort of 'uncertainty' and there can be no greater uncertainty than an exit
from the EU. This will undoubtedly (IMHO) cause short term pain for the UK in the event of an exit. The only question for me really is whether the mid
to long term outcome will be favourable or not. So far the 'Leave' campaign has done nothing to convince me of that.
Oh, and I'd have to say that Boris's 'Nazi' comments severely lost him and the 'Leave' campaign credibility in my
eyes. I actually had a lot of respect for Boris despite his quirks up until that point. It is a sign of desparation in my opinion.
The Scottish indeyref was 55/45 in favour of staying in. I believe the EURef will be more like 65/35 in favour of staying in which at this point is
about right. If this is to change then 'Remain' need to stop the scare stories and replace that with compelling facts, and the
'Leave' campaign need to start finding some credible supporters and stop relying on the emotional "independence" vote which
failed so badly in Scotland (thankfully). I suspect I'm not alone at being undecided and also being thirsty for facts but the simple fact is
that nobody really knows what would happen if we left the EU.
Look at it this way. If you were dealt two pairs in a poker hand and were offered a brand new hand. Would you take it or would you hope to assemble a
full house from what you have? That's where we are right now!
Here's a good fact - our contribution to the eu works out at 26p each per day net, which is roughly the same per person as what Norway pays to
access the single market.
Well at the moment i am remain they say it will take ten years to untangle i am 61 so think i should vote for whats good for my kids generation. Also
the leave side havent come up with a creditable argument
The economic argument for remaining at least in the short term is very strong. It basically boils down to whether you are willing to withstand
potential short term economic pain for longer term gain, beyond this predictions are pretty pointless.
The 'Official' figures for 2015 have just been released and it puts migration greater than the population of Milton Keynes, how long is
this sustainable year on year and at what cost to our schools, housing and NHS.
quote:Originally posted by james-w
The economic argument for remaining at least in the short term is very strong.
It basically boils down to whether you are willing to withstand potential short term economic pain for longer term gain..
Except that it doesn't, because there is no good evidence for the possibility of longer term gain. And the evidence for short-term economic pain
is so strong that it goes beyond 'potential'.
So it basically boils down to whether you are willing to withstand short term economic pain, with an option on long-term economic pain as well.
I wonder why nobody is making the case for closer integration. As Sam says the economic theory arguments for removing barriers to trade are not in
dispute, so why not have more or it? There could be a lot of savings if we harmonised our social welfare systems, government, employment laws,
healthcare systems etc. Anyone fancy driving on the other side of the road? It would make all those rust free southern European Alfas more attractive!
Closer harmonisation has undeniably been the direction of travel so far so it seems surprising no one is saying how good more of the same could be.
Closer harmonisation has undeniably been the direction of travel so far so it seems surprising no one is saying how good more of the same could be.
Absolutely... and it's been the direction of travel ever since we walked out of the African Savannah; the human race has developed via
ever-larger socio-economic groupings, from families of hunter-gatherers, through tribes, petty kingdoms, kingdoms and onwards to the large large
trading and defence unions we have today. And every step forward has been accompanied by a large increase in prosperity, security and technology.
Unfortunately, they reckon that the average European still has about 2% Neanderthal in their genetics, which presumably accounts for the football-fan
tribalism of those people who still say 'Me British/Scottish/Welsh/English/Cornish' (delete as applicable), 'me no care if
I live in mud hut in bog, so long as is MY mud hut in MY bog, dat nobody else can share or tell me rules'.
quote:Originally posted by coozerWhat I don't like is the unelected way the EU governs and imposes its whacky ideas on us.
What, you mean the unelected way they govern via all these elected MEP's and elected national Governments?
At least get a proper understanding of how the EU works before voting to commit financial suicide, instead of just taking the rabid rants of Daily
Wail readers and the lunatic Farage Fringe at face value.
The 'wacky ideas' that are reported are almost always gross distortions that are concealing crucial information. Not to say that there
aren't occasionally unintended consequences and glitches to be ironed out from complex legislation by any government, but the EU is no worse
than anyone else.
I wonder if anybody on here knows who their euro MP is we elect them and send them to europe to act on our behalf that seems democatic to me if we had
taken more interest in the EU and taken part rather than sending a bunch of freeloaders and just whinging about it all the time we may have had more
influence.
The GT Britain people hark back to is no more the Americans took that off us before entering ww2 look it up historical fact.
We need to stop this sitting on the side lines whinging and get on with being part of Europe its our nearest land mass.
Every political leader sent to The EU for the last 40 years has been made a fool of Margret thatcher gave the most away again look it up historical
fact.
Winston Churchill our greatest Briton would have been sat at the top table telling the rest in Europe how its going to be
I am probs going to vote to stay just hope we can find some politicians with the balls to stand up for Britain.
MY advice to anybody who cannot decide dont listen to either side look up the facts for you self both sides are treating us like imbeciles.
quote:Originally posted by coozerWhat I don't like is the unelected way the EU governs and imposes its whacky ideas on us.
What, you mean the unelected way they govern via all these elected MEP's and elected national Governments?
At least get a proper understanding of how the EU works before voting to commit financial suicide, instead of just taking the rabid rants of Daily
Wail readers and the lunatic Farage Fringe at face value.
The 'wacky ideas' that are reported are almost always gross distortions that are concealing crucial information. Not to say that there
aren't occasionally unintended consequences and glitches to be ironed out from complex legislation by any government, but the EU is no worse
than anyone else.
If only that were the case then it wouldn't be so bad.
The Unelected European Council propose all new laws, our MEP's only have the ability to propose amendments to them and mostly get
outvoted.
Our MEP's don't even sit together in the parliament, they are seated by political persuasion, left wing, centre, right wing etc.
quote:Originally posted by james-w
The Unelected European Council propose all new laws, our MEP's only have the ability to propose amendments to them and mostly get
outvoted.
Sorry, but that's absolute, unmitigated, paranoid tosh.
I'm actually astonished how many complete falsehoods you've managed to encompass in that single statement.
Firstly, it's the European Commission, not the European Council who submit legislative proposals. They're two
separate organisations. The European Commission is made up of members who are appointed by the elected member governments, one per state.
Secondly, The EC is not sitting there, randomly trying to think up new laws to propose, as you seem to imply. They do not come up with
proposals themselves: they are relaying the proposals of other organisations, PRIMARILY THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT ITSELF (but also member states,
and the European Central Bank)
Thirdly, the European Council is only able to propose new laws if they are supported by at least a quarter of the elected governments of
the EU member states.
Fourthly, MEP's don't 'only' have the ability to propose amendments. They also have the ability to outright
reject new legislation at several stages. Certainly, this is a majority decision by all MEPs, so UK MEP's can be outvoted if they are in the
minority, but that's democracy, and it is certainly not 'mostly' the case, as you suggest.
Fifthly under current proposals, even if 25% of governments support the proposal of a new law, it will get a red card if more than 50% of
member governments oppose it... so, in effect, over half of member governments have to actively or tacitly support a new law before it can even be
proposed
Sixthly, apart from having much stronger powers than 'only having the ability to propose amendments' to individual pieces of
legislation, as you suggest, MEP's have the power to force the entire European Commission to be dissolved on a vote of no confidence.
Here is an idiot's guide to EU legislative procedure.
It is entirely democratic, with a large number of stages, checks and balances.
Please at least make some attempt to get your facts straight and understand the reality of the situation before regurgitating this sort of
tinfoil-hat, conspiracy theorist balderdash.
The European Comission is made up of 28 Unelected members who cannot be held to account, if we don't like what they are doing we have no
vehicle with which to remove them.
The European council is made up of elected governments but the problem is the UK only has a veto to prevent EU laws impacting the UK in a very minor
number of areas. The European Council approves proposals by a voting process, they become EU law regardless if the UK want it or not, we have no opt
out.
The European Parliament is not a parliament as we know it here in the UK, it cannot propose laws only amend those proposed by the Unelected
comission and then needs final approval by the commission once ratified. Once a law is made, the elected parliament has no power to change this
law.
This not a democracy, it is run by the elite to serve the elite, information from a website run by the organisations isn't exactly a good source
of unbiased info
quote:Originally posted by james-w
The European Comission is made up of 28 Unelected members who cannot be held to account, if we don't like what they are doing we have no
vehicle with which to remove them.
Glad to see you've got their name almost right this time, at least - with a little prompting.
They are appointed by elected governments.
The vehicle by which they can be removed is a vote of no confidence in the Euopean Parliament, but you grossly overestimate their powers and
importance: they frame the legislation that they are told to frame, by elected bodies.
In that respect, they are no different to senior Civil Servants in the UK, whose job it is to implement the instructions of their elected masters.
quote:Originally posted by james-w
...the problem is the UK only has a veto to prevent EU laws impacting the UK in a very minor number of areas.
It's not a problem. That's what's called 'democracy'. We're part of a union, and except for critical areas
relating to national sovereignty, the majority consensus of all elected members prevails, just as it does in the UK's national
parliament.
You might as well complain that the Parish Council of Little Buggering on the Wold doesn't have a veto against legislation enacted in the House
of Commons.
There are Bylaws, Laws, European Laws and International Laws: there is a hierarchy, and quite rightly the tiers of that hierarchy are only able
to directly control laws at the level appropriate to them.
Would you have nations opting out of International Law, just because it doesn't suit them?
There has been much talk of us opting out of Human Rights legislation. Why would we want to? Have you any idea how dangerous it could be, to
voluntarily hand that power to our political masters?
quote:Originally posted by james-w
The European Parliament is not a parliament as we know it here in the UK, it cannot propose laws only amend those proposed by the Unelected
comission
Absolutely and utterly WRONG. It can and does propose laws: it does so VIA the European Commission. The Commission are there to
frame the laws that they are asked to frame by the European Parliament and others. The majority of European Legislation is initiated by
the European Parliament. That which it doesn't initiate, it has to approve.
The European Commission does not propose laws of its own, independent volition.
quote:Originally posted by james-w
This not a democracy
Yes it is. Your problem is that it isn't a democracy of the small, jingoistic clique that you'd like it to be.
You have the opportunity to elect and influence our MEP's. If you choose not to, that's your failing, not theirs.
Quotes directly from the website you linked earlier.
The European Parliament may approve or reject a legislative proposal, or propose amendments to it. The Council is not legally obliged to take
account of Parliament's opinion but in line with the case-law of the Court of Justice, it must not take a decision without having received
it.
The commission can only be asked to propose new legislation by another EU institution but the vast majority or new legislation comes from
the commission.
The parliament cannot vote against an individual commissioner and requires at least 2/3rds of the parliament for a vote of no confidence in the
entire commission This would require 500 votes of which we only have 73.
Our interpretations of these points seem to differ.
This so called democracy does not work for the UK and history shows this, we have been on the receiving end of more lost votes in the parliament than
any other member state yet we are the third biggest in seats behind Germany and France.
