[SamT]

Anthony Hilton

I once asked Rupert Murdoch why he was so opposed to the European Union. 'That’s easy,' he replied. 'When I go into Downing Street they do what I say; when I go to Brussels they take no notice

[erm, sam]

Well, I voted IN motherfuckas.

[petejh]

Quick straw poll of people I've met in the first hour this morning - builder round fitting our new front door is voting out, his wife and their two kids are also voting out. The young assistant isn't voting. Shopkeeper next door is voting out. My father's voting in.

I'm voting out. Because I'd like us to be a member of a European trading area (as well as building trade agreements worldwide), and to have free movement. For which I'm happy that the country makes concessions. But I don't agree this in any way needs to go hand-in-hand with being part of a political union which isn't accountable enough for me.

I think over the next ten years if another country wants to leave the EU - a not completely unlikely event the way the momentum is swinging, and another Eurozone crisis, it risks the whole thing failing. In which case the fallout would likely involve the EU being renegotiated back to something resembling its original intent in the 60s/70s which was a free trade and free movement agreement, not an ever closer political union which makes political decisions on our behalf.

[SamT]

All I've seen on this thread is a lot of people who think they're clever/right laughing and making out that others who don't share their opinion are racists and/or idiots. This is why I don't really get involved with these type of threads, politics, religion etc. A lot of people have been saying I haven't heard anything from the leave camp that's changed my mind to leave, well? I didn't know the issue was to get each other to change sides?

All I can say to you SamT is that if you're questioning your friendship with people because they have a different social view than you is that you obvious don't deserve them as friends, take that how you want although it's meant as an insult to you.

Not had chance to retort yet, but basically, at no point have I implied that out voters are 'as thick as fuck'.

The whole umbrella sketch  -   
I couldn't bear much more after that.   The whole issue is making me more and more angry, and I'm dismayed at some folks I know who are voting out to the point that I'm questioning our friendship.

and I said..

some folks I know

I know who my friends are. I was loosely pertaining to facebook type 'friends' really.

All I can say to you SamT is that if you're questioning your friendship with people because they have a different social view than you is that you obvious don't deserve them as friends, take that how you want although it's meant as an insult to you.

Water off a ducks back mate.  Nice of you to drag it down to a level of personal insults.

[tomtom]

I'm voting out. Because I'd like us to be a member of a European trading area (as well as building trade agreements worldwide), and to have free movement. For which I'm happy that the country makes concessions. But I don't agree this in any way needs to go hand-in-hand with being part of a political union which isn't accountable enough for me.

I'm baffled Pete... if we want to be part of an EU trading area and have free movement - it'll be exactly the same as now, except we have not say in what happens....? So we'd be part of the same political union, but with no way of changing anything...

Anyway - we'll see what happens. Glad its all over for now.

[Johnny Brown]

I though JB and others point was that we could have great standards if we wrote them ourselves, but we couldn't impose them on the French?

Actually no, I think we'd have worse standards due to a) a lower budget, and b) being more susceptible to influence from self-interested parties. Plus I think drawing from broader sources is always good - standards have to be carefully thought out so as not to stifle innovation.

Can't understand your beef with Dense Stu. The leave perspective is under-represented here and it's valuable input, whether or not folk are trying to influence or be influenced. The idea he and Pete present that the EU as is is doomed is fair, but I don't agree that it's a given. Leaving may well precipitate it though, as well as the break up of the UK (probably first).

In which case the fallout would likely involve the EU being renegotiated back to something resembling its original intent in the 60s/70s which was a free trade and free movement agreement, not an ever closer political union which makes political decisions on our behalf.

A free trade area is always going to gravitate towards a political union, as otherwise you don't have a level playing field for trade.

[lagerstarfish]

possible source of future Sun headlines

http://qz.com/713953/possible-names-for-eu-exits-for-all-members-of-the-eu/

[petejh]

I'm baffled Pete... if we want to be part of an EU trading area and have free movement - it'll be exactly the same as now, except we have not say in what happens....? So we'd be part of the same political union, but with no way of changing anything...

It needn't be. Canadian citizens and US citizens have free movement between their two countries - all that's required is a driver's license or other governmenrt proof of ID. Likewise with free movement of labour - it's a simple process (relatively for the US!) under the trade agreement to get 3-year work visas for the US/Canada, and these are renewable as many times as you wish.

Same with New Zealand and Australia, who have an agreement for free movement and free movement of labour.

You try telling a Canadian, a septic tank, a kiwi or an ex-convict that they must have a political union and that it must be run by technocrats over which they have no control, and see how well that goes down!
I find it slightly depressing when people can't envisage a UK that has free trade and movement without being centrally controlled by an unaccountable elite.

It needn't gravitate towards political union JB and TT as the four countries above prove. There are other examples. And if we're being scientific for a moment than the scientific method relies on disproving a hypothesis. Well clearly the remain hypothesis can be disproved just as the leave one can. So where does that leave us - with a choice of the heart. When I climb I gravitate towards the ground but I generally don't allow that to happen if it's not desirable.

Someone further up the thread commented 'against navel gazing inward-looking attitude' or words to that effect. I find myself thinking this about the remain in Europe point of view - e.g. it's all relative. I find 'looking into Europe as being the UK's best case scenario' to be a limited, inward-looking stance, compared to a scenario in which we can look outwards to the whole world.

[Will Hunt]

You try telling a Canadian, a septic tank, a kiwi or an ex-convict that they must have a political union and that it must be run by technocrats over which they have no control, and see how well that goes down!
I find it slightly depressing when people can't envisage a UK that has free trade and movement without being centrally controlled by an unaccountable elite.

This is the bit that stumps me. Somehow this word technocrat has become pejorative when all it means is somebody who is an expert in their field. They can only make recommendations to the EU parliament; it's the MEPs, who are very much accountable to their electorate, who vote on the legislation.
Calling them "an unaccountable elite" just makes you sound like a foil hat wearer. This elite that you're talking about is actually people like Graeme, Adam, my boss at work etc, all of whom qualify in a meritocratic way to advise the European parliament.

I don't understand how you think that is any different from what happens in Westminster. The only difference to me is that in Brussels you bring in expertise from a wider variety of cultures - hugely valuable in solving problems in every field from climbing wall standards to water management, to combatting global warming.

If somebody asked my local MP (who is a card carrying fuckwit) to make a decision on any of these issues, and they didn't turn to experts for advise, I'd be fucking livid.

[Johnny Brown]

Pete, you seem to be mainly talking about free movement of workers, and four countries whose physical areas/resources are huge compared to their populations, relative to Europe. In Europe we are competing for dwindling resources: fisheries, for example. Do you really think any European fishery could survive without central control? 

Do Canada adopt ANSI standards then? NZ seem not to bother with standards much afaik.

Interesting result from a guy who has fact-checked the campaigns: https://medium.com/im-trying-to-fact-check-brexit/fact-checking-brexit-the-conclusion-c1f56ba4cb70#.q4y8xhsxh

[Oldmanmatt]

Yes, I'm still confused how comparing continents of federalised states, with massive populations and immense natural resources; pertains to an island nation smaller than almost all of those individual states.

Still, lets have a little light relief and consider a novel argument:

 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/10839448/My-rivals-should-be-hanged-for-treason-says-Ukip-candidate.html


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[petejh]

Adam - when I worked there it entirely depended on the client. Some wished to see ANSI standards and others were content with EN. It isn't a show-stopper like some on here are portraying it to be.

[petejh]

Yes, I'm still confused how comparing continents of federalised states, with massive populations and immense natural resources; pertains to an island nation smaller than almost all of those individual states.

Still, lets have a little light relief and consider a novel argument:

 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/10839448/My-rivals-should-be-hanged-for-treason-says-Ukip-candidate.html


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Except for New Zealand. Or Switzerland. Or Norway. All countries that are regarded as brilliant places to live.

[tomtom]

Are you trolling Pete?

[Oldmanmatt]

Yes, I'm still confused how comparing continents of federalised states, with massive populations and immense natural resources; pertains to an island nation smaller than almost all of those individual states.

Still, lets have a little light relief and consider a novel argument:

 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/10839448/My-rivals-should-be-hanged-for-treason-says-Ukip-candidate.html


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Except for New Zealand. Or Switzerland. Or Norway. All countries that are regarded as brilliant places to live.

New Zealand is in some serious economic strife and has some serious issues with relations between settlers and the indigenous population mind, and some disparity between communities of the North and South islands. Still on balance,  I'd agree with you and I'd like to live there.
http://www.focus-economics.com/countries/new-zealand/news/consumer-confidence/consumer-confidence-decreases-for-second-consecutive

Swiss, has a pretty specialised economy, a population of 8M (compared to our 68M) and I'm not sure how we are supposed to emulate that.

Norway has an even smaller population, circa 5M (or less than London, if you like).

These are not comparable to the UK. They have established economic niches and are not models that we can just slip into.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[a dense loner]

The replies of people like tt and omm, and possibly someone else are a bit baffling re one of you asked a question or implied something along the lines of "name me one country that does this" Pete them names about 4 and you say yes yes but that's different their population is 5m or I'm not sure how we're supposed to emulate the Swiss! So basically whatever answer is given will be shot down in flames since something somewhere will be different between our countries and elsewhere. Excellent

[lagerstarfish]

London could be like Swiz

Scotland could be like Norway

Yorkshire could be like New Zealand

[tomtom]

The replies of people like tt and omm, and possibly someone else are a bit baffling re one of you asked a question or implied something along the lines of "name me one country that does this" Pete them names about 4 and you say yes yes but that's different their population is 5m or I'm not sure how we're supposed to emulate the Swiss! So basically whatever answer is given will be shot down in flames since something somewhere will be different between our countries and elsewhere. Excellent

OK, its a bit you said, he said blah blah, so being more constructive I'll turn it around and name countries 'closest' to what Britain could be like.... (which was kind of covered earlier in the thread but anyway..)

Japan.

Norway is probably the closest in Europe - though it is/was the biggest Oil exporter in the EU and has heavily invested its £££ from the oil - much more than we have.. in other words its like a much smaller UK with a Metric Fuck Gigaton of money in the bank...

Other suggestions?
 (not being facetious - -I can't think of any more..)

[a dense loner]

Japan? It's a bit nippy out there!

No, I have no other suggestions. Britain is like no other country in the world. You got me.

You know when you say to your kids you have to stand up for yourself or you can be whatever you want to be when you grow up, because you believe it. What do you say to them if they say "but daddy why can't we leave the Eu?" "Leave the eu? Are you fucking mental child? We'd never be able to make it on our own. Which idiots put these ideas in your head? You wouldn't understand yet but don't worry some thick older people don't understand even now"
Don't worry I know most on here would start going on about the emf, the best thing they did being 3am eternal.

[tomtom]

That was the KLF Dense xx

Unbelievable:)

[Oldmanmatt]

The replies of people like tt and omm, and possibly someone else are a bit baffling re one of you asked a question or implied something along the lines of "name me one country that does this" Pete them names about 4 and you say yes yes but that's different their population is 5m or I'm not sure how we're supposed to emulate the Swiss! So basically whatever answer is given will be shot down in flames since something somewhere will be different between our countries and elsewhere. Excellent

Because they are not models that we can follow.

I certainly did not, at any point, say "name me one country..." or anything similar. It is however a very common Pro argument, particularly the Norway analogy.

Pointing out the flaws in that analogy is hardly unreasonable.

You seem to keep saying "stop telling me what's wrong with my argument" but an argument that can be knocked down so easily is not something to fix your belay to, is it?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[tim palmer]

The replies of people like tt and omm, and possibly someone else are a bit baffling re one of you asked a question or implied something along the lines of "name me one country that does this" Pete them names about 4 and you say yes yes but that's different their population is 5m or I'm not sure how we're supposed to emulate the Swiss! So basically whatever answer is given will be shot down in flames since something somewhere will be different between our countries and elsewhere. Excellent

OK, its a bit you said, he said blah blah, so being more constructive I'll turn it around and name countries 'closest' to what Britain could be like.... (which was kind of covered earlier in the thread but anyway..)

Japan.

Norway is probably the closest in Europe - though it is/was the biggest Oil exporter in the EU and has heavily invested its £££ from the oil - much more than we have.. in other words its like a much smaller UK with a Metric Fuck Gigaton of money in the bank...

Other suggestions?
 (not being facetious - -I can't think of any more..)

Wow from what I understand the Japanese economy is in serious trouble so the UK might be able to follow that example in the event of a brexit

[i.munro]

The point for me here is time.
What sort of place the-country-formerly-known-as-the Southern-UK might find for itself in the world outside the EU and Uk is impossible for anyone to say.
What we can say with more certainty is how long the financial uncertainty and uncertain trading conditions triggered by a Brexit might last & what I'm hearing is ~20 years.

Several years to somehow force Brexit through the Uk parliament - several more to dissolve the UK - 2 yrs to leave the EU  then 7- 10 to negociate new agreements with the EU. At whch point negotiations with the rest of the world can start.

[Oldmanmatt]

As long as our nuclear plants don't follow the Japanese lead, I'll be happy...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Oldmanmatt]

On that note, don't all our nuclear plants belong to the French?
And do we still buy a shitload of 'lecky from the Frogs?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk