The EU debate

Bantex_2

Generali wrote: »

Yes



No. There is a bilateral agreement with the EU. If the UK was to leave the EU then she would no longer be part of that agreement.

And could possibly negotiate their own agreement. Not saying it is good or bad, but bit tired of the pro argument of "we would lose 5 million jobs as they are related to our trade with Europe"
Cannot believe all trade would end overnight if the UK went alone.

tomterm8

andrewf75 wrote: »

I don't see it as either we accept a European state or we leave. There is a third option of remaining a member and reforming it to what we want it to be - basically a free trade area. People across Europe don't want to give up their nationality for some superstate idea and it can't be forced on people against their will.

Europe is already a state, in my opinion, and we've spent the last thirty years agreeing that we want to reform it and keep it a free trade area while constantly it gains more powers and more sovereignty.

So... I just don't see that what you're suggesting is ever going to actually happen.

andrewf75

Bantex wrote: »

And could possibly negotiate their own agreement. Not saying it is good or bad, but bit tired of the pro argument of "we would lose 5 million jobs as they are related to our trade with Europe"
Cannot believe all trade would end overnight if the UK went alone.

No-one is suggesting it would end overnight or ever. But we wouldn't be as competitive. Nissan can still make cars in Sunderland and export to the EU, but if we exit that affects their competitiveness because it will cost them extra somehow - and the uncertainty might lead them to relocate. They went there in the first place because they wanted to get inside the EU so it is entirely logical that if we are no longer in the EU they would have a rethink.

Bantex_2

andrewf75 wrote: »

No-one is suggesting it would end overnight or ever. But we wouldn't be as competitive. Nissan can still make cars in Sunderland and export to the EU, but if we exit that affects their competitiveness because it will cost them extra somehow - and the uncertainty might lead them to relocate.

So you would blindly vote to stay in without any idea of how many jobs are or are not at risk?

The levels of inefficiency and corruption within the EU mean nothing?

andrewf75

Bantex wrote: »

So you would blindly vote to stay in without any idea of how many jobs are or are not at risk?

The levels of inefficiency and corruption within the EU mean nothing?

well its not blind though is it? Estimates have been made of several million. Even if it ends up only 1 million thats still a lot. I could ask you the same question. You'd blindly vote to leave without knowing how many jobs are at risk?

Of course the inefficiency and corruption means something. I just think the pros outweigh the cons and the risks of leaving are too great.

Bantex_2

andrewf75 wrote: »

well its not blind though is it? Estimates have been made of several million. Even if it ends up only 1 million thats still a lot. I could ask you the same question. You'd blindly vote to leave without knowing how many jobs are at risk?

Of course the inefficiency and corruption means something. I just think the pros outweigh the cons and the risks of leaving are too great.

One of the reasons i would like to see a referendum is that both sides will have to prove their arguments.

But, I cannot see just staying with the status quo as we are not sure what would happen and are too frightened to take any risks as a strong argument.

andrewf75

Bantex wrote: »

One of the reasons i would like to see a referendum is that both sides will have to prove their arguments.

Totally agree. Its time to sort it out once and for all.

But obviously neither side can prove their arguments because no-one can see into the future. It will still be speculation.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Bantex wrote: »

One of the reasons i would like to see a referendum is that both sides will have to prove their arguments.

But, I cannot see just staying with the status quo as we are not sure what would happen and are too frightened to take any risks as a strong argument.

The thing is though, the status quo is pretty damn good.

We have completely free trade with Europe, a lot of job creating large global companies have significant manufacturing plants or regional HQ's here as a result, we benefit from all the bilateral trade agreements around the world that the EU negotiates on better terms than we could achieve by ourselves (market of 500m versus market of 60m), the net financial benefits to the UK of being in the EU are measured in billions of pounds a year, we can all freely live and work anywhere in Europe we like, etc etc etc....

And there are virtually no downsides, except for the odd frothing story in the mail about bendy bananas or such like, that almost always turn out to be a complete load of BS afterwards.

I really, honestly, have no idea why any level-headed, rational, clear thinking person would have even the slightest bit of interest in leaving it.

Bantex_2

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

The thing is though, the status quo is pretty damn good.

We have completely free trade with Europe, a lot of job creating large global companies have significant manufacturing plants or regional HQ's here as a result, we benefit from all the bilateral trade agreements around the world that the EU negotiates on better terms than we could achieve by ourselves (market of 500m versus market of 60m), the net financial benefits to the UK of being in the EU are measured in billions of pounds a year, we can all freely live and work anywhere in Europe we like, etc etc etc....

And there are virtually no downsides, except for the odd frothing story in the mail about bendy bananas or such like, that almost always turn out to be a complete load of BS afterwards.

I really, honestly, have no idea why any level-headed, rational, clear thinking person would have even the slightest bit of interest in leaving it.

If that is true and provable, then why worry about a referendum as it will obvously go for staying in and close down all the doubts.

As an aside, I still cannot figure out why the whole of the EU traipses off the Strasburg once a month. It costs a fortune and wastes about a week every month.

You seen pretty clued up, could you explain to someone as dim as me.

CLAPTON

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

The thing is though, the status quo is pretty damn good.

We have completely free trade with Europe, a lot of job creating large global companies have significant manufacturing plants or regional HQ's here as a result, we benefit from all the bilateral trade agreements around the world that the EU negotiates on better terms than we could achieve by ourselves (market of 500m versus market of 60m), the net financial benefits to the UK of being in the EU are measured in billions of pounds a year, we can all freely live and work anywhere in Europe we like, etc etc etc....

And there are virtually no downsides, except for the odd frothing story in the mail about bendy bananas or such like, that almost always turn out to be a complete load of BS afterwards.

I really, honestly, have no idea why any level-headed, rational, clear thinking person would have even the slightest bit of interest in leaving it.

although the legislation on bendy bananas has now been abolished the issue did lead to a disgraceful wasted of perfectly good food

the legislation on bio fuels has helped destroy more rain forests, destroyed the income of the indigenous peoples and actually increased CO2 all base on politics rather than science

organised crime and corruption is rift within the EU with wide spread politic protection

the fisheries policies are global tragedy

economies of scale in the industrial world are indeed a positive for the EU but it's interesting that EU does have a Microsoft or a Facebook etc

there is a worldwide trend to reduce tariff as part of the WTA

if we are to have a sensible debate we need a more balanced discussion of both the benefits and the drawbacks of the organisation