Brexit

Moby

antrobus wrote: »

The future's always uncertain. And the end is always near. (Let it roll, baby roll:).)

I'm not convinced that it will be any different. Although I do suspect, assuming that we do get a successful 'renegotiation', that this time round we might have a PM that actually campaigns in favour of a yes vote, as opposed to leaving it to the leader of the opposition.:)

....but therein lies the rub............ what will be regarded as a 'successful renegotiation'. Will what Cameron regards as successful be seen in the same way by say John Redwood....Peter Bone etc?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/generalelection/eurosceptic-tory-mps-demand-major-concessions-when-david-cameron-renegotiates-britains-eu-membership-10240072.html

ruggedtoast

The point of Labour is that they are meant to forward the interests of working class, or at least working, people throughout the UK; irrespective of which part of it they live in.

The Union is a defacto necessity for Labour supporters because strength in numbers in a democracy is the only tool poorer people have to defeat the divide and rule policies of the, usually Tory, elite.

If they can't even campaign convincingly on that, and they didn't seem to be able to, then what is the point of them?

It would be nice to have a Labour party that wasn't paralysingly terrified of implying that it exists to represent working class people.

Generally this should be a common core of pro EU campaigning. The EU has made British workers immeasurably richer than they were before the EU. For all the barmy Brussels bendy bananas nonsense engendered by the Murdoch press, it should be pointed out that before the EU, few people could even afford to buy bananas in the UK.

As far as I can see, the EU migrants we have are doing a pretty good job of paying the taxes that fund much of the pensions and the welfare of most of the people who are planning to vote for them all to be kicked out.

ruggedtoast

chewmylegoff wrote: »

I should think the one thing that might tip the popular vote over into quit is the self appointed intelligentsia labelling anyone who opposes EU membership as a racist whilst failing to actually make the positive argument for continued membership that they insist is so overwhelming in terms that the electorate can actually understand and making vague unsupported statements that an exit will destroy us all.

Essentially that is the no campaign from the Scottish referendum came across. An independent Scotland will be !!!!!! and if you want it that means you are a narrow minded racist. That ludicrously inept campaign almost managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of a victory that should have been overwhelming and leaves a legacy of overwhelming nationalist support in the recent general election. a similar campaign in the quit/stay referendum is ironically the best chance that the so-called "racists" have of securing an exit.

On the occasion that "No" voters are able to frame a debate about the EU that isn't steeped in racism, xenophobia, and a rather wilful ignorance, I am happy to debate with them in that context.

You summarised why you are voting No rather well earlier on, and have obviously thought about it.

Unfortunately,"I want to bomb France" guy now sees you you as his buddy and natural referendum ally. And so do all his buddies and a great many other people who can only be described as raging racists.

Therefore, the onus is rather more on you to differentiate your No views from them, than it is for Yes voters to worry about being called a self appointed intelligentsia.

As for Scotland. Many of the bitterest English critics of Scottish independence, people who actually did alienate Scots, want nothing to do with the EU. Some of them thanked your post, apparently oblivious to the irony of writing hundreds of bitter missives accusing Scottish Nationalists of rampant anti-English racism over on the SNP thread for 2 years, and now wanting to do exactly the same thing themselves with our neighbours and friends 21 miles away in Europe.

If anything, the "No" spouters are making the EU want nothing to do with us, there is already plenty of anecdotal evidence that the Europeans are getting very tired of the UK and it's demands for special treatment.

Masomnia

ruggedtoast wrote: »

The point of Labour is that they are meant to forward the interests of working class, or at least working, people throughout the UK; irrespective of which part of it they live in.

The Union is a defacto necessity for Labour supporters because strength in numbers in a democracy is the only tool poorer people have to defeat the divide and rule policies of the, usually Tory, elite.

If they can't even campaign convincingly on that, and they didn't seem to be able to, then what is the point of them?

It would be nice to have a Labour party that wasn't paralysingly terrified of implying that it exists to represent working class people.

Generally this should be a common core of pro EU campaigning. The EU has made British workers immeasurably richer than they were before the EU. For all the barmy Brussels bendy bananas nonsense engendered by the Murdoch press, it should be pointed out that before the EU, few people could even afford to buy bananas in the UK.

As far as I can see, the EU migrants we have are doing a pretty good job of paying the taxes that fund much of the pensions and the welfare of most of the people who are planning to vote for them all to be kicked out.

I think you're right up to a point, but I think it will require a huge shift in the way that we see ourselves. As I always bang on about, people see themselves as Brits first and EU citizens second. In the same way that many Germans are cheesed off about bailing out lazy Greeks, rather than thinking that other EU citizens need support.

Many Labour supporters cherish the NHS, but it's incompatible with the EU (at least in the future), as why should French or German health care companies be excluded from providing health care in the UK which after all is just another part of the EU? Hence the NHS is under threat by EU competition law, and will be included in TTIP.

Railways will similarly never be renationalised as the direction of travel (pun intended) is towards a single railway area in which there is no room for state monopolies. Of course many on the left support this.

It may be a necessity for Labour supporters but it will force them to ask some pretty deep questions about what they value.

Thrugelmir

Masomnia wrote: »

Many Labour supporters cherish the NHS, but it's incompatible with the EU (at least in the future), as why should French or German health care companies be excluded from providing health care in the UK which after all is just another part of the EU? Hence the NHS is under threat by EU competition law, and will be included in TTIP.

Why shouldn't any EU citizen benefit from the NHS is the other issue.

Masomnia

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Why shouldn't any EU citizen benefit from the NHS is the other issue.

Mmm!.............

Generali

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Why shouldn't any EU citizen benefit from the NHS is the other issue.

UK citizens also get to use other EU health systems. I have been to A&E in France and The Boy had his MMR there.

BobQ

Masomnia wrote: »

Many Labour supporters cherish the NHS, but it's incompatible with the EU (at least in the future), as why should French or German health care companies be excluded from providing health care in the UK which after all is just another part of the EU? Hence the NHS is under threat by EU competition law, and will be included in TTIP.

Railways will similarly never be renationalised as the direction of travel (pun intended) is towards a single railway area in which there is no room for state monopolies. Of course many on the left support this.

It may be a necessity for Labour supporters but it will force them to ask some pretty deep questions about what they value.

We have been in the EU for many years and have had the NHS. They are compatible. If we choose to employ private contractors to deliver some services within the NHS (Tory policy) we can do so and allow them to compete for what we choose to outsource as any EU supplier can do. All of this is within the NHS Operating Model.

This conflicts with your previous argument. French, German, Italian, Irish and Spanish railways are fully or mostly government owned. Surely if privatised UK railways are a problem for the EU, the solution might be to renationalise them? They hardly provide an integrated service in the UK so cannot see them being integrated into a "single railway area" (whatever that is).

TickersPlaysPop

It annoys me so much when people are labelled as xenophobic just because they would vote to remove the UK from the EU.

I'm not saying I have an opinion either way at this point.

The banks threatening to leave the UK... the problem is not a UK problem it is a systemic global disease that need to be fixed. Creating money only when debt is created is a system doomed to fail if the banks are not willing to accept heavy regulation. We need to move money creation back into sovereign control?

It's the huge global companies that are sucking the life out of the economy by legally avoiding tax.

Tax the companies avoiding tax.

Regulate the banks heavily.

TickersPlaysPop

People are invested in, raised, educated and then they leave their country of origin to move to the UK... how do you think those countries feel about free movement of people within the EU?

This is of course only one part of the EU question.

The EU has mutated over the years far beyond the original intention of free trade. It is moving towards a United States of Europe and that is something people have not been given a choice over. soverign powers were handed over by Tony Blair without consent of the country.