BREXIT - Why?

savings_my_hobby

uk1 wrote: »

It is human nature that the ceos of big corporations want to minimise turbulence and uncertainty. They only like change that they make for others rather than change done to them.

It is ironic that many of the people who have been highly vocal in society and politics about how out of synch the aims and behaviour of big business is with ordinary people are now telling us that we should listen to them carefully and trust that what they are telling us now is somehow philanthropic and in our own best interests as individuals rather than their shareholders.

I think it is very kind of them.



Jeff

This is why the political left (Corbyn, Green party etc.) surprise me on this issue. The EU is basically the worlds biggest forum for corporate lobbying, I'd have thought this alone would mobilise the "revolutionaries" into mass hysteria sufficient enough to guilt us all into voting to leave.

savings_my_hobby

PenguinJim wrote: »

How many Brits in places like Spain will be forced to return to the UK?

None, next question please

savings_my_hobby

typistretired wrote: »

And many people originally thought we were only joining for trade. Somehow we were blind sided into joining all the other stuff.

The result of Maastricht, the maastricht treaty was signed by John Major in 1992 and transformed the EEC into the EU.

maastricht treaty is aka the treaty of European Union.

So when Cameron promised fundamental reform, some of us were expecting a return to the pre '92 era of relations with Europe, instead what we got was proof the EU cannot be reformed.

savings_my_hobby

PenguinJim wrote: »

I think you've got it the wrong way around - it's the French, German, Italian et al governments that are offering proper living rights for all EU citizens. Britain is not.

Whether Britain is part of the EU or not, my wife and I don't have the same right to live in Britain that we currently enjoy in every other flipping EU country - and that's despite my being British-born and a British passport holder.

I haven't seen any mention of this in the IN campaign, probably because of how embarrassing it is for the British government to be treating its own nationals worse than the other EU governments (in this specific case).

There is no "mirroring". Britain has a very strangely uneven advantage in this particular aspect, and I'm surprised more isn't being made of it. Then again, perhaps it is - perhaps it's discussed with regularity in the EU media about how we Brits are having our cake and eating it with regards to mixed-nationality partnership migration.

Take a look at how easy it is for a Brit to move to Canada right now. If you're a skilled worker in a profession that is on their list this year, and you have had the good fortune to be working continuously in that field for 5+ years, and your English is excellent, you've got a good chance of being accepted within a couple of years. (Alternatively, you can invest CA$2,000,000.)

It's easier than most places, in other words.

Except an EU country, because we can decide to move there this morning and be there by lunchtime if we want.

Now, take those Canada requirements, and optimistically apply them to the EU countries post-Brexit. Except, of course, with fluency in their first languages. Are you starting to get the picture?

Of course, relatively few people emigrate, but it's still worth pointing out that we lose significant emigration options if we leave. Sure, you don't want to move to France today (even though you literally could, later today, after reading this post!), but what about in ten years' time? 20? 40?

France is wasted on the French, after all.

Noted, although some of us are far more concerned with immigration not emigration.

Also you do not have a British Passport you have a European Union Passport, it is written right at the top and this is the point. before long Britain could be no more significant than Essex or Yorkshire, A region in a United States of Europe.

savings_my_hobby

[/COLOR]

Linton wrote: »

I dont know what "other stuff" you had in mind, but I think that you will find that much of it is ultimately to do with trade. For example the UK public has for a long time been keen on animal welfare on farms. In continental europe this has been much less of an issue. By being in the EU the UK has been able to negotiate common welfare standards. Without this commonality UK food exporters would have found it more difficult to be competitive. Perhaps foreign farmers saw this as unnecessary EU interence and an attack on their nation's sovereignty.

As well as ensuring that cost competition within the EU doesnt reduce all standards to the lowest level, this commonality of standards enables the EU to enforce similar standards on other countries who wish to enter agreements to trade with us without fighting large tariffs. The size of the EU market gives it far greater power to do this than the UK could on its own.

Perhaps, then perhaps they realised that they were net recipients not net contributors as we are.

It is one thing for your boss to tell you what to do it is quite another for your employee to. We pay good money for the plessure.

Anyway according to radio 4 today most of Europe are still not at our standards with regards to animal welfare

BananaRepublic

savings_my_hobby wrote: »

The result of Maastricht, the maastricht treaty was signed by John Major in 1992 and transformed the EEC into the EU.

maastricht treaty is aka the treaty of European Union.

So when Cameron promised fundamental reform, some of us were expecting a return to the pre '92 era of relations with Europe, instead what we got was proof the EU cannot be reformed.

That is the fundamental problem, Europe is committed to ever greater integration, and our politicians will simply go along with most of it. We only escaped the Euro because Brown hated Blair, and wanted to antagonise Blair who pushed for us to enter the Eurozone. (According to Andrew Rawnsley, on the basis of interviews with high level sources.) Blair of course gave away some of our rebate.

Cameron got nothing more than a fig leaf that does not hide the EU's naughty bits.

super_reds

Really can't understand why anybody would vote Remain, not been many empires that haven't want to expand their territory over the course of history.

Even if you want to stay by voting Leave the UK will get a better deal than the one Cameron came back with, useless tool that he is.

bigfreddiel

Reported in the Telegraph:

The Chancellor suffered a double blow on Tuesday after official figures showed public borrowing was higher than expected in April, while the previous year's deficit was also larger than first!thought.
Public sector net borrowing, excluding public sector banks, stood at £7.2bn in April.

So if George can't even work out the UK's finances, how can you believe him and his team if they predict a recession when we exit the EU?

Cheers fj

BananaRepublic

Sturgeon had it right when she warned that the blatant lies by the Bremain camp risk alienating voters from politics. It is shameful the way they are behaving.

I heard Farage today on the radio, with his acolytes, and it was like a group of children, really shallow and puerile, but no worse than Cameron et al. albeit less sophisticated.

One school of thought is that the vote will be decided by the camp that gets its voters out.

atush

She had it wrong when she thought the price of oil would support the Scottish spending plans too.