Chat Forum
It is currently Tue Feb 20, 2018 4:31 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 61994 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 1550  Next

Whether you can or can't actually vote IRL, In, or Out
In 61%  61%  [ 235 ]
Out 39%  39%  [ 151 ]
Total votes : 386
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 2:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11690
SamShark wrote:
DragsterDriver wrote:
I think it will be an 'out', the conditions Dave has won are clearly shite and full of conditions. He's come away empty handed.


So you think undecided people will see the deal as shit, and that will convince them to vote out?

Some say almost 50% of people are open to be convinced either way.

Where do you actually stand Sam?

I get you're a lefty, but the EU's intrinsic nature to go back on anything it has done so far and the deal not confirmed and legally binding isn't a great sell to any in voter.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 2:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 483
Silver wrote:
The Man Without Fear wrote:
Environmental regulations, human rights and workers rights are three examples that spring to mind instantly when one thinks, "What will be screwed if we leave the EU?"



How about we will be screwed if we stay in. The PM has much reduced power now. He or she will have almost no real power in 10 yrs if we vote to stay in


And who is to guarantee that environmental regulations, workers rights etc will not be changed by the EU? The super-state might actually worsen working conditions.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 2:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9265
Location: Mostly London........Mostly
Good to see The Sun are concentrating on the big issues of the referendum by having a front page splash featuring a photo of two euro aides caught shagging in the toilets


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 2:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 22491
danny_fitz wrote:
Good to see The Sun are concentrating on the big issues of the referendum by having a front page splash featuring a photo of two euro aides caught shagging in the toilets

Were they in or out?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 3:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3854
Location: 'ertfordshire
SamShark wrote:
Old bastards want out, the younger generation want to stay - 18-29s the biggest stayers, 60+ the most likely "out" group

This "Old Bastard" most definitely wants to stay in :thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 3:06 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 24194
Wendigo7 wrote:
SamShark wrote:
DragsterDriver wrote:
I think it will be an 'out', the conditions Dave has won are clearly shite and full of conditions. He's come away empty handed.


So you think undecided people will see the deal as shit, and that will convince them to vote out?

Some say almost 50% of people are open to be convinced either way.

Where do you actually stand Sam?

I get you're a lefty, but the EU's intrinsic nature to go back on anything it has done so far and the deal not confirmed and legally binding isn't a great sell to any in voter.


I back the status quo - remain. I think the EU is a self serving, unaccountable load of bollocks, but we are in now - it's what we have - and extracting ourselves is too risky for me. The EU would need to protect itself from future exits by other countries so has no interest in making our exit smooth and beneficial to us. They wouldnt spite themselves but wont assist/be helpful.

It's the same reason why I wanted Scotland to remain. Who knows if it would have been better for rUK sans Scotland, but all I could see was wrangling, animosity and shit loads of admin for years.

The above has nothing to do with left/right ideology or nothing to do with Cameron's deal, whatever that turns out to be.


Last edited by SamShark on Sat Feb 20, 2016 3:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 3:07 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 24194
SaintK wrote:
SamShark wrote:
Old bastards want out, the younger generation want to stay - 18-29s the biggest stayers, 60+ the most likely "out" group

This "Old Bastard" most definitely wants to stay in :thumbup:


Just a figure of speech :thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 3:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9265
Location: Mostly London........Mostly
Sefton wrote:
danny_fitz wrote:
Good to see The Sun are concentrating on the big issues of the referendum by having a front page splash featuring a photo of two euro aides caught shagging in the toilets

Were they in or out?


I believe the strap line was 'zip me up before you vote no' with a nod towards a certain wham classic


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 3:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2618
danny_fitz wrote:
Sefton wrote:
danny_fitz wrote:
Good to see The Sun are concentrating on the big issues of the referendum by having a front page splash featuring a photo of two euro aides caught shagging in the toilets

Were they in or out?


I believe the strap line was 'zip me up before you vote no' with a nod towards a certain wham classic

Gents toilets one presumes?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 3:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10714
SamShark wrote:
Wendigo7 wrote:
SamShark wrote:
DragsterDriver wrote:
I think it will be an 'out', the conditions Dave has won are clearly shite and full of conditions. He's come away empty handed.


So you think undecided people will see the deal as shit, and that will convince them to vote out?

Some say almost 50% of people are open to be convinced either way.

Where do you actually stand Sam?

I get you're a lefty, but the EU's intrinsic nature to go back on anything it has done so far and the deal not confirmed and legally binding isn't a great sell to any in voter.


I back the status quo - remain. I think the EU is a self serving, unaccountable load of bollocks, but we are in now - it's what we have - and extracting ourselves is too risky for me. The EU would need to protect itself from future exits by other countries so has no interest in making our exit smooth and beneficial to us. They wouldnt spite themselves but wont assist/be helpful.

It's the same reason why I wanted Scotland to remain. Who knows if it would have been better for rUK sans Scotland, but all I could see was wrangling, animosity and shit loads of admin for years.

The above has nothing to do with left/right ideology or nothing to do with Cameron's deal, whatever that turns out to be.


If the EU leave its all over. And that will be a very good not bad outcome. Europe will be able to breath the fresh air again


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 3:36 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5692
SaintK wrote:
SamShark wrote:
Old bastards want out, the younger generation want to stay - 18-29s the biggest stayers, 60+ the most likely "out" group

This "Old Bastard" most definitely wants to stay in :thumbup:


Ditto, but it is a month till I am 60 so I may change my mind when I pass that milestone.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 3:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 8:59 pm
Posts: 568
paddyor wrote:
The anglophone trade bloc is fantasy stuff. The only thing you and those countries had in common with each other back in the day was you controlled them. It's very much a case of grass is always greener. Why do people think a trade bloc with such different outlooks in and trade interests like that wouldn't be just as unwieldy as the EU.


Very true. Read an article saying we should continue our "love affair" with India. Which bit showed us to be a happy couple? When we slaughtered countless Indians or when their most famous individual is famed for getting us to fudge off? They were wanting reparations for colonial rule recently, pretty sure discussing it in their Parliament. Which brings me to very much doubt the reason we aren't trading with the Commonwealth is because the EU won't let us it's because they don't like us for invading them, killing them and raping them off their resources and subjecting them to rulers they didn't ever want.

But then again the Commonwealth is just a soundbite for the tabloids to propose a "viable alternative" to trading with the EU.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 3:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 29112
Carrots and Peas wrote:
paddyor wrote:
The anglophone trade bloc is fantasy stuff. The only thing you and those countries had in common with each other back in the day was you controlled them. It's very much a case of grass is always greener. Why do people think a trade bloc with such different outlooks in and trade interests like that wouldn't be just as unwieldy as the EU.


Very true. Read an article saying we should continue our "love affair" with India. Which bit showed us to be a happy couple? When we slaughtered countless Indians or when their most famous individual is famed for getting us to f**k off? They were wanting reparations for colonial rule recently, pretty sure discussing it in their Parliament. Which brings me to very much doubt the reason we aren't trading with the Commonwealth is because the EU won't let us it's because they don't like us for invading them, killing them and raping them off their resources and subjecting them to rulers they didn't ever want.

But then again the Commonwealth is just a soundbite for the tabloids to propose a "viable alternative" to trading with the EU.


Forget India, they're their own monster now, and you are correct that the history is a little complex, ditto the rest of the empire commonwealth. However the UK would benefit from much increased trade and freedom of movement agreements with Australia, Canada, and NZ. After all, the four of them are part of a very close knit military and intelligence arrangement. It is a very strange quirk of post-war history that they've managed to cut themselves off from each other in other matters.

I'd like to include Ireland in that group too, but I doubt they'd want to be included. Singapore is another one that could be considered.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 3:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3655
Just been reading up on an article which highlights the insanity of the EU (in todays Telegraph on paper).

70% of EU GDP is generated by services. There is no common market for services. 24 years and no common market for the most important area of European economies?

The remaining 30% of GDP (not all of which have access to a common market) are regulated by 700,000 pages of laws and regulations. Specifically on trade! That is a fraction of the total of laws made by the EU. 72% of British laws are now made by the EU, which probably explains the vast increase of laws passed under Blair and now Cameron.

No organisation can live like this. Its strangling growth and aspiration. When Britain joined the EC Europe accounted for 32% of world GDP, now it accounts for 19%.

In my opinion its trade union or nothing. And by that I mean no silly EU jobs to pension off politicians and free trade across goods and services.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 3:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 8:59 pm
Posts: 568
Newby1 wrote:
Just been reading up on an article which highlights the insanity of the EU (in todays Telegraph on paper).

70% of EU GDP is generated by services. There is no common market for services. 24 years and no common market for the most important area of European economies?

The remaining 30% of GDP (not all of which have access to a common market) are regulated by 700,000 pages of laws and regulations. Specifically on trade! That is a fraction of the total of laws made by the EU. 72% of British laws are now made by the EU, which probably explains the vast increase of laws passed under Blair and now Cameron.

No organisation can live like this. Its strangling growth and aspiration. When Britain joined the EC Europe accounted for 32% of world GDP, now it accounts for 19%.

In my opinion its trade union or nothing. And by that I mean no silly EU jobs to pension off politicians and free trade across goods and services.


How much of that is to do with the EU restricting Britain and how much to do with the Chinese, Indian, Middle Easters, NZ and Australian economies growing and therefore accounting for a larger share of the world's GDP since the early 70s though?

Edit - the answer is the rest of the world's growth to make that clear.

Also on services it's good for us if financial and legal services are unrestricted by Europe because they're the only reason we're a big economy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 3:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 8:59 pm
Posts: 568
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Carrots and Peas wrote:
paddyor wrote:
The anglophone trade bloc is fantasy stuff. The only thing you and those countries had in common with each other back in the day was you controlled them. It's very much a case of grass is always greener. Why do people think a trade bloc with such different outlooks in and trade interests like that wouldn't be just as unwieldy as the EU.


Very true. Read an article saying we should continue our "love affair" with India. Which bit showed us to be a happy couple? When we slaughtered countless Indians or when their most famous individual is famed for getting us to f**k off? They were wanting reparations for colonial rule recently, pretty sure discussing it in their Parliament. Which brings me to very much doubt the reason we aren't trading with the Commonwealth is because the EU won't let us it's because they don't like us for invading them, killing them and raping them off their resources and subjecting them to rulers they didn't ever want.

But then again the Commonwealth is just a soundbite for the tabloids to propose a "viable alternative" to trading with the EU.


Forget India, they're their own monster now, and you are correct that the history is a little complex, ditto the rest of the empire commonwealth. However the UK would benefit from much increased trade and freedom of movement agreements with Australia, Canada, and NZ. After all, the four of them are part of a very close knit military and intelligence arrangement. It is a very strange quirk of post-war history that they've managed to cut themselves off from each other in other matters.

I'd like to include Ireland in that group too, but I doubt they'd want to be included. Singapore is another one that could be considered.


But then surely you can have increased trade and movement with those countries whilst staying in the EU? And what honestly makes more sense, good trade relations with our neighbours or good trade relations with people living the other side of the world?

I'm not 100% sure but I really don't think part of EU membership is isolation from Aus, NZ, Singapore, China etc. Could be wrong though and if anyone knows I'm willing to be educated on it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 4:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2808
In

David Cameron
The Conservatives (75% of MPs)
Labour Party
Liberals
SNP
Green Party
Plaid Cymru
SDLP
The Queen
Archbishop of Canterbury
Barack Obama
NATO
US Government
CBI
80 % of FTSE 100 CEOs
The City

Out

UKIP
Ulster Unionists
Nigel Farage
IDS
John Redwood
Michael Gove
Kate Hoey
The Daily Express
Katie Hopkins
George Galloway
Nigel Lawson
Some other right wing loons aged 70+


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 4:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 22491
The Outs. :lol: :lol: :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 4:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 29112
Carrots and Peas wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Carrots and Peas wrote:
paddyor wrote:
The anglophone trade bloc is fantasy stuff. The only thing you and those countries had in common with each other back in the day was you controlled them. It's very much a case of grass is always greener. Why do people think a trade bloc with such different outlooks in and trade interests like that wouldn't be just as unwieldy as the EU.


Very true. Read an article saying we should continue our "love affair" with India. Which bit showed us to be a happy couple? When we slaughtered countless Indians or when their most famous individual is famed for getting us to f**k off? They were wanting reparations for colonial rule recently, pretty sure discussing it in their Parliament. Which brings me to very much doubt the reason we aren't trading with the Commonwealth is because the EU won't let us it's because they don't like us for invading them, killing them and raping them off their resources and subjecting them to rulers they didn't ever want.

But then again the Commonwealth is just a soundbite for the tabloids to propose a "viable alternative" to trading with the EU.


Forget India, they're their own monster now, and you are correct that the history is a little complex, ditto the rest of the empire commonwealth. However the UK would benefit from much increased trade and freedom of movement agreements with Australia, Canada, and NZ. After all, the four of them are part of a very close knit military and intelligence arrangement. It is a very strange quirk of post-war history that they've managed to cut themselves off from each other in other matters.

I'd like to include Ireland in that group too, but I doubt they'd want to be included. Singapore is another one that could be considered.


But then surely you can have increased trade and movement with those countries whilst staying in the EU? And what honestly makes more sense, good trade relations with our neighbours or good trade relations with people living the other side of the world?

I'm not 100% sure but I really don't think part of EU membership is isolation from Aus, NZ, Singapore, China etc. Could be wrong though and if anyone knows I'm willing to be educated on it.


Nope. UK can't negotiate special situations for those countries. UK is cut off from the three finest products of its imperial legacy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 4:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10714
Nobleman wrote:
In

David Cameron
The Conservatives (75% of MPs)
Labour Party
Liberals
SNP
Green Party
Plaid Cymru
SDLP
The Queen
Archbishop of Canterbury
Barack Obama
NATO
US Government
CBI
80 % of FTSE 100 CEOs
The City

Out

UKIP
Ulster Unionists
Nigel Farage
IDS
John Redwood
Michael Gove
Kate Hoey
The Daily Express
Katie Hopkins
George Galloway
Nigel Lawson
Some other right wing loons aged 70+


A weak tactic

Lying and deceitfulness is likely to be a lot more effective. Whatever you do don't debate the real issues


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 4:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 29112
Sefton wrote:
The Outs. :lol: :lol: :lol:


Elitist scum.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 4:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 22491
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Sefton wrote:
The Outs. :lol: :lol: :lol:


Elitist scum.

That's me.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 4:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 8:59 pm
Posts: 568
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Carrots and Peas wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Carrots and Peas wrote:
paddyor wrote:
The anglophone trade bloc is fantasy stuff. The only thing you and those countries had in common with each other back in the day was you controlled them. It's very much a case of grass is always greener. Why do people think a trade bloc with such different outlooks in and trade interests like that wouldn't be just as unwieldy as the EU.


Very true. Read an article saying we should continue our "love affair" with India. Which bit showed us to be a happy couple? When we slaughtered countless Indians or when their most famous individual is famed for getting us to f**k off? They were wanting reparations for colonial rule recently, pretty sure discussing it in their Parliament. Which brings me to very much doubt the reason we aren't trading with the Commonwealth is because the EU won't let us it's because they don't like us for invading them, killing them and raping them off their resources and subjecting them to rulers they didn't ever want.

But then again the Commonwealth is just a soundbite for the tabloids to propose a "viable alternative" to trading with the EU.


Forget India, they're their own monster now, and you are correct that the history is a little complex, ditto the rest of the empire commonwealth. However the UK would benefit from much increased trade and freedom of movement agreements with Australia, Canada, and NZ. After all, the four of them are part of a very close knit military and intelligence arrangement. It is a very strange quirk of post-war history that they've managed to cut themselves off from each other in other matters.

I'd like to include Ireland in that group too, but I doubt they'd want to be included. Singapore is another one that could be considered.


But then surely you can have increased trade and movement with those countries whilst staying in the EU? And what honestly makes more sense, good trade relations with our neighbours or good trade relations with people living the other side of the world?

I'm not 100% sure but I really don't think part of EU membership is isolation from Aus, NZ, Singapore, China etc. Could be wrong though and if anyone knows I'm willing to be educated on it.


Nope. UK can't negotiate special situations for those countries. UK is cut off from the three finest products of its imperial legacy.


Oh really, so the UK can't have trade relationships with anyone without it being with rEU as well? Do you have a treaty source for this out of interest?

It doesn't make sense to me because so many countries (notably the US, Russia, China, Japan and the Middle East) buy the financial and legal services from the City, so we must be able to have some sort of relationships outwith the EU. Or is that because those relationships are with big global banks and multinational magic circle law firms etc so the relationship is with private companies and not the UK government?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 4:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 29112
Quote:

Oh really, so the UK can't have trade relationships with anyone without it being with rEU as well? Do you have a treaty source for this out of interest?


That's not my main point sorry. Talking about the freedom of movement thing. But as for trade, that has always been complex - UK joining the EEC sent NZ's economy into a quarter century restructuring spiral which we emerged from fully only a decade ago.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 4:16 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14695
Location: South Oxfordshire
Carrots and Peas wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Carrots and Peas wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Carrots and Peas wrote:

Very true. Read an article saying we should continue our "love affair" with India. Which bit showed us to be a happy couple? When we slaughtered countless Indians or when their most famous individual is famed for getting us to f**k off? They were wanting reparations for colonial rule recently, pretty sure discussing it in their Parliament. Which brings me to very much doubt the reason we aren't trading with the Commonwealth is because the EU won't let us it's because they don't like us for invading them, killing them and raping them off their resources and subjecting them to rulers they didn't ever want.

But then again the Commonwealth is just a soundbite for the tabloids to propose a "viable alternative" to trading with the EU.


Forget India, they're their own monster now, and you are correct that the history is a little complex, ditto the rest of the empire commonwealth. However the UK would benefit from much increased trade and freedom of movement agreements with Australia, Canada, and NZ. After all, the four of them are part of a very close knit military and intelligence arrangement. It is a very strange quirk of post-war history that they've managed to cut themselves off from each other in other matters.

I'd like to include Ireland in that group too, but I doubt they'd want to be included. Singapore is another one that could be considered.


But then surely you can have increased trade and movement with those countries whilst staying in the EU? And what honestly makes more sense, good trade relations with our neighbours or good trade relations with people living the other side of the world?

I'm not 100% sure but I really don't think part of EU membership is isolation from Aus, NZ, Singapore, China etc. Could be wrong though and if anyone knows I'm willing to be educated on it.


Nope. UK can't negotiate special situations for those countries. UK is cut off from the three finest products of its imperial legacy.


Oh really, so the UK can't have trade relationships with anyone without it being with rEU as well? Do you have a treaty source for this out of interest?

It doesn't make sense to me because so many countries (notably the US, Russia, China, Japan and the Middle East) buy the financial and legal services from the City, so we must be able to have some sort of relationships outwith the EU. Or is that because those relationships are with big global banks and multinational magic circle law firms etc so the relationship is with private companies and not the UK government?


You're talking at cross purposes.

We can of course trade with any other country or trade block in the world. However the terms of that trade are dictated by our membership of the EU - so tariffs on Bananas from Barbados (as an example that seems to come back time and time again) are dictated by Brussels and can't be waived by London.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 4:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 8:59 pm
Posts: 568
Saint wrote:
Carrots and Peas wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:

Nope. UK can't negotiate special situations for those countries. UK is cut off from the three finest products of its imperial legacy.


Oh really, so the UK can't have trade relationships with anyone without it being with rEU as well? Do you have a treaty source for this out of interest?

It doesn't make sense to me because so many countries (notably the US, Russia, China, Japan and the Middle East) buy the financial and legal services from the City, so we must be able to have some sort of relationships outwith the EU. Or is that because those relationships are with big global banks and multinational magic circle law firms etc so the relationship is with private companies and not the UK government?


You're talking at cross purposes.

We can of course trade with any other country or trade block in the world. However the terms of that trade are dictated by our membership of the EU - so tariffs on Bananas from Barbados (as an example that seems to come back time and time again) are dictated by Brussels and can't be waived by London.


Ahhh ok thank you :thumbup: .


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 4:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 29112
Of course you have the TPP and TTIP trade agreements swooping in over the top of all bilateral and existing trade agreements. But I do think that a pure free trade and freedom of movement block between the four main anglophone countries (minus the US) would be very desirable but just not possible given UK's entwinement with Europe.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 4:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 29112
Saint,

Correct. Thank you for articulating my point better than I was doing (hangover is my excuse).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 4:22 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14695
Location: South Oxfordshire
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Of course you have the TPP and TTIP trade agreements swooping in over the top of all bilateral and existing trade agreements. But I do think that a pure free trade and freedom of movement block between the four main anglophone countries (minus the US) would be very desirable but just not possible given UK's entwinement with Europe.


for the UK it wouldn't make financial sense unless we could keep the same with the EU


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 4:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 29112
Saint wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Of course you have the TPP and TTIP trade agreements swooping in over the top of all bilateral and existing trade agreements. But I do think that a pure free trade and freedom of movement block between the four main anglophone countries (minus the US) would be very desirable but just not possible given UK's entwinement with Europe.


for the UK it wouldn't make financial sense unless we could keep the same with the EU


I agree, but the EU is a merciless master, and is completely ignorant of, and unwilling to learn about the UK's historical ties with Canada, Australia and NZ. In fact there's probably more than a little malice in seeing Britain cut down to size.

EDIT: imagine Britain being part of the EU and having preferential and open access to the vast territories, regions, and mineral wealth of Australia and Canada. And NZ's hobbits. The Germans and French would be thrilled by that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 4:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 8:59 pm
Posts: 568
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Saint wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Of course you have the TPP and TTIP trade agreements swooping in over the top of all bilateral and existing trade agreements. But I do think that a pure free trade and freedom of movement block between the four main anglophone countries (minus the US) would be very desirable but just not possible given UK's entwinement with Europe.


for the UK it wouldn't make financial sense unless we could keep the same with the EU


I agree, but the EU is a merciless master, and is completely ignorant of, and unwilling to learn about the UK's historical ties with Canada, Australia and NZ. In fact there's probably more than a little malice in seeing Britain cut down to size.


It doesn't make any sense for the EU to be shrinking the British economy maliciously because that would cost them money. Talk about cutting off your noise to spite your face.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 4:33 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14695
Location: South Oxfordshire
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Saint wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Of course you have the TPP and TTIP trade agreements swooping in over the top of all bilateral and existing trade agreements. But I do think that a pure free trade and freedom of movement block between the four main anglophone countries (minus the US) would be very desirable but just not possible given UK's entwinement with Europe.


for the UK it wouldn't make financial sense unless we could keep the same with the EU


I agree, but the EU is a merciless master, and is completely ignorant of, and unwilling to learn about the UK's historical ties with Canada, Australia and NZ. In fact there's probably more than a little malice in seeing Britain cut down to size.


Up to a point I agree - I'm not sure that it's a conscious malice, but I think that there is something there, especially from the French. However, our geography more or less dictates who our closest trading partners need to be, and those are the cards that we've been dealt with.

Cameron's successes (limited such as they are) in getting some sort of accommodation out of the EU shows that we can influence things from the inside when we put our minds to it; however, if we will continue to just ignore the EU for large periods of time, and insist on sending UKIP MEPs to Brussels, then I'm afraid we get the EU we deserve. We need to be engaging with the EU on a daily basis if we want to have some form of real influence - that doesn't mean joining the Eurozone or being closer politically by any means


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 4:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2618
Nobleman wrote:
In
The Conservatives (75% of MPs)


Guido has it as 30% of tory MP's in
40% as out and rest undecided


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 4:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 981
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-35621079

EU referendum: Cameron sets June date for UK vote


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 4:51 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 24194
Quote:
If we will continue to just ignore the EU for large periods of time, and insist on sending UKIP MEPs to Brussels, then I'm afraid we get the EU we deserve.


Fair point - it's crazy that so many of our representatives just want to make a mockery of it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 5:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 45318
The Man Without Fear wrote:
Let months of lies, propaganda, speculation and tedious TV and radio interviews commence!



Indeed some people might even say if we vote out British people would lose their human rights.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 5:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19988
We're obviously gonna get an in vote, might be closer than expected, and the world will see us as a bunch of entitled whiners. Again.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 5:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 29112
Glaston wrote:
Nobleman wrote:
In
The Conservatives (75% of MPs)


Guido has it as 30% of tory MP's in
40% as out and rest undecided


Where does Jacob Rees-Mogg stand?

He shall be my lodestone.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 5:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8143
Newby1 wrote:
Just been reading up on an article which highlights the insanity of the EU (in todays Telegraph on paper).

70% of EU GDP is generated by services. There is no common market for services. 24 years and no common market for the most important area of European economies?

...


Huh?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 20, 2016 5:22 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 24194
AND-y wrote:
We're obviously gonna get an in vote, might be closer than expected, and the world will see us as a bunch of entitled whiners. Again.


Perhaps so, but I wish I had more insight into what other countries think about the EU.

Does everyone else apart from the UK think it's perfect?

Do pothers think it's not great, but they are happy to put up with it?

Or do others want change, in which case why do we see this as the UK demanding change and others having accepted a little bit to keep us quiet.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 61994 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 1550  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: backrow, Banana Man, Bobless, Chips, Chuckles1188, Clive Simms, clydecloggie, croyals, danthefan, Diego, duke, earl the beaver, Edinburgh01, eldanielfire, feckwanker, Google Adsense [Bot], GWO2, happyhooker, hermie, Jensrsa, JoeMangled, La soule, Lazy Couch potato, Liquid_Len, ManInTheBar, Mick Mannock, normilet, ovalball, Oxbow, redderneck, Saint, SamShark, Seez, SFBB, Snooze, troglodiet, ukjim, Ulsters Red Hand, unseenwork, Witchfinder General, World Class Phil and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group