Jump to content

EU Referendum


Romes
 Share

EU Exit or Stay  

213 members have voted

  1. 1. EU referendum (Brexit) Are you For or Against?

    • Exiting the EU (Brexit)
      192
    • Staying in the EU
      21


Recommended Posts

its an OUT vote from me.

 

billions of pounds leaving the UK yearly to go to other countries while our own country suffers isn't what the EU should be about. in 2013 we contributed 13.5 billion euros and directly received back just 6.3 billion euros. yes, you could argue that there are other benefits such as free trade and European courts etc, but is that all really worth 7.2 billion euros? my opinion is probably not.

 

and lets be honest, we could still trade with whoever we wished. if we are not in the EU, we cant be dictated to by them over trading. worst case scenario would be that Germany dictate that other EU citizens are not to trade with us... but that wont happen as there are too many German owned businesses within the UK. they're too smart to cut their nose off to spite their face.

 

the real question though, is will we get this referendum? :hmm:

 

Lets get something straight.

The idea of an EU superstate isnt a bad one ,free trade ,mutual defence and free movement,they are not bad things.

The implementation is at fault,the twin parliaments costing far more than is reasonably acceptable,rampant red tape and bully boy style of politics.

There is a reason why the EUs books will never get signed off,you can be polite and say they dont quite balance,or you can tell it like it is and say they have been cooked and burned.

The idea is that it benefits the people ,you,me and the average man or woman on the street.

The only people it benefits are the fat cats and the politicos.

Thats not what we voted for.

To think we would lose trade because other EU states would ' Tell their citizens not to do business with the UK ' makes a mockery of democracy and the rights of the citizens living in free states.

Why should it cost so much money to run a free trade agreement and the ECHR ?

Why are countries accepted into membership when they didnt meet the criteria ?

Why was/is the Syrian migrant issue,and the illegal migrant issue as whole, handled better by these people who we pay all those billions to ?

And last of all,why is it Germany calls the shots on everything ? Because theyre the richest,strongest,biggest contributor ?

Is there a hierarchy within our 'union'

Im sorry but anyone who thinks all this is fine and dandy needs to talk to someone.

OUT , and before 2017 ,that 15 billion its going to cost us could be spent on better things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 175
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

That says it all Norway is not even in the top 5!!! We should get out and stay out! Let it implode if it likes. France and Germany will not stand for total collapse so it will keep on. But we will have an instant budget surplus!

Per capita. :good:

 

I'm afraid that is such an over-simplification and misses the wider, longer-term implications of a collapsing EU. Like it on not, you can't get around the fact that the EU has one of the largest economies on the planet, some say the largest, and it is a very big part of global economic stability.

Edited by FalconFN
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Lets get something straight.

The idea of an EU superstate isnt a bad one ,free trade ,mutual defence and free movement,they are not bad things.

The implementation is at fault,the twin parliaments costing far more than is reasonably acceptable,rampant red tape and bully boy style of politics.

There is a reason why the EUs books will never get signed off,you can be polite and say they dont quite balance,or you can tell it like it is and say they have been cooked and burned.

The idea is that it benefits the people ,you,me and the average man or woman on the street.

The only people it benefits are the fat cats and the politicos.

Thats not what we voted for.

To think we would lose trade because other EU states would ' Tell their citizens not to do business with the UK ' makes a mockery of democracy and the rights of the citizens living in free states.

Why should it cost so much money to run a free trade agreement and the ECHR ?

Why are countries accepted into membership when they didnt meet the criteria ?

Why was/is the Syrian migrant issue,and the illegal migrant issue as whole, handled better by these people who we pay all those billions to ?

And last of all,why is it Germany calls the shots on everything ? Because theyre the richest,strongest,biggest contributor ?

Is there a hierarchy within our 'union'

Im sorry but anyone who thinks all this is fine and dandy needs to talk to someone.

OUT , and before 2017 ,that 15 billion its going to cost us could be spent on better things.

The first two sentences are pretty accurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So? We are talking contributions as a whole and we pay a damned site more than we should. Germany still owes us after the last little go they had at European domination and from the first attempts as well I believe.

Per capita is very important as the cost per person is raised directly via taxes! The graph you showed broadly correlate to the population of each country - you wouldn't expect to see Luxembourg in the top five, but I bet they pay a similar amount per capita as others.

 

This shows the per person amount and we are very much middle ground, although this is before the rebate:

https://factcheckeu.org/numbers/show/104/national-contributions-to-eu-budget-per-capita-2013

Edited by FalconFN
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So? We are talking contributions as a whole and we pay a damned site more than we should. Germany still owes us after the last little go they had at European domination and from the first attempts as well I believe.

Germany was released from a lot of war reparations, one of the countries that voted for that was Greece. Greece has been virtually bankrupted, still has to buy arms from Germany and maintain a defence budget of 2% of the countrys money. Every EU country is supposed to do the same but somehow the Germans have reduced their defence spending to just over 1%.

The EU is a German led dictatorship, the biggest member sets the rules and bends them to suit itself, there is no accountability, no control.

I have doubts that we will ever get a true referendum but if we do I want out and the first priority would be border control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe there has to be due to the way it has been put forward. I dont think they can back out of this.

David Cameron has been very careful how he put it forward. He has always said that he would have a referendum once he had negotiated certain reforms and we would get a referendum on a reformed union.

Number one is that he has never specified what the exact reforms are that he wants and, looking at the way things are going, it doesn't look like he's going to get anything changed so it wouldn't surprise me at all if an in/out referdum never happens.

Given that he's already said that he's not going to run again then the end of 2017 is a good time for the cons to elect a new leader in time for 2020 if he's forced to resign over it.

 

You'll never see an ex-pm in a dole queue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Lets get something straight.

The idea of an EU superstate isnt a bad one ,free trade ,mutual defence and free movement,they are not bad things.

The implementation is at fault,the twin parliaments costing far more than is reasonably acceptable,rampant red tape and bully boy style of politics.

There is a reason why the EUs books will never get signed off,you can be polite and say they dont quite balance,or you can tell it like it is and say they have been cooked and burned.

The idea is that it benefits the people ,you,me and the average man or woman on the street.

The only people it benefits are the fat cats and the politicos.

Thats not what we voted for.

To think we would lose trade because other EU states would ' Tell their citizens not to do business with the UK ' makes a mockery of democracy and the rights of the citizens living in free states.

Why should it cost so much money to run a free trade agreement and the ECHR ?

Why are countries accepted into membership when they didnt meet the criteria ?

Why was/is the Syrian migrant issue,and the illegal migrant issue as whole, handled better by these people who we pay all those billions to ?

And last of all,why is it Germany calls the shots on everything ? Because theyre the richest,strongest,biggest contributor ?

Is there a hierarchy within our 'union'

Im sorry but anyone who thinks all this is fine and dandy needs to talk to someone.

OUT , and before 2017 ,that 15 billion its going to cost us could be spent on better things.

I can't disagree with any of that, not at all

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Per capita. :good:

 

I'm afraid that is such an over-simplification and misses the wider, longer-term implications of a collapsing EU. Like it on not, you can't get around the fact that the EU has one of the largest economies on the planet, some say the largest, and it is a very big part of global economic stability.

 

The whole point of the Mexico example is to show your whole economy doesn't have to be subject to the EU's red tape to allow free trade.

 

We buy more from the rest of the EU than they buy from us, they need our trade so couldn't afford to put barriers in the way.

 

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

When it comes to the vote I suspect we might be better out but neither side has presented any figures or proper reasoning to back their position so I

don't think I can vote yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

When it comes to the vote I suspect we might be better out but neither side has presented any figures or proper reasoning to back their position so I

don't think I can vote yet.

 

That's a very good point. I do, however, doubt that we. the great unwashed, will ever be given the truth by either side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed, but as I said, the EU isn't just about trade. Trade isn't the issue that annoys people as far as I can see, so examples of countries that trade with the EU are irrelevant. The EU is a political and economic union that other countries want to trade with, it is our membership of that union that is to be decided and not our membership of the EEA or any future free trade deal that we will have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

When it comes to the vote I suspect we might be better out but neither side has presented any figures or proper reasoning to back their position so I

don't think I can vote yet.

Because the accounts have never been audited because of lack of accountancy, fraud and corruption then I don't see how either side can possibly produce any reliable figures.

We can only guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

We buy more from the rest of the EU than they buy from us, they need our trade so couldn't afford to put barriers in the way. Very true

 

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

When it comes to the vote I suspect we might be better out but neither side has presented any figures or proper reasoning to back their position so I

don't think I can vote yet. Not just about the figures though is it, there's quality of life and that's worth more than any money.

:hmm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will take us off into the unknown, there is no doubt about that. People say they will still need us etc but Angela Merkel is a woman, hell hath no fury and all that stuff. Not to mention those Latin temperments where if someone snubs your family the blood feud is carried on for generations.

 

You just can't set aside the possibility that, even though it will cost them dearly, they would have the ability to completely and utterly cut us dead. Purely out of malice, and really shaft us just to prove they can. To teach us a lesson.

 

I would say be scared, be very scared what you wish for. Do you honestly think they are going to just say OK see you around?

 

A lot of the talk is dangerously nieve in my opinion

Edited by Vince Green
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will take us off into the unknown, there is no doubt about that. People say they will still need us etc but Angela Merkel is a woman, hell hath no fury and all that stuff. Not to mention those Latin temperments where if someone snubs your family the blood feud is carried on for generations.

 

You just can't set aside the possibility that, even though it will cost them dearly, they would have the ability to completely and utterly cut us dead. Purely out of malice, and really shaft us just to prove they can. To teach us a lesson.

 

I would say be scared, be very scared what you wish for. Do you honestly think they are going to just say OK see you around?

 

A lot of the talk is dangerously nieve in my opinion

Yes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will take us off into the unknown, there is no doubt about that. People say they will still need us etc but Angela Merkel is a woman, hell hath no fury and all that stuff. Not to mention those Latin temperments where if someone snubs your family the blood feud is carried on for generations.

You just can't set aside the possibility that, even though it will cost them dearly, they would have the ability to completely and utterly cut us dead. Purely out of malice, and really shaft us just to prove they can. To teach us a lesson.

I would say be scared, be very scared what you wish for. Do you honestly think they are going to just say OK see you around?

A lot of the talk is dangerously nieve in my opinion

 

Do you think the German car manufacturers would let them lose the British market?

 

Do you think the French farmers/cheese makers would let them lose the British market?

 

On the other hand the Spanish fishermen might not be so keen to be excluded from British waters, but then the

Scottish fleet might flourish once again.

 

Our trade might be damaged, but we (as a country) would have the massive savings to compensate.

 

Though as I said before nobody is presenting figures.

 

 

Because the accounts have never been audited because of lack of accountancy, fraud and corruption then I don't see how either side can possibly produce any reliable figures.

We can only guess.

 

That's only the EU accounts, the governmant must have a fair idea what it costs us and what benefit we get from it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Do you think the German car manufacturers would let them lose the British market?

 

Do you think the French farmers/cheese makers would let them lose the British market?

 

On the other hand the Spanish fishermen might not be so keen to be excluded from British waters, but then the

Scottish fleet might flourish once again.

 

Our trade might be damaged, but we (as a country) would have the massive savings to compensate.

 

Though as I said before nobody is presenting figures.

 

 

 

That's only the EU accounts, the governmant must have a fair idea what it costs us and what benefit we get from it.

Agreed but it does make it difficult in terms of value for money comparisons when trying to compare what various services would cost us either in or out.

And also to know how much of what we contribute is going straight down the drain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Do you think the German car manufacturers would let them lose the British market?

 

Do you think the French farmers/cheese makers would let them lose the British market?

 

On the other hand the Spanish fishermen might not be so keen to be excluded from British waters, but then the

Scottish fleet might flourish once again.

 

Our trade might be damaged, but we (as a country) would have the massive savings to compensate.

 

Though as I said before nobody is presenting figures.

 

 

 

That's only the EU accounts, the governmant must have a fair idea what it costs us and what benefit we get from it.

Its not about we buy from them its about what they buy from us. Look what happened with British beef a few years back, they just stopped buying it. Even though the EU said an embargo was illegal they went ahead and did it anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its not about we buy from them its about what they buy from us. Look what happened with British beef a few years back, they just stopped buying it. Even though the EU said an embargo was illegal they went ahead and did it anyway.

 

Ill take you up on that point.

We as a nation export a lot of food,Im not going to get into lists,but beef is one of them.

We import far more.

Its been said that this country does not produce enough food to feed itself,a staggering thought considering what we could produce.

We have fields left in stubble and rapeseed,we import wheat from Canada and Poland and we buy lamb from New Zealand.

Can anyone tell me why we cant produce these things,and others here ?

OK ,they must be cheaper ?

Why would it be cheaper to send produce half way round the world than make it here ?

The point is, so we stay in the EU because otherwise they wont buy our beef ? (I know this is just an example Vince :) )

They can either buy it or not,we can always eat it ourselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...