Reasons to Remain.

[JohnD]

Obviously jock is not a UK taxpayer, so he doesn't contribute to roadbuilding, schools or the NHS, used by people, some of whom are poorer than him. I bet he would be really annoyed if he paid more than he got back.

He would say its his right not to be a net contributor, even if he has more money coming in than the average Scot. He probably thinks England should absorb more Scots escapees too.

Still, if UK leaves the EU, and Scotland leaves the UK and rejoins the EU, only Scotland will be under an obligation to give freedom of movement to people from other countries. England will be under no obligation to absorb refugees or economic migrants from independent foreign countries.

 

[PBC_1966]

No-one mentioned anything about EU embargoing trade with UK. They'd be happy to trade with us, as long as we comply with their regulations and pay their import duties.

Then why have you been trying to suggest that outside of the EU the U.K.'s trade with EU countries would plummet to very low levels?

If we didn't apply import duties , there'd be no leverage to motivate them to enter into a trade agreement.

So the U.K. would apply import duties, just as it already does on goods from other parts of the world, and just as it did on goods from EEC countries prior to joining.

 

[PBC_1966]

It is only in my later years that I began to take an interest in economics. If you think that politicians make the policies then you are very much mistaken, it is all down to the economists.

I certainly think that's a very valid point. As much as politicians might nominally be in charge of setting policies, ultimately it comes down to following the money trail and the vested interests.

History has always been written by the winner & history as you know it bears little resemblance to the truth.

Also a very good point about the victors writing the history books. Going rather off the topic, but take the huge deception found in most concise histories here about Abraham Lincoln, for an example.

 

[PBC_1966]

Since Britain joined the European Economic Community (now the EU) in 1973, the nation has become one of Europe’s best-performing large economies.

But that is not necessarily a consequence of joining the EEC/EC/EU. Without being tied up in all the red-tape and expense, perhaps Britain's economy would have improved even more, meaning that membership of the EU has actually held it back.

 

[JohnD]

Can you quantify "all?"

It is very noticeable that after joining the EU, UK stopped lagging other comparable large, prosperous and developed European countries.

There is most certainly no evidence to suggest that leaving the EU would bring economic advantage.

 

[PBC_1966]

It is very noticeable that after joining the EU, UK stopped lagging other comparable large, prosperous and developed European countries.

What proof is there that it was joining the EEC, later the EU, which resulted in that?

There is most certainly no evidence to suggest that leaving the EU would bring economic advantage.

Even if that is true, monetary gain is not the only, or even the most important issue here. Freedom is far more important than being rich.

 

[JohnD]

There is certainly no evidence to suggest otherwise.

Building and living in a free and united Europe is far more important than being rich. Remember that the greatest motivation for the men who initiated a united Europe was that they had just lived through the greatest and most destructive war the world had ever seen. The older ones had also lived through the second greatest and most destructive war the world had ever seen. Nothing was more important to them than making a recurrence unthinkable.

View media item 3017

 

[jockscott]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...ompletely-open-about-its-superstate-plan.html

Another reason to vote NO methinks... JohnD and Himmy,, do you really want an EU Superstate??

 

[JohnD]

I want a strong union, of which the UK should be a major part.

Let me check what's inside your head:

The people who run the EU are
1) MEPs elected by the citizens of the constituent nations, and ministers and representatives from those nations,
or
2) Evil alien goblins

Which do you think it is?

 

[tony1851]

you forgot:
3) self-serving Eurocrats.

 

[JohnD]

That's the same as the evil alien goblins. You are suggesting that they are beings who are not elected or nominated from the constituent nations. Perhaps you think that the UK is governed by self-serving evil Westminstercrats and Holyroodcrats.

Does Manchester have a City Council? Who elected them?

 

[PBC_1966]

You are suggesting that they are beings who are not elected or nominated from the constituent nations.

Just because they happen to be from one particular member country and some of them are elected doesn't mean that they can't be "Euorocrats" who, for their own particular reasons, want to see a federal European superstate.

 

[JohnD]

They are not from "one particular country."

They are from all the nations of the union.

If you are from a country that doesn't want to be a part of the union, or a country that is too close to Russia and has been threatened by Mr Putin that dire consequences will occur, you don't have to be.

If you don't like the union being run by elected members, and representatives of the constituent governments, perhaps you prefer some undemocratic system.

However, the countries with recent experience of the Soviet Empire are very keen to escape it and to become part of a European Union.

 

[tony1851]

That's the same as the evil alien goblins. You are suggesting that they are beings who are not elected or nominated from the constituent nations. Perhaps you think that the UK is governed by self-serving evil Westminstercrats and Holyroodcrats.

Does Manchester have a City Council? Who elected them?

I agree that we have greasy, self-serving slimeballs in Westminster and Holyrood, but at least they are our slimeballs whom we can vote in and out every so often.
I don't recall being asked whether or not to vote for Junker or Tusk et al. Speaking of Tusk, apparently Junker gave him a medal 3 or 4 years ago, for standing up to Polish workers - it's like Animal Farm or even the old USSR, where they gave each other medals for diddly squat. Tusk should remember the Polish airmen who joined the RAF in 1940 - they were the ones who deserved their medals.
Incidentally, when he was President(?) in Poland, he was on E60,000 a year. Apparently his wife wanted him to earn more and pushed him to go for his present position, where he earns E200,000 + if I'm not mistaken; a Pole climbing the greasy Europole.

 

[JohnD]

"I don't recall being asked whether or not to vote for Junker or Tusk et al"

Neither were you invited to vote for Brown, Milliband or Major, nor will you be invited to vote for Oily Dave's replacement. Perhaps you would be happier with a popular figurehead like Trump or Putin.

It is however to be expected that when you are in a multi-national Union, some of the active people will not be from your home town. That is to be welcomed. I can see it would not be comfortable for a person who dislikes and distrusts foreigners, and believes they are evil alien goblins.

You seem very vague about your other meandering allegations, isn't the Daily Mail website up today?