When considering in or out:

[tony1851]

Short extract from the Telegraph:

'Juncker added: "The idea that, the day after the British referendum with a negative result, everything would carry on as it has so far is totally wrong. Those who leave the table can no longer eat at this table."'

That sums it up nicely; the EU bureaucracy is an exclusive dining club, where they all have their snouts in the trough - literally.

 

[Doggit]

And that comment from Juncker sums up the fear peddling game. Just because the referendum votes leave, the Government still has to give notice to go, and that doesn't have to be done immediately; and as with the Irish referendum that was run three times till they got the right result, I wouldn't put it past Cameron to do the same.

 

[PBC_1966]

I wouldn't put it past Cameron to do the same.

With more and more public money being wasted each time to push how "wonderful" EU membership is and how it would be "disastrous" if the U.K. really were to leave.

That's if it doesn't result in a frenzied round of renegotiations, after which he'll claim that the U.K. has won some fantastic concessions (which in reality are nothing of the sort) and thus the circumstances have changed so much as to make the referendum result invalid in some way. Then just carry on and say that since the situation has changed so much, there will be no need for a further referendum.

 

[JohnD]

This is an extract from the Bank of England's report. Note the use of the word "could" three times, and "likely" and "perhaps" once each - all in the space of three lines. All these 'expert' reports on the financial consequences of Brexit are full of 'ifs,' 'maybes', 'mights' , etc.

Whereas The Sun and the other Brexit papers are full of certainty... catering to the prejudices of their readers.

Do you know, we had some old plumber on here, claiming he had never met a single person who disagreed with him.

 

[noseall]

Even more scary stuff.

When those that are meant to be impartial are warning people, I guess it's time to listen. Haven't really heard any arguments for the good of leaving the EU other than those that have an interest in controlling immigration or of feathering their own nest.

 

[Deleted member 63160]

I wonder if the IMF are more concerned about the fall out if the UK does exit. I reckon it would cause the EU to collapse eventually.

 

[Himaginn]

First of all, it wasn't John's comment, it was mine. Quite honestly, if you can't get that bit right, what chance of you getting a bigger picture right?

Come on now, it's easy enough to accidentally mess up a quote when editing a post, especially with multiple quotes, quotes within quotes etc.

Are you really trying to use a small slip-up like that to try and discredit the content of the post? Look at the graph - There are expected dips here and there, but the overall trend is clearly upward.

I'd love to look at the graph, including the source article, which you'll notice Gerry still hasn't provided.
Just another little slip up? They're beginning to mount up, these little slip ups.

 

[Himaginn]

How about your claim that it's the Commission that holds all the power, makes all the decisions, etc.
Clearly that is not the case. On the temporary Visa free travel for Turkey:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36272677

Yes, the European Parliament votes on issues, but it's the Commission which has to put proposed legislation to parliament. You pointed out that the European Parliament may now "suggest" legislation to the Commission, but when asked for a citation indicating that the Commission must honor such requests, you failed to produce any. And you think that "roundly defeats" the argument?

It roundly defeats your assertion that it's the Commission that governs the EU.
The procedure is available, whether it's been used yet, I dunno, but the system and process is there to be used!
Whereas it's utterly obvious that the Commission does not make the rules, or govern the EU.

Think of the Commission as the same as committees in local and central government. They draft legislation in those committees to be put before the house/chamber for discussion and vote.
It would be intolerable, and nothing would ever get done if the legislation was drafted in the house/chambers.

 

[Himaginn]

Additionally, the fact that some Brexiters have been discovered breaking the rules illustrates their dishonesty. So we do care!

And you think that among all the "remainers" there aren't some breaking rules? "in" or "out," Labour or Conservative, male or female - There are always some who break the rules.

But only the Brexiters have been proven to be breaking the rules, so far.
So a proof that one side has broken the rules is no basis for assuming t'other side is/will also break the rules.

 

[Himaginn]

Even our home grown food is subsidised via the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP).

As the U.K. pays more into the EU then it gets back, that means that in effect the subsidy is originating from the U.K. in the first place.

Maybe, but it won't be available for farmers 'cos you'll have spent it on compensating all those exporters to EU for the tariffs imposed by EU on our exports to EU.
Moreover, there'll be additional UK expense required to reorganise the farming industry, invent the UK farming subsidies, and administer the scheme.
How many more times are you going to use the EU contributions?

 

[JohnD]

the European Parliament votes on issues, but it's the Commission which has to put proposed legislation to parliament.

Let me check how that works.

I'll be the Commission, you be the Parliament.

I propose that PBC pays me a million pounds. How do you vote? Yea or Nay?

Well that's a disappointment.

PBC has refused to vote in favour, and the result is that I don't get my million pounds. Furthermore, if the governments of the member nations don't think I am making the proposals they want, they can nominate people who will.

Yet PBC pretends that I am the one in charge.

 

[Himaginn]

Plus, doesn't the EU want VAT levied on foodstuffs?

Yes. The U.K. & Ireland are the only two countries which zero-rate most foods, and as discussed in one of the numerous other EU threads recently, the EU has been claiming that this is "unfair" for years.

Yet in my experience food is very similarly priced in France, but better quality, and fewer road miles.
Food in Spain is, generally, cheaper.
Explanations to be submitted to the forum for perusal.

 

[Himaginn]

It's interesting to know that the Leave campaign says it would continue with the agribusiness subsidies, so there would be no saving to the UK taxpayer.

Except for removing the whole extra layer of expensive EU bureaucracy from its administration.

Who would pay for the administration then, or do you expect the civil servants to work for free?

 

[EFLImpudence]

Plus, doesn't the EU want VAT levied on foodstuffs?

Yes. The U.K. & Ireland are the only two countries which zero-rate most foods, and as discussed in one of the numerous other EU threads recently, the EU has been claiming that this is "unfair" for years.

Yet in my experience food is very similarly priced in France, but better quality, and fewer road miles.
Food in Spain is, generally, cheaper.
Explanations to be submitted to the forum for perusal.

I don't see the relevance.

How much would it be here if Britain was not in the EU - and, indeed, how much in any other country if they were not?

With no VAT in Britain the basic price is therefore more expensive.
Obviously if the EU imposes VAT it will be that much higher again.

 

[Himaginn]

I think we can all agree that with age comes wisdom. The older you are, in general, the more knowledge you have gained of how the world works.
Polls show older voters favour Brexit. If I have to trust someone's judgement, I choose the wisdom of crowds. I choose age over youth...

You discount education then?
]