- Joined
- 16 Jan 2016
- Messages
- 447
- Reaction score
- 51
- Country
Good, go find them and post them...
In or out
- Thread starter gasbanni
- Start date
Sponsored Links
You'll regret that, 'cos I will, 'cos I can.
Then you'll suffer the indignation of being seen as a right plonker.
He'll be back in in a second to say, "well where are they?"
And I'll say, "patience! It'll take time, but it'll be done."
Sponsored Links
I'll enjoy the challenge that F&I has thrown down. Let him live up to his disgraceful behaviour.
But I have to admit to a big thank you to the likes of F&I, Gasbanni, PBC et al, because in the informal discussion we had tonight amongst friends, I was much more well-informed than I would have otherwise been.
I was well-informed of the typical arguments presented by the 'Out-ers'
So a big thank you to the 'out-ers' on this forum. It prepared me well.
So much so that a more formal gathering, including the younger members of our much extended families to discus these issues has been suggested.
S
Shutpa
As a declared 'Outer', I have removed my name from your list because I really don't see why I should be asked fight the other sides case. Nevertheless, since I do recognise the importance of seeing the oppositions point of view, and have answered the same question for them before, (page 9 of this thread),I really don't mind doing so again if only to remind myself that there is another side to the argument.
1. 'In', means we have the right to live and work in EU member countries. 'Out', means we would lose that freedom.
2. 'In' means that with easy access to the EU market, foreign-owned companies, eg Japanese car manufacturers, are happy to locate here creating thousands of jobs. 'Out' means that these companies could move to lower cost EU countries with the loss of these jobs.
3. 'In' means that UK exports are not subject to EU export tariffs. 'Out' means, not only would the UK be subject to such tariffs, but also that we would have to meet EU production standards.
4. 'In' means that the UK is in there helping write the rules. 'Out' means that they would be written without us.
I should point out that I posted that reply in response to a member, or perhaps several members, who posed the same question. And when someone asked why I hadn't put the 'Out' argument, I pointed out that then, as now, no one had asked for that case to be stated. I should have pointed out that in points 1 to 4, I did make an attempt to show both sides.
I got much, if not most of my information from here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20448450,
and although the arguments presented there and elsewhere, did not change my decision to want to leave the EU, I will be following the debates closely between now and R day. You just never know!
Edit: I felt really sorry for a small businessman interviewed on tv on Friday. He not only had to spend thousands of pounds having to introduce new packaging with words on the back to the effect that "This contains fish" on a packet of herring or some other fish, but also had to discard the already bought and paid for packaging which did not require such a statement.
Last edited by a moderator:
Kindly suggest who is posting the truth.
Don't forget, I know where the post is that you claim that you post the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
And the post by you that confesses to being a wind-up merchant, as well.
I did say I would, so here you go:
I think it's safe to say, you are now a right plonker.
I read that one of the IN arguments is that the EU create jobs by investing in EU countries (including the UK) Surely this is easily countered by saying that the £billions saved from membership fees/ contributions , can easily be invested in this once great country? Instead of giving them money and receiving less back, it can be invested in Britain's future?
D
Deleted member 63160
Interesting opinion.
The OUT campaigners have been asked to specify what trading arrangements would be made, and with whom, following a Brexit.
They've so far been extremely vague and noncommittal. PBC's model doesn't stack up. We export 50% of our goods to EU. There's no way we could easily find new markets for that amount of goods.
It's not an opinion.
D
Deleted member 63160
It is. It's what you think about something. It's your opinion.
A proven fact is not an opinion:
I don't mind how many times this comes up, the insincere, devious quotes of F&I keep getting repeated each time.
Precisely. Whatever financial arguments might exist for staying or leaving, the issue of freedom is a far more important one. On the surface, people might think that some of the EU's activities actually support that, but in reality, if you look more closely you find that they're actually setting up the stage to remove freedoms. Read the European Charter of Fundamental Rights, for a start.
The compliance with legislation which has been passed only in order to comply with EU directives has imposed huge and unnecessary costs on British businesses. To take another example, look at all the business premises which have had to replace perfectly good exit signage with the new, mandated "running man" signs. It's cost businesses, collectively, millions of pounds, and apart from that thousands upon thousands of perfectly serviceable exit signs have gone to the scrap heap. So much for not wasting resources!
But to be fair, sometimes the problem lies with Whitehall bureaucrats who "gold plate" rather vague EU directives with their own ideas, and a simple one-page directive written in very broad terms ends up as 20 pages of detailed regulations, so some of the blame lies firmly at home.
Exactly. And as I said some pages back, the argument in support of the EU that Britain gets EU grants for projects is just ridiculous set against the fact that the U.K. is putting more money into the EU in the first place. As I also said earlier, if anyone would like to send me £1000 I'll willingly send you £400 by return with conditions attached as to how you may spend it. That is effectively what happens with the "generous" EU grants.
There would be no need to, because all of those exports wouldn't simply stop. Yes, over time perhaps there might be a reduction, but to imply that withdrawal from the EU would immediately result in 50% of the U.K.'s exports drying up is just scare tactics.
Sponsored Links
