EU Referendum Vote - Poll

Fortheloveofguitar

octatonic;1117379" said:

Friday cannot come soon enough.

Amen to that

Paul_C

I'm particularly looking forward to Wednesday, but that's because I'm taking my daughter to Woburn Safari Park.

Rocker

As someone who does not have a vote in this referendum, I am very impressed by the arguments put forward by @ICBM and @ToneControl. But the overall lack of real facts, provable facts - not opinions, has left the debate wide open to scurrilous comments gaining the status of fact.

Paul_C

ToneControl

Heartfeltdawn said:

ToneControl said: I think you have to make adjustments to each source of information, based on your perception of its source

At what point do you recommend dropping a heroic dose of LSD to adjust the source? 

Picture yourself on a boat

Fretwired

The UK's relationship with Europe ... 23 years of being slapped in the face with a wet mackerel .. vote Brexit and hit the EU hard with a large North Sea Cod ...

ToneControl

Limehouse_Blues said:

I disagree with some of ToneControl's "proven facts" on p.45 of this thread.

14. Re no trade deals with 'major' countries. I'm starting with this one because it's the most egregious. What’s a ‘major country’ by your reckoning? Half of the G8 are EU member states (Italy, France, Germany, UK). The US has free trade agreements with four other G20 countries (Mexico, Canada (both NAFTA anyway) Australia and South Korea. The EU has four member states that sit in the G20 and the EU itself has FTAs with five other non-EU G20 members (Canada, Turkey, South Africa, Mexico and South Korea). So almost half the G20 is either in the EU or has a free trade agreement with it. Your “proven fact” is a demonstrable falsehood. And if you meant China or the other BRICs, the US hasn't an FTA with any of them either.

I've stated the fact that the EU has no trade deals with any major countries, I checked their list - it's a fact

The largest countries are Mexico, Chile, South Africa Norway and Switzerland.  

--- fact

the list is lamentable:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_free_trade_agreements#Free_trade_agreements_in_force

The EFTA Member States (Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway have a deal with Canada, the EU doesn't. How does that make the EU look?  Amateurish, I'd say

1. Re laws. The EU comprises its member states of which the UK is among the more important. Almost 9 times out of 10 in Council, decisions go the UK’s way. In some areas (particularly in important aspects of banking and financial services regulation) other supra-national bodies (notably the G20 and the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision) set the agenda - not the EU.

It is true that in recent years EU legislation increasingly takes the form of Regulations (having direct effect in Member States) rather than Directives (which require to be transposed into national law). But whether adopted as Regulations or Directives, the substance of much EU legislation comprises technical rules that facilitate the functioning of the single market. The bedrock of law relating to property, contract and insolvency as well as the judicial machinery for resolving disputes remains distinct in the various member states.     

So why is the ECJ over-riding Uk courts?

2. Re democracy. You assert it is a “proven fact” that the EU is "less democratic" whereas that's clearly a matter of opinion. As I’ve observed previously on this thread, our directly elected representatives in the European Parliament arguably have greater scope to change legislation during its genesis than lawmakers at Westminster. Also, in the EU law making process, the democratically elected governments of the member states in Council arguably play the most important role.

that is BS. The UK MPs create and can amend legislation, MEPs cannot.

Anyone who looks closely enough at the passage of both UK and EU legislation from early proposals / consultations through to made law can see how the Commons is something of a rubber stamping chamber for a government put in place by FPTP voting. FPTP can produce a legislative tyranny that is far from “democratic”. The EU law making machine and the Westminster legislature are different beasts and neither system is perfect. Yet to openly assert without any sort of qualification whatsoever that one is “less democratic” than the other is a massive over-simplification that suggests you know how to objectively “measure” or quantify democracy as if it was liquid in a measuring vase. This is politics, not science, and the world is not black and white.

less democratic = more executive power held by the unelected

ToneControl

3. Re closer union. Again, the EU comprises its member states. The UK does not seek closer political integration at the EU level (quite the contrary). Nor do some other member states, particularly the non-eurozone Nordics. Some politicians in some member states may favour more fiscal integration but to suggest this is even a “plan” is disingenuous. Yes, the eurozone member states are, in some areas, looking for tighter integration but nobody is trying to build a superstate. Even tentative steps towards any sort of fiscal pooling or burden sharing run into road blocks at every turn (witness the arguments over common deposit insurance in the context of the much vaunted eurozone ‘banking union’). Even if there was a "plan" it wouldn't, I would guess, have much chance of success because that would require a degree of unanimity among the member states that simply isn't there. The implication of any "superstate" plan would be to emasculate (with the consent of all the relevant member states) the national ministries of finance in eurozone countries as fully as the national central banks were upon the creation of the ECB. You may think that is likely. I don't.

I think you are very mistaken

8. Re 'control'. You make a reasonable point about the impact of migration on demand for essential services but ignore the fact that EU migrants are almost invariably UK taxpayers and your starting premise as to a lack of "control" is simply untrue. A substantial proportion of immigration to the UK is from outside the EU. The UK could cut that element virtually to zero tomorrow if it was minded to. As far as intra-EU movement goes, freedom of movement has strings attached. An EU citizen that exercises freedom of movement needs to be able to support himself or herself in the member state they move to. If they can’t, then they can be kicked out by the host member state. Admittedly, the generosity of universal in-work benefits in the UK makes it easier to jump that hurdle here but the UK could change that (by shifting away from universal benefits to a contributions based system).

you are missing the point, what benefit is it to Uk citizens to have EU migrants arriving with no skills, or duplicates of existing skills - this reduces the pay for the poorest already here

10. Re benefits. A Pole or a German living and working in the UK is a UK resident but not a UK national. That you confuse nationality and residence speaks volumes. I think you mean that EU rules prevent discrimination among EU citizens on grounds of nationality which is quite right. When it comes to benefits, the reason this anti-discrimination rule proves such a headache for the UK is largely because of the universal benefits model that the UK favours. See above. If the UK would only shift to a contributions based system (as prevails in many other countries) then there would be far less furore over this.

I am not confused about residents vs nationals. Yes, it would be better to re-engineer the benefits system, but I think we would be poorer is we moved to the Bismarck model

13. Re lowest growth rate. Against which other political unions of sovereign nation states are you comparing the EU? There aren’t any that I can think of. To say that the EU (and in particular the eurozone) has its problems would be an understatement. But where is your shining beacon in this post-crisis world? The USA? Japan? The boom that bust in 2008 has negatively affected all heavily indebted ‘developed nations’ and the policy response has been broadly similar everywhere (variations on a QE theme). The inflation in financial and real assets that the post-crisis policy response has produced does not represent real ‘growth’.

I've read that growth in the developed countries outside the EU is higher, is that not true?

I checked it here, http://www.tradingeconomics.com/euro-area/gdp-growth

and the USA seems to have 2 or 3 times the EU growth rate for the last few years

thanks for responding btw, nice to discuss these details

Nitefly

Mackerel?  I thought they were herrings, but I couldn't see a red one...

Fretwired

Limehouse_Blues said:

Not sure where to begin with this so I shall say just this .. the UK doesn't have a trade deal with China .. nor does the EU. However we trade .. if you have things worth buying people buy them.

Re laws ... you need a lesson on stats. The UK actually agrees with most laws and just votes YES. In instances where we disagree and want changes we won zero concessions. Your figures are misleading.

Re democracy - I don't think you have any idea how the EU works. Take the election of Junker. The governments of the EU members discussed a short-list and agreed on Junker. The UK blocked his appointment but was overruled. The MEPs voted but had only one name of the ballot paper - Junker. That's how the USSR worked - deals in the background, vote for the chosen man. Democracy it isn't. MEPs have no real power - they can suggest new law or make law.

The fastest growing area in the world is Asia .. the EU takes to long to make decisions and is in economic decline. Over the weekend you may have used a smart phone made by Apple or Samsung, used a tablet computer from Apple to order goods from Amazon or put in a bid for something on eBay, posted on Facebook or Tweeted, typed a letter using Microsoft Word or edit a photo using Adobe Photoshop ... these companies didn't start in the EU. Ask yourself why that is the case ..

Bidley

This whole thing is turning into Rangers vs Celtic (or any other rabid sporting rivalry).

If you're voting based on the official campaign(ers), then I question whether you should be allowed to vote at all...

Clarky

still struggling to make my mind up..

in principle I like the idea of the EU

in practice it's looking like shite

not a fan of moving towards an EU Federation [or worse]

I like the idea of the UK being a member of an EU that is a partnership for trade and other things of common interest [like sharing data and resources for things like catching serious criminals etc]..

maybe at the extreme end of that something like a Confederation so the member states have more autonomy / independence..

I think my single biggest issue is trust / faith

I seem to have little trust / faith in the info, projections and rantings we're being fed by both sides

and I have little trust / faith in the people actually running the EU and what their end game agenda is

ToneControl

Clarky said:

still struggling to make my mind up..

in principle I like the idea of the EU

in practice it's looking like shite

not a fan of moving towards an EU Federation [or worse]

I like the idea of the UK being a member of an EU that is a partnership for trade and other things of common interest [like sharing data and resources for things like catching serious criminals etc]..

maybe at the extreme end of that something like a Confederation so the member states have more autonomy / independence..

I think my single biggest issue is trust / faith

I seem to have little trust / faith in the info, projections and rantings we're being fed by both sides

and I have little trust / faith in the people actually running the EU and what their end game agenda is

that's a good summary of where I started from

quarky

Chalky

ToneControl;1117690" said:

Clarky said:

still struggling to make my mind up..

in principle I like the idea of the EUin practice it's looking like shitenot a fan of moving towards an EU Federation [or worse]

I like the idea of the UK being a member of an EU that is a partnership for trade and other things of common interest [like sharing data and resources for things like catching serious criminals etc]..maybe at the extreme end of that something like a Confederation so the member states have more autonomy / independence..



I think my single biggest issue is trust / faithI seem to have little trust / faith in the info, projections and rantings we're being fed by both sidesand I have little trust / faith in the people actually running the EU and what their end game agenda is





that's a good summary of where I started from

The EU endgame is, and has always been, closer European political union. This has been categorically stated by France and Germany for DECADES. This is not for debate in the EU. It is at the very core of EU's existence.

It is plain stupid to think we can change this.

ToneControl

Chalky said:

ToneControl;1117690" said:

Clarky said:

still struggling to make my mind up..

in principle I like the idea of the EUin practice it's looking like shitenot a fan of moving towards an EU Federation [or worse]

I like the idea of the UK being a member of an EU that is a partnership for trade and other things of common interest [like sharing data and resources for things like catching serious criminals etc]..maybe at the extreme end of that something like a Confederation so the member states have more autonomy / independence..



I think my single biggest issue is trust / faithI seem to have little trust / faith in the info, projections and rantings we're being fed by both sidesand I have little trust / faith in the people actually running the EU and what their end game agenda is





that's a good summary of where I started from

The EU endgame is, and has always been, closer European political union. This has been categorically stated by France and Germany for DECADES. This is not for debate in the EU. It is at the very core of EU's existence.

It is plain stupid to think we can change this.

This is true, the plan is a federation

it's a matter a record in the national archives that UK treasury officials knew this in 1970

see the Peter HItchens video

at 13:30

not only was it planned to be a federation, the Euro currency can only work if it is one

Fretwired

The Daily Mail is urging voters to vote Remain ... so having spent 40 years criticising Europe the paper has done a complete U turn.

Limehouse_Blues

In reply to TC:

Labelling that the EU’s accomplishments "amateurish" in the arena of free trade is unfair. Remember, the EU is not a nation state but a group of nations which includes half of the G8. Does the other half of the G8 trade as freely with one another as the UK does with France, Italy and Germany? Outside, the EU has recently secured an FTA with Canada, after long negotiation and is seeking agreement with the US via the proposed TTIP, of which you're presumably a big fan. Neither the US nor the EU has an FTA with China. Hardly surprising given the latter’s almost neo-mercantilist bent. China doesn’t do “free” trade. Heck, China doesn’t do “free” - ask Ai Weiwei.

On the ECJ, there is a distinction to be drawn between national law and EU law. Yes, the latter trumps the former in those areas where the EU has competency. The supremacy of EU law in discreet areas is not news. The EU courts are only involved when questions of EU law (especially treaty rights) are engaged. If two parties start a contractual dispute in the High Court, their litigation may reach the UK Supreme Court but it won't end up in the EU courts unless questions of EU law are engaged (unlikely in many, if not most, domestic cases). The judgments in Factortame are worth reading.

Yes, UK MPs can initiate and amend legislation. But how often does this happen outside the government’s legislative agenda (private members’ bills etc)? And to what extent do MPs substantively overhaul items on the government’s legislative agenda? Often it’s comparatively little. Any UK government with a solid majority and effective whip can do what it wants. Moreover, observe the extent to which the UK government legislates via statutory instrument these days, rather than statute. SIs receive even less scrutiny, especially when subject to negative review or, as a few SIs may be, not even laid before Parliament.

The EU Parliament has limited rights of initiative. See Article 225 TFEU. That indirect right may be of limited practical significance but your assertion that MEPs cannot amend EU legislation is wrong. That’s exactly what MEPs do every day. The genesis of EU legislation involves much more political horse trading than UK legislation. That much of that horse trading between Council, Parliament and Commission occurs behind closed doors in ‘trilogue’ arguably is a cause for concern. You may be interested to read the EU ombudsman’s consultation on the trilogue process.  

You think I’m mistaken on closer union. Well, only time will tell I guess.

Your question about the impact of migration on wages pretty much boils down to “What’s the benefit of competition?” I haven’t the time or inclination to begin to try to explain that one but Adam Smith might be able to point you in the right direction. Given your apparent enthusiasm for FTAs I had you down as a regular free marketeer. Maybe not eh?

Anyhow, it’s pretty clear that we’re on different sides of the fence here and neither is likely to be persuaded by the other’s arguments. I wish I could say I was logging off to go plug in my Strat but sadly it’s just to get on with work. I, like everyone else, will be glad when Friday comes.

I look forward to the debate returning from these trifling affairs of state to matters of far greater import like maple vs rosewood; plexi vs tweed etc.

Bluebeard

John Oliver did a bit on Brexit this week

Axe_meister

It comes down to trust who do you trust more.

An unelected EU official with less of a political agenda, or our current lot of incompetent politicians (on both sides)