Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Brexit Referendum Poll - In Or Out?


warpig
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 260
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Well the mystical overlords will never be voted out anywhere in the world will they

There is nothing mystical about them, they are well recognised, but you've made my point.

So do you see the hypocrisy of arguing against one level of overlord while accepting another? My argument is simple. Deal with the local mystical overlords first, then the next level. Trying to do it the other way around won't work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Conversation this evening about Brexit included this statement, "It is easier to reform the EU from inside than being out altogether."

Response, "If Cameron could not achieve the desired reforms, why will it be any different in the future?"

...... ........

Ooops, trigger happy.

As far as voting is concerned:

EU top hierarchy should be voted for. Lords should be reformed with a massive cull for starters.

Voter apathy and misinformation campaigns - I predict 65% turnout. I noticed Cameron is trying to move away from Project Fear mantra in his speeches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope it would not, but not being part of a club like that is preferable to belonging to it i never said it would change the situation

Then why leave? If there is even the slightest chance we might sway the argument from the inside, then surely it is better to at least try? Are you saying that it is better to admit defeat, and leave these nations to their fate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of people I talk to seem to think that Brexit would mean immediately reversing the last 40 years of UK law returning us back to where we were in 1974.

The way I see it, there are really 3 possibilities:

1) As above, a complete revocation of all EU laws, would take years to pass through parliament and is consequently never going to happen.

2) Leave all laws (FOI, Minimum pay, Max working hours) much the way they are now - This is what Brexit would be.

3) March forward into a new European order, which will involve...? I don't know, but it's what a YES vote will get us.

Edited by Habeas Domus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you're ok with technocracy so long as it does things you approve of?

That strikes me as an incredibly short sighted view. And i don't understand how people can approve of a democratic government being overruled by an unelected bureaucracy and thinking this is a good thing.

Democracy is the worst system aside from all the others and such. Unfortunately Europe as a whole has never really seemed to get that with the exception of the UK. And perhaps nowadays not even the UK gets it.

Read my post again. I'm not pro EU on the whole, I just trust them to do the right thing more than I trust Westminster. There is a fag paper between the two, but in my opinion, the EU has done more for the working biddy than Westminster. Feel free to persuade me otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then why leave? If there is even the slightest chance we might sway the argument from the inside, then surely it is better to at least try? Are you saying that it is better to admit defeat, and leave these nations to their fate?

Showing people the exit in a fire isn't leaving them to their fate is it?

Staying in and telling everybody that the fires not that bad, preventing them from leaving by lighting other fires and then telling them "what could they do about it anyway?" is leaving them to their fate. Isn't it? :blink:

Edited by XswampyX
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of people I talk to seem to think that Brexit would mean immediately reversing the last 40 years of UK law returning us back to where we were in 1974.

The way I see it, there are really 3 possibilities:

1) As above, a complete revocation of all EU laws, would take years to pass through parliament and is consequently never going to happen.

2) Leave all laws (FOI, Minimum pay, Max working hours) much the way they are now - This is what Brexit would be.

3) March forward into a new European order, which will involve...? I don't know, but it's what a YES vote will get us.

maybe 4) Remain and wait for the STHF then form new European order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The most efficient way to deal with a mess, is to get rid of the biggest mess first and that certainly isn't London it's Brussels. Not only is it a mess, they're non-elected officials, so they go first.

We do determine the direction of our country, we always have apart from when the EU morphed from a trade agreement in to some political and economic behemoth. You seem to have a problem with politics in general and as such you should vote to rid yourself of this extra layer of bureaucratic nonsense that we didn't sign up to.

No, it is not. The most efficient way to deal with a mess is to deal with the root cause of the mess. That is the mess that has existed in this country since.... well, since gawd knows when!

'We' do NOT determine the direction of our country. 'We' do not determine it's financial, or international, direction. Don't believe me? Give me an example of when a vital government decision has been taken in 'our' interest.

You're right to a certain extent, I have a problem with politicians in general. I've just watched a Question Time filmed in my home city. A question was asked about raising taxes to fund the NHS. Not one of the politicians addressed the fact that the NHS has become a monster, delivering services that are way outside it's original remit. Not one politician said that we shouldn't be providing IVF treatment for same-sex couples, not one politician said we shouldn't be providing breast enlargement/reduction on the NHS, not one politician said that the reductions in local government spending has shifted costs from local government onto the NHS, with a minimum of at a 2x multiplier in cost. All they wanted to do is say how THEIR party would invest the most in the NHS.

How could you NOT have a problem with politicians, and politics, in this country? Do I think Brussels is better? Yes, but by a baw hair, as we say up here. That baw hair is enough though, enugh for me to vote in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the House of Lords is utterly irrelevant. Compare a revising chamber which basically does skut work that the MPs can't be bothered to deal with with a European Commission wielding executive power. Comparing British democracy unfavourably with the EU technocracy is a sick joke tbh.

I disagree. Tell me what Westminster has done to favour you over the last 20 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe so but we all had a chance to vote ,our system is not perfect (first past the post ) but we have a post and we have a chance to vote for the politicians who stand as candidates we can also vote for which candidate stands for the parties of one`s choosing

Of course there is, there will be another vote in a few years vote them out you have no chance of doing so with the EU

You detest what we have because you have no say but you are happy to vote for much more of the same ?because of economic arguments that are all hypothetical from both sides

All the same the sky will fall in arguments were had when the country was deciding on whether to use the euro or stick with the pound what happen sweet fa nothing changed

But your option is to opt out of a layer that has done an, admittedly limited, amount of good for the working man, and put your trust in an institution that has done sweet fa for him? Where is the point in a democracy that only allows the eventual election of the same shade of grey? Red or blue, they're grey in the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Showing people the exit in a fire isn't leaving them to their fate is it?

Staying in and telling everybody that the fires not that bad, preventing them from leaving by lighting other fires and then telling them "what could they do about it anyway?" is leaving them to their fate. Isn't it? :blink:

Showing people an exit to the fire in the building is not, you're right. If the fire that is killing them is burning in their stomach though, then all you are doing is giving them false hope. An illusion of salvation.

Staying in, and telling them that they should use some of the water they have to extinguish the internal fire that most certainly WILL kill them, at least leaves a scintilla of hope of putting out the external fire with what water they have left.

Sorry, I'm stretching your metaphor to make the point, but I hope you get it.

Edited by AThirdWay
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The mess is organic, it's mess piled upon mess. A simple analogy is you have to tidy before you can clean and we only have one shot at this in the foreseeable future and that's June 23rd.

The last referendum on proportional representation is a good example. There are tens of thousands more examples, the problem is you don't want to see it. You're a Europhile and I'm seriously starting to consider whether you might be on a European payroll.

Yes politicians are a sellout, there's no surprise there. They all need funding, they all want to keep their job, so they don't rock the boat. Why are you so surprised? There will only be political reform after an economic collapse, staying in the EU simply means we'll recover slower than as a fully independent country.

The problems you're describing are a function of socialism, we need to move away from a system that makes useless employees more difficult to sack and where decisions are taken in fear of upsetting the balance. As Maggie aptly said, "the problem with socialism, is you run out of other people's money." The EU is a great idea in principal, but the mechanics of it are a nightmare and beyond that they're a financial drain. We're better off on our own by a factor of 3 or 4 to 1.

No, it is not. The most efficient way to deal with a mess is to deal with the root cause of the mess. That is the mess that has existed in this country since.... well, since gawd knows when!

'We' do NOT determine the direction of our country. 'We' do not determine it's financial, or international, direction. Don't believe me? Give me an example of when a vital government decision has been taken in 'our' interest.

You're right to a certain extent, I have a problem with politicians in general. I've just watched a Question Time filmed in my home city. A question was asked about raising taxes to fund the NHS. Not one of the politicians addressed the fact that the NHS has become a monster, delivering services that are way outside it's original remit. Not one politician said that we shouldn't be providing IVF treatment for same-sex couples, not one politician said we shouldn't be providing breast enlargement/reduction on the NHS, not one politician said that the reductions in local government spending has shifted costs from local government onto the NHS, with a minimum of at a 2x multiplier in cost. All they wanted to do is say how THEIR party would invest the most in the NHS.

How could you NOT have a problem with politicians, and politics, in this country? Do I think Brussels is better? Yes, but by a baw hair, as we say up here. That baw hair is enough though, enugh for me to vote in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Supporting the working man is what's wrong with this country. We should support those that are unable to work, not those who choose not to work. Our benefits system is an international joke, even economic migrants from Syria are falling over themselves to get here. I want control of our borders in terms of asylum seekers and immigration and that's simply impossible when we're a member of the EU

My angle is that I think the EU, by a tiny margin, has supported the working man more than Westminster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He'd have us get to the root cause of the fire and prevent other fires. meanwhile the house is burning down. I suspect your approach is much like mine, let's put the fire out before it kills someone.

Showing people the exit in a fire isn't leaving them to their fate is it?

Staying in and telling everybody that the fires not that bad, preventing them from leaving by lighting other fires and then telling them "what could they do about it anyway?" is leaving them to their fate. Isn't it? :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He'd have us get to the root cause of the fire and prevent other fires. meanwhile the house is burning down. I suspect your approach is much like mine, let's put the fire out before it kills someone.

Yeah. To hope to stay in the EU but bring our own government down would be like going on holiday with the couple from next door, finding out they are complete control freaks and instead of leaving them in the hotel you ring up your kids and get them to burn down your grandparents house because your parents didn't love you.

Eh? :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of people I talk to seem to think that Brexit would mean immediately reversing the last 40 years of UK law returning us back to where we were in 1974.

The way I see it, there are really 3 possibilities:

1) As above, a complete revocation of all EU laws, would take years to pass through parliament and is consequently never going to happen.

2) Leave all laws (FOI, Minimum pay, Max working hours) much the way they are now - This is what Brexit would be.

3) March forward into a new European order, which will involve...? I don't know, but it's what a YES vote will get us.

You are delusional. Brexit will mean the UK competing head on with the third world with it's citizens having no EU protection. That will result in third world pay and working conditions for many. Why would the UK 1% want to keep any of the EU red tape that gets in the way of increasing their share? Those EU regulations will go the same way a UK human rights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Supporting the working man is what's wrong with this country. We should support those that are unable to work, not those who choose not to work. Our benefits system is an international joke, even economic migrants from Syria are falling over themselves to get here. I want control of our borders in terms of asylum seekers and immigration and that's simply impossible when we're a member of the EU

You do understand the concept of the 'straw man' argument, yes?

You're all over the place man, but I did think that, at the root of it all, would be a problem with immigration :lol:

I've mentioned, on other threads, that all the bs about sovereignty and deciding our own destiny is just misdirection. It will all boil down to immigration in the end. You're so predictable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The mess is organic, it's mess piled upon mess. A simple analogy is you have to tidy before you can clean and we only have one shot at this in the foreseeable future and that's June 23rd.

The last referendum on proportional representation is a good example. There are tens of thousands more examples, the problem is you don't want to see it. You're a Europhile and I'm seriously starting to consider whether you might be on a European payroll.

Yes politicians are a sellout, there's no surprise there. They all need funding, they all want to keep their job, so they don't rock the boat. Why are you so surprised? There will only be political reform after an economic collapse, staying in the EU simply means we'll recover slower than as a fully independent country.

The problems you're describing are a function of socialism, we need to move away from a system that makes useless employees more difficult to sack and where decisions are taken in fear of upsetting the balance. As Maggie aptly said, "the problem with socialism, is you run out of other people's money." The EU is a great idea in principal, but the mechanics of it are a nightmare and beyond that they're a financial drain. We're better off on our own by a factor of 3 or 4 to 1.

Again, you're all over the place! Of course politicians are a sell-out, that is MY point, not yours. YOUR point is that EU politicians are a sell-out, but UK ones are less so. that is not the case.

How, in the name of the wee man, can the problems of a political and financial elite, that I have described, be "a function of socialism"? That makes about as much sense as exposing the "best country in the world" to enormous political upheaval!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can sense you're running out of steam and that won't work on me, my grandfather is Croatian, my grandmother is Scottish, my father is American and my mother is English, my heritage is the poster boy for immigration and I'm all for it, BUT in a controlled manner which we don't have.

You do understand the concept of the 'straw man' argument, yes?

You're all over the place man, but I did think that, at the root of it all, would be a problem with immigration :lol:

I've mentioned, on other threads, that all the bs about sovereignty and deciding our own destiny is just misdirection. It will all boil down to immigration in the end. You're so predictable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can sense you're running out of steam and that won't work on me, my grandfather is Croatian, my grandmother is Scottish, my father is American and my mother is English, my heritage is the poster boy for immigration and I'm all for it, BUT in a controlled manner which we don't have.

So it IS about immigration? So what was all that previous flannel about?

So, tell me, which UK political party do you trust to reduce immigration?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then why leave? If there is even the slightest chance we might sway the argument from the inside, then surely it is better to at least try? Are you saying that it is better to admit defeat, and leave these nations to their fate?

Why did you you vote out in the scottish referendum surely it would be better to stay if there was a chance of changing from the inside ? or did you think there was no chance of change ? thats where i am on the EU

Why did you choose to run ?

Edited by long time lurking
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is nothing mystical about them, they are well recognised, but you've made my point.

So do you see the hypocrisy of arguing against one level of overlord while accepting another? My argument is simple. Deal with the local mystical overlords first, then the next level. Trying to do it the other way around won't work.

Ahh i see that's why you wanted out of the UK ..all makes sense now ....not

Fighting 1 bullie is preferable to fighting 2 ?

Edited by long time lurking
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.