EU membership referendum debate thread

Snail · Post by **Snail** » 28 May 2016, 22:36

I suggest you read his book:
https://yanisvaroufakis.eu/books/and-th ... they-must/

Maybe I will.

johnhemming2 · Post by **johnhemming2** » 29 May 2016, 10:39

The flaw in the idea of getting the Germans (and British) to pay for everything is that they won't be guaranteed to agree to this.

Post by **clv101** » 31 May 2016, 22:11

From Paul Kingsnorth's newsletter:

I have just voted in Britain's referendum on whether or not to stay in the EU. I voted to leave. Readers of my work will probably understand why: I instinctively favour small government (if any), accountable democracy, local culture. Any giant, distant governing institution makes those things hard if not impossible to achieve, as any Scottish nationalist will tell you. Small is not just beautiful, it is also more effective, as I wrote in this article a few years back.

AutomaticEarth · Post by **AutomaticEarth** » 31 May 2016, 22:29

I had an amazing discussion tonight. I was talking to young people who want to stay in the EU. Here is the conversation:

Me: 'Why do you want to stay in the EU?'
Them: 'Because we are better off in'.
Me: 'why?'
Them: 'because we are safer in'.
Me: 'why?'
Them: 'because that is what we are told'.
Me: 'oh'.
Me: 'how is it easy getting a job?'
Them: 'really difficult. There are no jobs out there'.
Me: 'yes there are. You are not looking hard enough'.
Them: yes we are! But they are already taken!'
Me 'oh really?'
Them: 'yes.'
Me 'by whom?'
Them: 'mainly foreigners by the looks of it. They seem to be taking the jobs at the moment.'
Me: 'and you still want to vote to stay in the EU?'
Them: 'yes'.
Me: 'why?'
Them: 'because it makes sense.'
Me: 'oh.'

Apologies for the long post, but the above conversation took place. Let's just hope they stay in bed on the day. Btw these were local college kids who came in for a bite to eat, as was myself after coming back from London today.

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 31 May 2016, 22:46

Paul Kingsnorth is useful for making one think but not necessarily the best advisor. Government has to be at the appropriate level; small for small things, large for large things. Few people really seem to grasp the notion of subsidiarity.

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 01 Jun 2016, 02:45

I was chatting yesterday to one of my daughters who helps run the local ATC. We were talking about the EU and migration and how migrants are taking jobs which local youngsters don't seem to be educated to take. I said that the education system was at fault and she agreed saying that children today are educated to pass exams and are told what to do. When not told what to do they are helpless and have no initiative. She sees a good cross section of society in the ATC and they are all much of a muchness.

BritDownUnder · Post by **BritDownUnder** » 05 Jun 2016, 00:04

Seems to me that the European Union represents a failure of negotiation on the part of the UK. That's maybe because the UK joined late. I know the French vetoed the UKs entry for a while. When the UK finally wanted to join, Ted Heath and the UK negotiators were probably at a disadvantage and wanted any deal that they were offered. The Europeans knew this and exploited it to the full.

My brother who studied politics at University once told me that the EU was founded for German industrialists and French farmers and I think that has elements of truth even now. I understand the beginnings were actually a coal and steel community.

As for staying or leaving that is really not for me to say as I left the UK many years ago but I understand that the UK is making a net financial contribution of around 3 billion pounds a year to give it a right to be a member of a free trade/travel/movement-of-people-and-capital zone that it has a large trade deficit with.

Australia and NZ have a similar arrangement which has resulted in NZ being a 'branch' of Australia so far as business is concerned.

I would probably advise that the UK citizens vote out and attempt to renegotiate the membership terms on a more favourable basis.

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 05 Jun 2016, 07:28

BritDownUnder wrote: attempt to renegotiate the membership terms on a more favourable basis.

There's zero chance of that.

The UK wasn't in at the start, for which Charles de Gaulle has to take a lot of personal responsibility, rather than 'France' generally, but most of the EU members joined after the UK.

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 05 Jun 2016, 08:49

The moment of truth

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFt-pRI ... e=youtu.be

fuzzy · Post by **fuzzy** » 05 Jun 2016, 10:37

BritDownUnder wrote:Seems to me that the European Union represents a failure of negotiation on the part of the UK. That's maybe because the UK joined late. I know the French vetoed the UKs entry for a while. When the UK finally wanted to join, Ted Heath and the UK negotiators were probably at a disadvantage and wanted any deal that they were offered. The Europeans knew this and exploited it to the full.

My brother who studied politics at University once told me that the EU was founded for German industrialists and French farmers and I think that has elements of truth even now. I understand the beginnings were actually a coal and steel community.

As for staying or leaving that is really not for me to say as I left the UK many years ago but I understand that the UK is making a net financial contribution of around 3 billion pounds a year to give it a right to be a member of a free trade/travel/movement-of-people-and-capital zone that it has a large trade deficit with.

Australia and NZ have a similar arrangement which has resulted in NZ being a 'branch' of Australia so far as business is concerned.

I would probably advise that the UK citizens vote out and attempt to renegotiate the membership terms on a more favourable basis.

I would mainly agree with your thinking, except trying to 'renegotiate' implies that the UK public gets a bum deal because of our contract. It's not like that. Our national government is a self serving fungus dating back to the Normans, that only do any action either for public marketing or for lobbyist favour. The EU is a larger version of a self serving collective organism with extremely poor value for money. It has the appearance of public accountability, such as MEPs - but this is showboating. MEPs have 9% of the legislative voting rights in EU lawmaking, the rest is unelected career bureaucrats. Obviously, almost any politician will go moist at the thought of 2 seas of gravy versus only 1.

Lurkalot · Post by **Lurkalot** » 05 Jun 2016, 21:55

Seeing as others have mentioned conversations they have had I'll recount one I had today. I was speaking with a customer , an old lady who I'm pretty sure is mid seventies, and she had just come off the phone where she had been talking to younger members of the family. She was trying to convince them to vote , they were somewhere between confused , apathetic or just plain fed up with the whole thing. My customer is more drawn to voting out but she did say she almost felt as if she didn't really deserve to have a vote. Her reasoning is that , perhaps a little morbidly , any decision will probably only effect her for a few more years whereas that same decision will effect her family for decades to come and she wonders if she should have that right. On one hand I could see her point but I don't really think selective democracy is the way ahead.

UndercoverElephant · Post by **UndercoverElephant** » 05 Jun 2016, 22:42

Compulsory voting is the way forward, IMO. Plus PR and we might get something resembling a functional democracy.

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 05 Jun 2016, 22:58

UndercoverElephant wrote:Compulsory voting is the way forward, IMO. Plus PR and we might get something resembling a functional democracy.

I don't necessarily have a problem with compulsory voting. But only if three conditions are met;

1) Full proportional representation

2) All seat must have precisely equal number of constituents. Thus all MP's have equal voting power on behalf of their constituents in parliament.

3) An option on every ballot sheet to put a cross on "none of the above". Furthermore, this "non" vote should be counted and reported along with all other results.

PS_RalphW · Post by **PS_RalphW** » 06 Jun 2016, 06:43

And if 'none of the above' gets the most votes, then the election is void, and none of the candidates can stand in the re-election.

BritDownUnder · Post by **BritDownUnder** » 06 Jun 2016, 08:52

There's zero chance of that.

Depends. If you a member of a club that will lose 25% of its membership subs then maybe you would sit up and take notice. the same goes for a market which buys a lot more from you that it sells to you. Now whether the UK negotiators can see that I couldn't say. I would put most of the UK civil servants in the Monty Python upper class twit of the year category. These days most of the rest are probably recruited from a quota.

fuzzy wrote:
I would mainly agree with your thinking, except trying to 'renegotiate' implies that the UK public gets a bum deal because of our contract. It's not like that. Our national government is a self serving fungus dating back to the Normans, that only do any action either for public marketing or for lobbyist favour. The EU is a larger version of a self serving collective organism with extremely poor value for money. It has the appearance of public accountability, such as MEPs - but this is showboating. MEPs have 9% of the legislative voting rights in EU lawmaking, the rest is unelected career bureaucrats. Obviously, almost any politician will go moist at the thought of 2 seas of gravy versus only 1.

You may be right but don't rule out the fact that not only are they self serving but also rather incompetent. On a European scale you only have to look at what Sepp Blatter did to see their level of thinking.

Basically the EU is run on French moral standards with Germanic money. I'd never heard of Founders Syndrome before but that is probably what the EU has. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founder%27s_syndrome

I understand that in France and probably other European countries there are various 'Ecoles Nationale' that train civil servants rather than in the UK recruiting civil servants depending on which school or university your parents could afford to send you to.