It's not over yet - EU

[Ian J]

The reason there aren't many immigrants here is that there aren't many jobs. There is also little wealth, so little to attract small businesses - there are no customers for those businesses. (OK I know that is an over-simplification, but it is fundamentally true.)

I lived in Newcastle from 1984 to 1990 and at the time the area had one of the largest unemployed statistics in the country yet most people seemed to have money to spend as the restaurant and nightlife was vibrant and a hifi chappie that I spoke to told me that there were more CD players sold in the North East than in any other region (It was the early days of CD ) as the North Easterners had a much greater disposable income than Southerners as the latter had huge mortgages and expensive train fares to pay for.

The official unemployment figures may have shown high unemployment but they didn't take into account the active black economy operating up there.

I know that it's 25 years ago but the only foreigners that I ever saw in the region were Chinese working in Chinatown or else Asian working in "Indian restaurants"

Nothing to do with EU but the Geordies that I came across in my six years there were either lovely, friendly people or thieving b***ards and it was ultimately the latter that caused me to move away to the opposite end of the country as I was sick of having my house burgled or my car stolen

 

[KM-Tiger]

All of us are grossly under-qualified to fully understand the ramifications of this vote.

With respect, that is a slippery slope you are on there?

We either believe in universal suffrage or we don't.

 

[Toby Willows]

No one can understand this complex problem. Not even remainers.

Therein lies the issue. All of us are grossly under-qualified to fully understand the ramifications of this vote.

So everyone made as much of an informed decision as they could with the information being given from both sides, together with their own personal beliefs and experience. As many of the remainers, if not more, may have made a "wrong" decision as you suppose the leavers did. You need to get over your believe in remain was right and informed and leave was wrong and uniformed. Lets face it we were all equally informed, with the exact same information. It just so happens the majority decided to vote leave.

And let's not forget those who believed the £350million per week figure, or those who believed that Turkey is on the verge of joining the EU.

Seriously, you still don't understand where this figure comes from. It's so simply everyone (bar a few ramainers) can understand it.

The cost of our membership to the EU was set at £350,000,0000 a week.

With discounts, rebates, grants that comes down to £150,0000,000 a week.

So the £350,000,000 per week for membership cost is true and accurate. Please give the leave camp credit to understand how this figure comes down to approx £150,000,000 rather call us dimwitted liars.

Let me make it simple for you to understand in business terms. I join the FSB for £200 per year. That's the cost of my membership, end off. I now get discounts on credit card processing and terminal rental, that comes to about £90 per annum. So in effect I only pay £110 for my membership, for which I get access to legal advice etc. BUT the membership cost is still £200. This is how the EU membership works £350,000,000, after rebates (credit card processing in my example above) etc it cost £150,000,000 for the other benefits i.e freedom of trade,freedom of movement, loss of ability to govern our own country.

So please get over the £350,000,000 I and probably 99% of the population understand that's not the true cost but just the membership fee.

I'm leaving this thread now as it's simply going round in circles with a few people who have some serious undemocratic issues with not getting their own way.

 

[Swisaw]

OK EU membership cost us £150m/week. This is like my home insurance, which costs £250.00/year. If my home destroyed, my insurance would spend upto £200.00K to repair it. I never dare not to insure my home. Now Brexiteers cost us UK insurance. We don't have any insurance to protect UK. Alternatively this case this £150m/week can be considered an invetment, with high returns. This returns comes from more businesses, more employment, more taxes and more cost reductions. But now we have lost this high return invetment.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

With respect, that is a slippery slope you are on there?

We either believe in universal suffrage or we don't.

The UK is a parliamentary democracy. We hire elected officials who then make decisions for us based on what they believe is in the national interest.

The UK has never had a direct democracy system. It's one thing to have the power to elect officials to govern, but it's another thing entirely for the public to make direct decisions on single political questions of this magnitude.

This is easily one of the most complicated decisions even elected politicians would make, never mind the public. Where does it end? If George Osborne created 3 annual budgets - A, B and C - and asked the public to vote on which one they want, do you think that would be the right thing to do?

If Mark Carney asked the public to decide on the Bank of England's fiscal policies for the next 5 years, do you think the public would be qualified enough to make that decision?

I'm not sure why the decision to leave the EU was over-simplified to such a great degree, whilst there are plenty of other decisions, arguably far less complicated overall, where we would feel out of our depth and ask the politicians why they aren't making the decisions they were elected to make.

At least politicians have direct policy experience and can draw upon advisers, economists and analysts with a wealth of experience in their relevant fields. Not to mention the huge Civil Service machine which can undertake massive studies to help politicians make informed decisions.

Meanwhile, the British public were dropped in at the deep end whilst being blasted by opposing campaigns and media publications which have been openly proven to be deceitful and misleading in many cases.

They were then asked, in just a few short months, to make a single political decision which will drastically change the UK as we know it for generations to come, in a situation which is likely to be irreversible.

Remain or leave, I honestly don't think it was fair for our elected officials to sidestep their constitutional responsibilities and put that decision on us.

 

[Deleted member 59730]

Much is made by the wrecking Brexiters that 'we have got our country back' and that our MPs should follow the will of the people. What we haven't seen yet is any kind of public perception of the damage done by the vote; The fall in value of the pound, the loss of jobs, the increased prices in the shops etc etc. When it come to a vote will the anti EU politicians really vote in Parliament to make their constituents suffer even more? Apparently French civil servants are already saying that article 50 can be reversed because of this very scenario.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

Seriously, you still don't understand where this figure comes from. It's so simply everyone (bar a few ramainers) can understand it.

The cost of our membership to the EU was set at £350,000,0000 a week.

With discounts, rebates, grants that comes down to £150,0000,000 a week.

So the £350,000,000 per week for membership cost is true and accurate. Please give the leave camp credit to understand how this figure comes down to approx £150,000,000 rather call us dimwitted liars.

I fully understand where this figure comes from. However, no one explicitly stated that it's the original cost of our membership before rebates. In fact, what was said is that "we send the EU £350million a week". It's even plastered across a huge red bus:

And on posters:

And directly from the mouths of pro-Brexit politicians:

This is a complete lie. The rebate is applied BEFORE we send the EU any money. We don't pay £350million per week and then receive a portion of it back from the EU. We just don't pay that much in the first place. Not even close. We do not send £350million per week, and the EU does not take it.

So yes, they are dimwitted liars. Very much so.

It just shows how much misinformation has really spread when some people STILL try to defend the accuracy and usage of this figure, and then have the audacity to claim that remainers can't understand this "simple" fact.

 

[Newchodge]

Much is made by the wrecking Brexiters that 'we have got our country back' and that our MPs should follow the will of the people. What we haven't seen yet is any kind of public perception of the damage done by the vote; The fall in value of the pound, the loss of jobs, the increased prices in the shops etc etc. When it come to a vote will the anti EU politicians really vote in Parliament to make their constituents suffer even more? Apparently French civil servants are already saying that article 50 can be reversed because of this very scenario.

There was a thread http://www.ukbusinessforums.co.uk/threads/what-happens-if-mps-ignore-the-will-of-the-people.359143/ discussing this point.

 

[Ian J]

The UK is a parliamentary democracy. We hire elected officials who then make decisions for us based on what they believe is in the national interest.

The UK has never had a direct democracy system. It's one thing to have the power to elect officials to govern, but it's another thing entirely for the public to make direct decisions on single political questions of this magnitude.

This is easily one of the most complicated decisions even elected politicians would make, never mind the public. Where does it end? If George Osborne created 3 annual budgets - A, B and C - and asked the public to vote on which one they want, do you think that would be the right thing to do?

If Mark Carney asked the public to decide on the Bank of England's fiscal policies for the next 5 years, do you think the public would be qualified enough to make that decision?

I'm not sure why the decision to leave the EU was over-simplified to such a great degree, whilst there are plenty of other decisions, arguably far less complicated overall, where we would feel out of our depth and ask the politicians why they aren't making the decisions they were elected to make.

.

If you truly believe that the ramifications of staying in or leaving the EU were too complicated for the British public to comprehend how come you have written tomes here on how the public made the wrong choice or do you genuinely believe that unlike the 17.4 million people who voted to leave the EC you are one of the few who can fully understand the issues

 

[mhall]

For what it's worth, I don't think Cameron should have campaigned at all. He should have said "I did the best I can with the negotiations, Personally I would rather we stay in but this is not about me. I will now step back and listen to what the electorate tell me and, whatever the result, I will do as I am elected to do and represent the peoples' voice" He might even have got Brownie points from some Labour voters.

 

[mhall]

- Massive change from the status quo
- A Union which prioritises wealth equality
- A Union which prioritises funding for poorer regions
- A way to boost trade and the economy
- A way to take powers from David Cameron and fight against the Government which has overlooked them for so long

That suddenly would have seemed a lot more appealing to a lot of people.

Or, on the other hand, if you were asked if we should join a group that:

- Costs us millions of pounds a week, paid for by a 20% VAT charge on what we buy.
- Gives us some of the money back we give them but tells us what we must spend it on, and then expects their badge to be on everything that we spend it on, as some forelock tugging to them.
- Decides for us what is most beneficial for us with us having only one voice in 27.
- Sits above our own Courts and decides what laws we can pass.
- Takes control of our Immigration policies, albeit unofficially.
- Forces us to accept the Trade deals THEY decide.
- Has members who decide for themselves whether they follow the rules but we must follow them all
- Can block everything we want to do if just one other person doesn't like it

Would you really have voted to join?

 

[MBE1]

No one can understand this complex problem. Not even remainers.

Therein lies the issue. All of us are grossly under-qualified to fully understand the ramifications of this vote.

I spent dozens of hours researching various topics on the run-up to the referendum date, and I know I barely scratched the surface. How on earth were any of us expected to make a fully informed decision in only 3 months?

Everyone has a right to vote and a right to make a decision, but let's not pretend that this whole referendum was fully informed and factual in any way.

What are you supposed to say when this hugely complex situation was decided by many people who simply believe things which are not true?

This does not account for everyone of course, but the truth of the matter is that many voters went to the polling booths that day without knowing all of the facts. That no doubt applies to remain voters in some respects as well.

What makes you feel no-one else failed to do any research? I don't think anyone has ever claimed this vote was solely decided by things that were untrue, some people from both sides might have listened to various points, few actually believed them IMO. Project fear failed despite the whole of the UK administration getting behind the idea, you really have a poor view of the intelligence of the UK individuals. Most people can see the lies for what they are, or ignore statements being twisted to suit an argument.

But using your own logic, IF this was such a complicated issue, why would you expect MP's to make a better decision? Most do no actually know much more about the EU than anyone else, few read the treaties involved, most vote along party lines.

However, you concede that such a lack of understanding applies to the remain vote as well, so in reality they cancel each other out. There was no points raised in the tv debates or in the press which convinced myself one way or another, it was a simple plain truth for myself, unless we as a nation decide who and how many people can come to our country, then we have no real control.
The EU refused to negotiate on this main central policy of free movement, as they were entitled to, so it made the choice very simple for myself.

Other's will have voted for their own reasons, but you seem to fail to see there is no right or wrong way to vote, there is simply a vote. Indeed many of the remain camp implored people to at least vote, to exercise their right to take part in the decision, what ever they decided.

Anyway, I'm off to carry on with my life.

 

[Ian J]

Or, on the other hand, if you were asked if we should join a group that:

- Costs us millions of pounds a week, paid for by a 20% VAT charge on what we buy.
- Gives us some of the money back we give them but tells us what we must spend it on, and then expects their badge to be on everything that we spend it on, as some forelock tugging to them.
- Decides for us what is most beneficial for us with us having only one voice in 27.
- Sits above our own Courts and decides what laws we can pass.
- Takes control of our Immigration policies, albeit unofficially.
- Forces us to accept the Trade deals THEY decide.
- Has members who decide for themselves whether they follow the rules but we must follow them all
- Can block everything we want to do if just one other person doesn't like it

Would you really have voted to join?

And has decided in it's infinite wisdom that tampons are luxury items

 

[SamLH]

Anyway, I'm off to carry on with my life.

Scotts not, hes gonna carry on complaining like a child.

 

[Newchodge]

Scotts not, hes gonna carry on complaining like a child.

We can do without your playground insults.

 

[MikeJ]

Scotts not, hes gonna carry on complaining like a child.

Really @ShirleyM ? You thanked that?

 

[Scalloway]

And has decided in it's infinite wisdom that tampons are luxury items

It was the UK government that decided they were a luxury by failing to include them on a list of items that were to be zero rated when we joined the EU.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

What makes you feel no-one else failed to do any research? I don't think anyone has ever claimed this vote was solely decided by things that were untrue, some people from both sides might have listened to various points, few actually believed them IMO. Project fear failed despite the whole of the UK administration getting behind the idea, you really have a poor view of the intelligence of the UK individuals. Most people can see the lies for what they are, or ignore statements being twisted to suit an argument.

Because almost everywhere I looked, there were people making claims about the EU which were simply factually untrue in many cases.

It's not just what they believed, either. It's what they didn't believe. Your own post highlights that quite well with your mention of "project fear". Warnings about the economy were dismissed as nothing more than scaremongering, with the claim that experts have no idea what they're talking about.

Unfortunately, many of these points are very well-reasoned and based in solid logic. Take the increased cost of living, for example. Some people dismissed this as a lie, but when the Pound is at a 31 year low, the cost of imports will increase sharply and therefore the cost of many consumer products in shops and supermarkets will go up.

When people dismiss this as not being true, what are you supposed to say?

Before this winds anyone up I want to be clear that I'm not talking about all Brexit supporters. However, there are ample national surveys out there which show that a significant chunk of the electorate believe things which are not true.

In the Ipsos MORI survey, those who intended to vote leave believe that EU citizens make up 20% of the UK population on average. The real number is 5%. 37% also believe that at least 13% of UK child benefit goes towards children living in Europe. In reality it's 0.3%. 23% of people surveyed also believe that the UK pays the most into the EU of all members. In reality we are the 4th highest contributor on average.

This isn't just speculation. It's what real voters have said.

Even if this wouldn't have changed anyone's decision (and I personally don't think it would have changed the result overall), that's not really the point. Democracy is the fairest governing system we have in this world, but it's not without its downfalls - especially when it's so easy to toy with accuracy and emotion.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

Scotts not, hes gonna carry on complaining like a child.

It always seems to be leave supporters who consider a continued debate about a topic a negative thing.

When we live in a world where thoroughly discussing important topics in detail is labelled as "complaining like a child", it really makes me worry about the future of the human race.

 

[john1989]

@Scott-Copywriter we are the second biggest net contributor. Not the 4th.

 

[alwaysinamess]

Something I have been pondering on is abut the 3.5mil a week, paid in Sterling or Euros. This surely only benefits one of the party's at any time. The same I guess with the rebates.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

@Scott-Copywriter we are the second biggest net contributor. Not the 4th.

Not true.

We're the 4th factoring in Government member state contributions including VAT and GNI.

We're also 4th in total contributions including traditional own resources.

2nd in TOR only, but 4th overall. The total monetary contribution over the past 9 years also leaves us in 4th.

Not a bad deal for the second largest economy in the EU.

 

[ShirleyM]

The UK is the second biggest net contributer to the EU, after deductions of rebates, etc. I thought the net figure was the preference of the remainers. If we go on gross contribution of £350m (which the Remainers heavily disputed) then we are the 4th biggest contributer.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

An interesting perspective here from one of the MEPs at the EU Parliament.

"The truth is that European citizens are not against Europe. They are against this Europe."

 

[KM-Tiger]

"The truth is that European citizens are not against Europe. They are against this Europe."

Must say I agree, it was out of the EU we wanted, not out of Europe.

 

[MikeJ]

WE KNOW!

PEOPLE ARE USING "EUROPE" INSTEAD OF "THE EU".

IT HAPPENS

GET OVER IT.

 

[MikeJ]

And relax......

 

[Newchodge]

And relax......

And breathe .....

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

For those who suggest that we will hold some kind of large leverage over the EU in our negotiations, I feel this is a fantastic example regarding the United States which puts things into perspective.

This is an image of every US state's GDP compared to countries of the world with a similar sized GDP of every state. It's a good example as the US and the EU are quite similar in economic size:

So basically, the UK is to the EU as California is to the US. The US and EU have GDPs of $16-17 trillion, and California and the UK have GDPs of around $2.4-2.8 trillion.

And California is the US's largest state economy as well. This means that we are a similar size to them, but in the relevant position within the EU, we are Texas.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

The very prospect of having a coalition of Labour-SNP-Plaid Cymru and Liberal Democrats government is frightening. You only have to think back to the tv debates back at the GE2015 to see how chaotic it was.

Hard to see how they'd be able to do it, to be honest.

Whilst these parties all lean left and agree on a lot of points, they don't agree on everything. They share a common goal in ousting the right-wing government, but I'm sure they'll have a few differing ideas on the direction the UK should go after that.

 

[Impounded Car Insurance]

Wow what a long thread.

 

[David G Rees]

Democracy is ok ,only if the vote goes your way?
We have decided to leave, just get on with it....you either believe in a democracy or you don't...stop whining!

 

[Swisaw]

Democracy is ok ,only if the vote goes your way?
We have decided to leave, just get on with it....you either believe in a democracy or you don't...stop whining!

Warning from HM Government: Brexiteering damages your health and your livelihood.

No one, the majority or not, has the right to hurt themselves and others. Remember Nazis in Germany came to power democratically.

 

[japancool]

No one, the majority or not, has the right to hurt themselves and others. Remember Nazis in Germany came to power democratically.

Actually, they didn't. The Nazis never won a majority in the Reichstag and Hitler was appointed Chancellor by Paul Hindenberg, he wasn't elected to the position.