The European Debate Thread

[Neil_F]

I've stated elsewhere my personal reasons for being happy about living in the EU

Not what I asked. I asked what are the economic, social and political benefits to the UK of being a member of the EU.

As far as I'm concerned, the European issue was settled in 1975, (when I voted against entry).That was supposed to be a binding,once in a lifetime vote.

Oh right, so as long as you've had your say that's the end of it. What about the millions of people who weren't eligible to vote then and have been borne since? Are they to be disenfranchised because you had your say 40 years ago?

 

[Neil_F]

One thing without doubt is the amount of people we have to sustain within this small country is no longer viable.

I understand your point of view but I don't subscribe to the "we're all doomed" philosophy that is increasingly common. A lot of the country has very low population density, even London has a low population density for a mega city.

If the population doesn't continue to grow then we face a demographic challenge with catastrophic economic impacts and the non-working population (the retired) will be too great for the working age population to support.

Of course there are social impacts of population growth driven by immigration, but I think the alternative is worse.

 

[Cricko]

I understand your point of view but I don't subscribe to the "we're all doomed" philosophy that is increasingly common. A lot of the country has very low population density, even London has a low population density for a mega city.

If the population doesn't continue to grow then we face a demographic challenge with catastrophic economic impacts and the non-working population (the retired) will be too great for the working age population to support.

Of course there are social impacts of population growth driven by immigration, but I think the alternative is worse.

London has become the hub of making money...it is not spread around, nothing much filters down ..it generally just makes the rich ..richer... we are not all in this together.. The sound-bite that we are is actually an insult to those that are not. It has become obvious that this country has become a divide between those "that have".and those "that have much more" and those that most don't give a toss about..Why is because you are not academic or bright or silver spoon fed you have to be dumped on a waste tip?

People are people , from wherever you came...it is who they are..."There but for the Grace of God go I"... the persecution of those that had nothing to do with the banking (World Recession) failure, but are now paying the price is anathema. Those that were involved carry on getting their bonuses regardless. It is a bizarre world.

Oh BTW the EU can go and **** themselves.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Or avoiding a smack in the mouth when you offend them perhaps.

I've never been slow in coming forward with my opinions.

Rob Noxious can confirm that I'm not adverse to giving out the occasional smack on the mouth, when it's necessary,either.:smile:

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Oh right, so as long as you've had your say that's the end of it. What about the millions of people who weren't eligible to vote then and have been borne since? Are they to be disenfranchised because you had your say 40 years ago?

Yes,that's right.

Btw,not only me but the whole of the British population -18 or older-at that time.

I suppose you want a Scots style "neverendum" on Europe? :dim:

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Oh BTW the EU can go and **** themselves.

That's a sophisticated Highfield College point of view.:winking:

 

[callan]

I understand your point of view but I don't subscribe to the "we're all doomed" philosophy that is increasingly common. A lot of the country has very low population density, even London has a low population density for a mega city.

If the population doesn't continue to grow then we face a demographic challenge with catastrophic economic impacts and the non-working population (the retired) will be too great for the working age population to support.

Of course there are social impacts of population growth driven by immigration, but I think the alternative is worse.

I've always been slightly confused by this point, I get the need to have a 'working age' population, and that immigration helps fill this gap.

So based on the scenario that the UK's aging population needs propping up, we allow Poles or whoever to come in...great (according to some) as it fills the gaps and there is evidence (I believe) that the economy is supported by doing so.

Using the Poles as an example, I would imagine that there are hundreds of thousands in the uk, and more elsewhere through Europe.

Good for the UK perhaps, however what is the impact on Poland ?

Have we, by attempting to fill a hole in the uk, opened one up potentially else where?

I would be interested in your views as SZ's economic guru!

 

[Neil_F]

Yes,that's right. Btw,not only me but the whole of the British population -18 or older-at that time.

Wow. I wasn't expecting that.

I can't honestly believe you think that there shouldn't be another vote on the EU until the last person who voted in '75 dies because that vote was considered to be "once in a lifetime". Is that genuinely your position?

I suppose you want a Scots style "neverendum" on Europe? :dim:

You suppose incorrectly. The facts have changed since 1975. The EC is no more in name or practice and it is not unreasonable for the electorate to be asked if they wish to remain a member of something wholly different in design and intention.

I can think of no valid reason to deny that vote and, in my opinion, those that do fear their side would lose.

For the record, I would vote to remain in the UK, though only just. If the circumstances of our membership changed (for example political union was implemented, or broader fiscal union) then I think it would be right to have a further referendum on membership. I do not support anything beyond a single ballot whilst the facts remain the same.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Wow. I wasn't expecting that.

I can't honestly believe you think that there shouldn't be another vote on the EU until the last person who voted in '75 dies because that vote was considered to be "once in a lifetime". Is that genuinely your position?



You suppose incorrectly. The facts have changed since 1975. The EC is no more in name or practice and it is not unreasonable for the electorate to be asked if they wish to remain a member of something wholly different in design and intention.

I can think of no valid reason to deny that vote and, in my opinion, those that do fear their side would lose.

For the record, I would vote to remain in the UK, though only just. If the circumstances of our membership changed (for example political union was implemented, or broader fiscal union) then I think it would be right to have a further referendum on membership. I do not support anything beyond a single ballot whilst the facts remain the same.

Personally, I would have no problem with another referendum on the EU-as long as that would stop the constant flow of anti-EU propaganda coming out of England-(not the UK or GB notice).

I'm certain that vote would be a No to leaving, (as I've said before), after a vigorous campain in favour of staying in the EU, by the political and business elites.

As far as I'm concened it's a sterile debate, which I'm sure the right-wing British media will return to again, the moment the general election campaign finishes.

There would, of course, have to be a refendum on EU membership, if any sort of "political union" or "broader fiscal union " took place within the EU.That's already on the statute book.

 

[londonblue]

Wow. I wasn't expecting that.

I can't honestly believe you think that there shouldn't be another vote on the EU until the last person who voted in '75 dies because that vote was considered to be "once in a lifetime". Is that genuinely your position?



You suppose incorrectly. The facts have changed since 1975. The EC is no more in name or practice and it is not unreasonable for the electorate to be asked if they wish to remain a member of something wholly different in design and intention.

I can think of no valid reason to deny that vote and, in my opinion, those that do fear their side would lose.

For the record, I would vote to remain in the UK, though only just. If the circumstances of our membership changed (for example political union was implemented, or broader fiscal union) then I think it would be right to have a further referendum on membership. I do not support anything beyond a single ballot whilst the facts remain the same.

Why, where else were you thinking we could co?

 

[Neil_F]

Personally, I would have no problem with another referendum on the EU-as long as that would stop the constant flow of anti-EU propaganda coming out of England-(not the UK or GB notice).

Free speech is a beautiful thing. I've twice invited you to make the positive case for the EU but you haven't.

I'm certain that vote would be a No to leaving, (as I've said before), after a vigorous campain in favour of staying in the EU, by the political and business elites.

I'm not so sure. The out campaign lacks a credible lead, but it will be able to paint itself as the anti-establishment, bright sunny uplands side of the debate that worked so well for the SNP. The in campaign will be establishment led and overwhelmingly negative.

 

[Cricko]

I guess my input is a bit like the tory spin....ignore those that raise a point and blast on regardless. *sigh*

 

[Berrichonne shrimper]

I guess my input is a bit like the tory spin....ignore those that raise a point and blast on regardless. *sigh*

Welcome to the zone you newbie.

 

[Neil_F]

London has become the hub of making money...it is not spread around, nothing much filters down ..it generally just makes the rich ..richer... we are not all in this together.. The sound-bite that we are is actually an insult to those that are not.

Again, I'm not sure the reputation is accurate. I live in London and the vast majority of it is composed of rich and poor living side by side in similar quality accommodation. As I said on another thread, inequality of consumption power is preferable to inequality of earnings; you can earn substantially more in London but quality of life may not be as high because housing costs eat up most, if not all, of the gain.

It has become obvious that this country has become a divide between those "that have".and those "that have much more" and those that most don't give a toss about..Why is because you are not academic or bright or silver spoon fed you have to be dumped on a waste tip?

Again, I think this has an element of truth to it, but it is endemic of the developed world and not just this country. Primary and secondary industry in this country is dead. Labour, environmental and tax regulation have killed low margin, high volume manufacturing and it won't be coming back.

The economy becomes service based by default, but there are millions of people that doesn't suit. How do you bring back that sector of the economy whilst maintaining environmental and labour regulation in particular? I don't see how you can.

People are people , from wherever you came...it is who they are..."There but for the Grace of God go I"... the persecution of those that had nothing to do with the banking (World Recession) failure, but are now paying the price is anathema.

This is somewhat off the deep end. I don't think anyone is being persecuted. Government spending was unsustainable, kept afloat by the mirage of a financial sector bubble. Tax rises don't work in an era of free movement of capital and people because high earners leave and businesses re-direct their investment. Only by increasing taxes on the immobile middle do governments increase revenue.

That leaves spending cuts. I think a lot of the spending cuts implemented have been poorly targeted but a lot of it is to do with politics (protecting old people for example), but there are few other alternatives.

Those that were involved carry on getting their bonuses regardless.

A lot of them have lost their jobs. Politicians, the chief architects of 2008, have escaped unscathed and well remunerated.

 

[Benfleet A1]

I guess my input is a bit like the tory spin....ignore those that raise a point and blast on regardless. *sigh*

Aside from the excellent reply from Neil F, any thread where the Plastic Commie flaps his lips usually ends up like that.

 

[Benfleet A1]

I've always been slightly confused by this point, I get the need to have a 'working age' population, and that immigration helps fill this gap.

So based on the scenario that the UK's aging population needs propping up, we allow Poles or whoever to come in...great (according to some) as it fills the gaps and there is evidence (I believe) that the economy is supported by doing so.

Using the Poles as an example, I would imagine that there are hundreds of thousands in the uk, and more elsewhere through Europe.

Good for the UK perhaps, however what is the impact on Poland ?

Have we, by attempting to fill a hole in the uk, opened one up potentially else where?

I would be interested in your views as SZ's economic guru!

I think I can partly answer this one. Talking from the experience of some of the Eastern Europeans I work with,the general plan is to work over here while waiting for the economies of their own countries to pick up [especially in the construction industry] then head back home. That's certainly the plan with most of the Romanian lads working on Crossrail at Liverpool Street.

 

[Bielzibubz]

I presume you're not an American citizen though?

I am a British citizen,however.And that is the whole point (whether you like it or not).

In a like manner, although I've lived in Spain for just over 35 years now and most certainly have opinions on the political scene here, (plus can and do vote in local and EU elections), I'm always rather guarded whenever discussing politics with a Spanish/Catalan national.

That's called having respect for other nationalities's opinions.

:hilarious: So you being a British citizen abroad for the past 35 years means you know all there is to know about what it's like to live here on a day to day basis does it? :hilarious: Citizenship has absolutely bugger all to with whether you know what your talking about or not, actually living here does. Like it or not, that's the truth. It gives you more of a right to comment I'll grant you but you still continually talk bollocks when it comes to knowing what it's like living here.

And as to liking it or not I really couldn't give a damn, honest. Your not here, that's a plus point.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Free speech is a beautiful thing. I've twice invited you to make the positive case for the EU but you haven't.

Why don't you make it (since as you said you're in favour)? :unsure:

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

:hilarious: So you being a British citizen abroad for the past 35 years means you know all there is to know about what it's like to live here on a day to day basis does it? :hilarious: Citizenship has absolutely bugger all to with whether you know what your talking about or not, actually living here does. Like it or not, that's the truth. It gives you more of a right to comment I'll grant you but you still continually talk bollocks when it comes to knowing what it's like living here.

And as to liking it or not I really couldn't give a damn, honest. Your not here, that's a plus point.

Do you honestly think that someone can live in a country until their late 20's/early thirties without knowing what everyday life in that country is really like? :dim:

 

[Benfleet A1]

Why don't you make it (since as you said you're in favour)? :unsure:

What's the matter Patriot, you never seem to like going head to head with Neil F. Isn't the big nasty man playing nicely?