mikey74 – Member
chewkw:

Can I ask: Where are you from and what experience do you have that allows you to comment on the relationship between the UK and the EU?

A British Commonwealth citizen that can vote on all matter affecting BritLand (indirectly us …)

If BritLand wants to be the leader (or maintain leadership role) of Commonwealth nations then British Commonwealth Nations should have a say because we Do Not want to be indirectly govt by rich developed EU nations. Especially the EU bureaucrats.

If BritLand want to be part of EU then the British Commonwealth should be dissolved. i.e. no longer exist or merely exist for ceremony to cherish past relationship.

Dissolve the British Commonwealth and we shall Not have a say in your matters. You can then be part of EU whatever we don’t give a monkey!

Otherwise Do Not try to intervene in Commonwealth matters or try to tell them what to do …

edit: All British Commonwealth Citizen can vote if they are in Britland regardless of whether they are British citizen or not.

Nope, I stand correct.

No, you stand corrected as your original comment would have included them as commonwealth citizens, they by your own admission have no problem getting jobs in the UK, ergo the comment is wrong

jimw – Member

Nope, I stand correct.

No, you stand corrected as your original comment would have included them as commonwealth citizens, they by your own admission have no problem getting jobs in the UK, ergo the comment is wrong [/quote]Try getting them to apply jobs in non-medical field …

Think you are splitting hairs …

Just as unproven as linking intelligence and racism, Junkyard. Some (intelligent) people make all the right noises but when you look at their actions they are racist. Someone who claims to make no racial distinction will never rent out their property to blacks for example (I have) or never employ Arabs (I have) always finding an excuse but never admitting the real reason – racism.

Splitting Hairs or being accurate, depends on your perspective.

Well I’m inclined to think David Mitchell has a point.
Why elected leaders ought to make the big decisions

@ernie did you read my post, London is hugely Labour biased so for Boris to overturn that shows his popularity

@DrJ Touche – Kahn and Khan. Joking aisde as much as I respect Lagrand, DSK is a perfect example of what a political organisation the IMF is.

@Junky EU migration is fundamentally racists as if you are European (so basically white) you can go anywhere. From Africa, Latin America, Asia – no thanks. All we are asking for is the same system as pretty much everywhere else in the world, the EU is the outlier here.

Watched Marr on replay, Varoufakis quite direct about the dire state of the EU teetering on the edge he made the point that we in the UK are screwed both ways Remain or Leave when it inevitably goes bang. Personally I think the further away we are the better. Fox made the point well that over the years again and again we have talked about reform but the political union rolls on as indeed it has to to prop up the failed euro.

Blair also made the point that EU migrants do the work Brits don’t want to and wages we won’t accept – shot Remain in the foot there (and Brit unemployed claiming benefits) – we can have cheap workers with controlled immigration and the employers can pay for their visa applications and we can keep an eye on living and working conditions. Mich better solution.

Just as unproven as linking intelligence and racism, Junkyard

The evidence base for the least intelligent being the most authoritarian and racist is robust
You are free to ignore it and throw anecdotes around as if they counter actual research

Anecdotes are important. Because it’s the sum of the anecdotes that form our attitudes. It’s by acting on anecdotes that changes can be made. Anecdotal evidence suggested employers were being influenced by candidates names. A study was set up in which the same/similar CVs were sent to employers with different names. Sure enough, the Mohameds didn’t get interviews but the Pauls did.

That’s real research to prove that presumably intelligent employers who claim not to be racist are extremely racist.

Varoufakis quite direct about the dire state of the EU teetering on the edge he made the point that we in the UK are screwed both ways Remain or Leave when it inevitably goes bang.

He doesn’t make the point as inevitable, he’s making the point that if it carries on as is, it’s likely and britain being in our out, doesn’t matter, it’ll get sucked into the repercussions regardless. His main point is about uniting(whether left or right) and fighting to change the EU into a more transparent democracy.

He also makes the point fairly clearly, that Brexit will accelerate EU disintegration. Which leaves a broken Europe in the hands of fringe extreme groups. A fairly terrifying outcome for all tbh.

Fast forward on the link I gave on the last page about half an hour(past the Greek stuff), his points on transparency and the above are simple, but fairly compelling.

@slowoldman – what a patronising little man Mitchell is. Maybe he should take that BS to Switzerland where they have referendums all the time and see what they say ? I have the exact contrary view that the big issues should be seperated from the general elections. We should have a referendum every year or two on important issues. If you had listened to the politicians the Scottish vote would have been a formality, as it was the public rejected independence

Junky EU migration is fundamentally racists as if you are European (so basically white*) you can go anywhere. From Africa, Latin America, Asia – no thank

Free movement within a territory is not racist and if it is every territory in the world is racist
If we leave the EU afterwards I will be freely able to move anywhere within the UK but no one else in the world will have this – Why wont this still be racist?

*Do you not think its a bit racist to argue all Europeans are “basically white”

presumably intelligent employers

Total guess as the research did not measure the employers intelligence
if they had they would find out the stupid ones were more likely to be racist than the brighter ones as does the rest of the research you wont accept
Your anecdotes wed to your inability to grasp what the research showed [and then saying it showed something IT DID NOT EVEN MEASURE] renders me unwilling to participate further in this futile excercse

.

I have the exact contrary view that the big issues should be seperated from the general elections.

Define “big issues”.

Since you keep mentioning the Scottish ref in jambafacts, I was wondering if you could enlighten a simple teuchter from the benighted glen. Why was a vote to leave apparently based on small minded nationalism on our part,yet a vote to leave the EU isn’t?

@tmh, the ONS uses the £350m figure (annual equivalent)

Mr Grayling also defends Vote Leave’s claim that EU membership costs the UK £350m a day – after the UK statistics chief said it was misleading.

“It’s our gross contribution according to the Office for National Statistics,” he says, even pointing out it’s on table 9.9 in one of its reports

duckman
I was wondering if you could enlighten a simple teuchter from the benighted glen. Why was a vote to leave apparently based on small minded nationalism on our part,yet a vote to leave the EU isn’t?

I think a large part of leaving both is based on petty small minded nationalism. What do you think ducky?

jamba, from 8 pages ago.

18bn (£346m per week) is the amount before the rebate
13bn (£250m per week) is the amount after the rebate
8.5bn (£163 m per week) is what gets spent in Europe out of the UK contribution.
4.5bn (£86m per week)is what gets spent in the UK out of the UK contribution

This isn’t difficult.

I don’t know why you are still arguing about it.

C’mon be serious – there is a specific reason why the ONS account calcuate this specific gross figures. But it is clear – they say so themselves – that not only should this not be considers a gross figure for our cost of membership, but also that we do not spend his figure as you guys make out. IT IS A LIE and you know it. The rebate is pre-payment, so it is a complete lie that we spend £350m AND that this is a sum of money that we could spend on the NHS. Even if that was the case, to consider costs in isolation of benefits is nonsensical and deceitful.

For the OUT campaign continue to use this as the centre point of the campaign is nothing short of disgraceful.

To centre on a BLATANT lie shows the vacuum at the centre of the OUT economic argument.

C’mon Russ put us out of our misery, we are on tenterhooks now…..

Tbh I’ve better things to do than get into a internet argument.

But to label stupid people racist is pretty shocking and by saying “most likely” doesn’t make it any better.
I generally find that racists are racists and stupid people are stupid.
I’m just a bit uneasy about labelling a planet full of unintelligent people racists because there a bit thick?
On that note I’m out, out of this thread and out on the 23rd.

So what are your out reasons Russ?

To avoid ambiguity, from this week’s select committee report. This WHOLE section was in bold for emphasis in the actual report

32.At the heart of Vote Leave’s presentation of its case is the claim that, on leaving the EU, the UK Government would receive a windfall of £350m per week, available to be spent in other ways, “like the NHS and schools”. This, and the other figures used by Vote Leave for the UK’s EU budget contributions (£150bn ‘contributed’ in the past decade, and £511bn since joining) are highly misleading to the electorate for a number of reasons.

33.First, Vote Leave’s £350m figure does not account for the budget rebate, which amounts to £85m per week. Leaving the EU could not make this money available to spend on schools and hospitals because it is not ‘sent’ to Brussels in the first place. The rebate does not leave the UK or cross the exchanges. This is repeated in other ways. A ‘counter’ is prominently displayed on Vote Leave’s website. This purports to show that the UK has historically contributed £511bn to the EU since joining in 1973 and excludes the rebate. The UK rebate is indeed controversial in other Member States. It may be raised in future negotiations over the EU’s financial framework. However, it can only be changed with the UK Government’s consent, as happened in the Government led by Tony Blair.

34.Secondly, the extent to which money that the UK receives from the EU budget (a further £88m per week to the public sector and £79m per week to the private sector and non-governmental organisations) would be available for spending on other priorities, would depend on the policy choices of the democratically-elected Government of the day. Vote Leave has stated that “There will [ … ] be financial protection for all groups that now get money from Brussels”. If that policy were implemented, the money available to fund other priorities after Brexit, such as schools and hospitals, would be much lower, and probably closer to the UK’s net contribution of £110 million per week than it is to £350 million. This would be true even if, as has been widely argued, efficiencies could be made in the way that money the UK currently receives from the EU budget is spent.

35.Finally, it is not impossible that the UK may continue to make contributions to the EU budget after Brexit, either on a transitional or permanent basis, in return for continued access to parts of the single market, or because it considers mutual co-operation in certain areas, such as science research, to be desirable. This too would reduce the supposed fiscal windfall arising from leaving the EU.

36.Vote Leave has said that £350m a week is “the core number”, and that it is using the number “again and again”. It is very unfortunate that they have chosen to place this figure at the heart of their campaign. This has been done in the face of overwhelming evidence, including that of the Chair of the UK Statistics Authority, demonstrating that it is misleading. Without qualification this is unavoidable. Brexit will not result in a £350m per week fiscal windfall to the Exchequer as a consequence of ending the UK’s contributions to the EU budget. Despite having been presented with the evidence contradicting this claim, Vote Leave has subsequently placed the £350m figure on its campaign bus, and on much of its recent campaign literature. The public should discount this claim. Vote Leave’s persistence with it is deeply problematic. It sits very awkwardly with its promises to the Electoral Commission to work in a spirit that reflects its “very significant responsibility” and the “gravity of the choice facing the British people”.

37. Claims about the UK’s contributions to the EU budget should be set in context; the UK’s gross contribution, after application of the rebate, accounts for less than 2 per cent of public sector spends each year, and is equivalent to less than 1 per cent of the UK’s economic output. If leaving the EU has a substantial positive or negative effect on the economy as a whole–as many advocates of leaving or staying believe it will–the consequent impact on the public finances is likely to be far more significant than the size of any saving from the EU’s budget contributions. Nonetheless, the net saving would be a significant reduction in public expenditure in the context of the current austerity programme.

Time to stop lying

@ernie did you read my post, London is hugely Labour biased so for Boris to overturn that shows his popularity

Let’s see what “London is hugely Labour biased” actually means.

London Assembly Elections 2000 : Tories = 9 seats, Labour = 9 seats

London Assembly Elections 2004 : Tories = 9 seats, Labour = 7 seats

London Assembly Elections 2008 : Tories = 11 seats, Labour = 8 seats

London Assembly Elections 2012 : Tories = 9 seats, Labour = 12 seats

London Assembly Elections 2016 : Tories = 8 seats, Labour = 12 seats

So in most of the London Assembly Elections Labour either got as many seats or less seats than the Tories, that’s what you mean by “hugely Labour biased”.

In other words the Tories are always in with a chance in London (thanks to the leafy suburbs).

Therefore the Tories winning a London mayoral contest with 3.06% more votes than Labour is no great achievement, however much spin you might want to put on it.

Boris Johnson is not ‘fabulously popular’ with Londoners.

Thm I think know we know know that lot have their own agenda and are just part of the establishment and the fake moon landings, of course they would say that (but hey it makes you think though)

This is from the ONS

Some commentators have previously quoted figures calculated from table 9.2 of the Pink Book. In an official letter written by the Deputy National Statistician for Economic Statistics, Jonathan Athow it is stated that “The information set down in table 9.2 of the Pink Book on the current account position does not give a full picture of the UK’s position with respect to  the EU . . . We would therefore discourage users from using the figures in table 9.2 as a reflection of the UK’s contribution to the EU.”

Athgray member

. Obviously you would,as you post bollocks sorry; “opinion” such gems such as your Scottish white van man to suggest that 45% of the population voted out of anti-English sentiment. Factually incorrect,and statistically unsupported,which will be further reinforced by the % of the remain vote up here, but hey;it’s your opinion. The point I was making was that some of the same people accusing Scots who voted yes of nationalism at best ( Boris) seem now to embraced the argument the Nats used. Uncaring dominant neighbour,lack of control over our own fate,too much meddling etc. Amazing( not really) And I have to say that Boris and a Brexit will be a fantastic advert of independence. So tempting!

Here too. Three posts and three insults this morning, Duckman. What beast bit you?

@DrJ Touche – Kahn and Khan. Joking aisde as much as I respect Lagrand, DSK is a perfect example of what a political organisation the IMF is.

Yes – you, me, and Varoufakis are on the same page there!

Nail on head in today’s Grauniad

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/may/30/eu-referendum-neoliberal-irvine-welsh

“whether you back red or black in the tawdry, crumbling casino of neoliberalism, and whatever the slimy croupiers of the mainstream media urge, it’s the house that invariably wins”

I don’t know why you are still arguing about it.

Because it’s STW. I myself posted rhe £350 vs £250 vs £150 numbers and said I personally would have used the £250 number. As I also said numerous times it sdifficuot to oin diwn thencontribution as it moves around (and has been steadily increasing) and the rebate can be withdrawn as can the EU grants paying us our own money back. I can see why Leave persost with the £350 and its justifiable, also given the ludicrous bs and scaremongering from Remain why try and “play fair” when the other side is doing anything but.

Thanks for that @tmh I had forgotten Blair gave away part of the rebate

Yep Junky every country in the world (outside the EU) gives preferential treatment and righrs to its own citizens. The reason the EU is the exception is its a project to creat a United States of Europe. I want as “racist” an immigration policy as the US, Canada and Australia, South Africa, China, India etc etc

I see no one has commented on Blair’s statement that EU migrants come to take the low paid jobs British citizens won’t do

Ok Jambas you may have conceded a lower figure and that the contribution represents a relatively small % of GDP ie the claim is a pretty fatuous argument, however my questions relate to the people that you represent – they continue to lie about the cost of membership and that the money could be used for other purposes. As ^ this goes against promises made to the Electoral Commision and is nothing short of a disgrace

The other side argument is irrelevant, This is the cornerstone of the economic argument (sic) of your side – it is the first thing you see on the website (actually now relegated behind nasty foreigner stuff) and blazoned across the battlebus. There is no hiding – its blatant lying and anyone involved should feel the collective shame of a deceitful campaign.

Driving back from London on Saturday night and there are further lies about Turkey being IN Europe. There is no end to the depths that OUTers will scrape to.

C’mon Russ, we are still wondering….

I see no one has commented on Blair’s statement that EU migrants come to take the low paid jobs British citizens won’t do

What’s to say? If correct, then what is the issue?

C’mon Russ, we are still wondering….

Read my first post 😉

jambalaya – Member

I see no one has commented on Blair’s statement that EU migrants come to take the low paid jobs British citizens won’t dowhy’s there a problem with that? And I also see you ignore the bit where he says alot of them aren;t long term migrants and go home after a certain period. Ergo they aren’t the drain on the system that’s made out…

Really?
I’ve never posted anything thing on this thread as its a discussion that will always have the for and against and both will blindly argue their point.
I’m 100% out and I’m not stupid or racist.

So where is it in there Russ?

why try and “play fair” when the other side is doing anything but.

you’re arguing on an interweb forum, you aren’t part of the tory civil war, so thats why you should play fair. It just makes you look silly.

ps the 250 number is still the wrong one to use, I guess you’ll get there after another 50 pages! 😆

So where is it in there Russ?

It’s the both will blindly argue their point bit.
What ever reason I give, someone will post why I’m wrong and they are right.
Politics and religion are a non starter in my book.

OK, so not blindly saying your wrong etc. but you don’t want to share the reasons not that we missed them 😉 A lot of posters have picked up on the reasons given by leavers as they are based on lies/exaggerations like most of the exit campaign. Some of those things are worth pointing out. I hope you make your mind up based on the facts.

I’ve finally reached a decision! I’m voting out.

Main reason is that the current system and allegiances are clearly not working, the rich are getting richer and the poor poorer. If this is what we want to continue, then vote stay.

However, I believe we need to challenge the establishment and the safety of the status quo, because if we remain, we’re going to be in for at least another 25 years of delusional government and corporate leadership, which on a social platform, just isn’t working.

Furthermore, the scaremongering of the remain camp is now truly pissing me off and if they get the win, then it will just unleash even greater amounts of propaganda bullshit from the ruling minority.

Bollox to all the various hypothesising as to what will or might or might not happen, seemingly no one knows and if they do, then they are not telling us clearly.

It’s time to lose our chains, unshackle ourselves from the constraints of tired and lethargic government and shake things up a bit. Unless you’re happy to exist in a tired and lethargic way, in which case, vote for the same shit.

so when are you marching on westminster, slackalice? 😆

It’s time to lose our chains, unshackle ourselves from the constraints of tired and lethargic government and shake things up a bit.

How’s that been working out so far? We have control over the vast majority of issues. Have we made a great job of dealing with them? Or have we just sat back on the sofa with a cup of tea and an episode of Strictly?

It’s absolute self delusion to imagine that Brexit will herald in a new dawn of national rebuilding and integrity. It won’t. It will be the same, only worse.