[Closed] EU Referendum - are you in or out?

Lol are people still reading chewkw? Making as much higher sense as jackajamba over there.
On the UK us deals as was pointed out in the 80s by Peter Wright, the special relationship is defined as they think we are special and we think we have a relationship.

EU - 28 countries, population 750m

Commonwealth - 53 Countries, pop 2.1 billion

you really think that we shouldn't care about 1/3 of the worlds population, and the industrial, scientific, trading and cultural opportunities that access to and relations with that market offers us?

@DarcL

Only about 200 years, if you go 1750-1950,

[i]Who cares about the Commonwealth? Let one of the other countries serve as the centre of the Commonwealth if it's so important to them. [/i]

You must remember when the quote was made, and without our Empire/Commonwealth we'd have never won the war or even managed to survive for as long as we did.

So a fine comment for its day (the 50's), but it's 2016 now and lets move on.

And what exactly is it that the OUT folk want that we can't do anyway? No one is stopping us trading with the non-EU countries, it's just that if we get out life will be so much harder to trade with the EU countries.

mikewsmith - Member

Lol are people still reading chewkw? Making as much higher sense as jackajamba over there.
On the UK us deals as was pointed out in the 80s by Peter Wright, the special relationship is defined as they think we are special and we think we have a relationship.

Are you leaking brain juice?

Or are you thinking that you are rational full of wisdom?

It's not difficult is it to ask for own control?

Which part of the [u]own control[/u] do you not understand?

If it's hardship to have own control so be it. Which part of that you cannot understand? Don't let the rot get to your brain. Leaking brain juice is one thing, having brain rot will turn you ZM ... or are you already one?

🙄

No one is stopping us trading with the non-EU countries, it's just that if we get out life will be so much harder to trade with the EU countries.

Er, wrong, the UK cannot sign free trade agreements as it stands, we are tied into EU trade agreements

for example, if we wanted to sign a free trade deal with India or the US, we can't, we are tied in to EU wide agreements.

EU - 28 countries, population 750m
Commonwealth - 53 Countries, pop 2.1 billion
you really think that we shouldn't care about 1/3 of the worlds population, and the industrial, scientific, trading and cultural opportunities that access to and relations with that market offers us?

Romans? Vikings? Normans? Hundred years war? Spanish Armada?

As a people us Brits are all immigrants - for instance my family can trace back to the invading Normans, German economic migrants (with Handel), French refugees (Huguenots) and Spanish fishing fleets plus no doubt some who came as part of the Neolithic cultural package. There is a family in Yorkshire who can trace their genetics to Roman soldiers from Africa....

I be keen to see some links supporting your view.

[url= http://www.europarl.europa.eu/atyourservice/en/displayFtu.html?ftuId=FTU_5.11.2.html ]Summary of Direct taxation harmonisation.
[/url]

I have a very different opinion not least based upon leaked PWC memos and the deals personally signed off by Junker, its a combination EU tax legislation amd very compliant (complicit I would say Governments, Luxembourg is about the richest EU country per capita).

Have you read any of the ruling requests? Can you point out a reference to European law rather than Luxembourg law in the text?

Ditto the triple-Irish ("graciously" reformed by the Irish but 4 years from now !)

Why should they? The problem is that the US don't recognize that other countries might look at the world differently to them. All the structure does is enable a company to extract income to a third country without triggering a subpart F inclusion in the US because it can take advantage of the same country exception being a payment between two companies incorporated in the same jurisdiction. The US could have changed their law, but instead bully the Irish into changing their's.

[I]Er, wrong, the UK cannot sign free trade agreements as it stands, we are tied into EU trade agreements[/I]

I didn't say anything about 'free trade', I said 'trade'.

Hmmm, so you want to negotiate trade deals as

1. An economic bloc representing 24% of global GDP, or

2. An smaller independent nation

Before answering - I know its an easy one - have a look at the trade deal struck with Canada

I looked up "Appeal to Authority" on Wikipedia and there was just a picture of jamba's nan.

If I had a photo to hand I'd post it. All of 5ft tall and ruled the family in proper Matriarchal style, my Grandad was 6ft tall and knew where he stood 🙂 RIP Mari

tmh why not look at a breakdown of the gdp by country within the eu, look at gdp of the recent joiners of the last 10 years

Greece has withdrawn it's diplomats from Austria after being excluded from the mini-summit on the migration crises. The Austrians didn't invite the Germans either. I'd wager they see both countries as part of the problem 😯

@mefty thanks I'll read that now. To summarise my view - eu legislation means if it's taxed in one EU country we can't tax it again and comoanies abke to trade freely cross border, dodgy deals in ireland and lux mean minimal / no tax paid there either

I am familiar with the numbers and your opposition to EU enlargement, but fail to see the link between this and my point re negotiating trade deals. They are separate issues.

Have you bought the Connolly book yet!!

Europe's Deadlock by David Marsh is also fun - here's one for you, mon ami

Each time, as the pressure builds, the Germans give in; each time, in an increasingly irksome display of brinkmanship, this capitulation comes at a later stage. Yet it is always only a partial surrender that leaves no one satisfied and nothing resolved. The German cave-in is never complete enough to resolve the euro’s problems or to win more than grudging acknowledgement from supplicant states pleading poverty.

Which is nothing to do with harmonisation and is all about the elimination of double taxation, which is a completely different topic.

Quote from the Guardian piece a while ago [url= http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/02/tax-avoidance-deals-juncker-legislation-luxembourg-eu-corporation-tax-multinationals ]linky[/url]

[i]
Last month the Guardian reported on leaks of 28,000 documents from accountancy group PricewaterhouseCoopers. The documents disclosed that the Luxembourg authorities, under Juncker, had helped 340 big firms to minimise their tax payments, in some cases to 1%. The European commission is investigating Luxembourg following allegations it effectively subsidised Amazon and a subsidiary of Fiat.[/i]

I recall the Amazon deal (effectively done by Junker) has now been declared illegal state aid. EDIT yes in a display of transparency consitent with the eu it published last month a prelimjnary decison reached more than a year earlie that the Lux / Amazon deal was state aid [url= https://home.kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmg/pdf/2014/11/etf-244.pdf ]kpmg link[/url]

Also I read today the extra property tax the French added on foreign owned property has been declared illegal by the EU. The French won't be returnjng the money any time soon though as they well kniw the EU isn't great on actualky enforcing rules.

@tmh I wasn't asking whether you where familar with the numbers was I ? I was asking you to share them so we can make a judgement on the importance of the constituents not least the portion of eu gdp made up by the uk itself. I've no objection to an increased common market just not an increased european superstate under th current and anticipated future rules.

Are you quoting that for a purpose? There is no great relevation in that article.

There is no great relevation in that article.

That EU piece is as dull as dishwater and says nothing much of anything imo

Maybe I shouldn't have used the word harmonisation, Imdid edit the post above to use legislation

[quote=DrJ ]I looked up "Appeal to Authority" on Wikipedia and there was just a picture of jamba's nan.
😆

I am familiar with the numbers and your opposition to EU enlargement, but fail to see the link between this and my point re negotiating trade deals. They are separate issues.

Jambs, the constituents do not affect my point. So I will leave it there. i too am opposed to a European Superstate and to the € (other possibly than among the core States) - however, I think our current position is the best of a (pretty poor) world and hence maximises our advantage. For that reason - I am NOT out!

So I will leave it there

Fine Luxembourg has enabled tax avoidance, so have Belgium and the Netherlands, but what they have done generally works globally - it is not restricted to Europe nor indeed dependent upon EU rules as you contended.

That EU piece is as dull as dishwater and says nothing much of anything imo

It is fairly dry, but does have the considerable merit that it is grounded in fact - I appreciate you prefer hyperbole - btw the original expression is as dull as ditchwater.

What worries me most about those "leading" the voice of Brexit is that they are to a man and woman, reasonable, rational straight talkers who make a strong case every day with factual logical statements.

Take for example, Nigel Lawson, always a go-to guy when you want it straight and sensible:

[from Newstalk]

A former government minister under Thatcher’s government, Lord Nigel Lawson has said that the Republic of Ireland could ask to once again join the United Kingdom while speaking at a debate on the forthcoming referendum on whether or not the UK should remain in the European Union.

Lawson, father of celebrity cook Nigella Lawson and chairman of the Vote Leave campaign group, also said “it would be great” if the Irish free state realised it had “made a mistake” in getting independence from Britain in 1922.

The 83-year-old statesman, who served as the Chancellor of the Exchequer during Margaret Thatcher’s tenure as the UK’s Prime Minister, made his off-the-cuff remarks while answering a question of what a British exit from the EU would mean for the border between the two distinct nations on the island of Ireland.

Replying, Lawson said that the United Kingdom has a “special relationship with the Irish Republic, for obvious historical reasons, but also reasons of sentiment.”

Lawson then added: “I would be very happy f the Republic of Ireland – I don’t think it’s going to happen – were to say we made a mistake in getting independence in 1922, and come back within the United Kingdom. That would be great.”

😆

I think he need to aim bigger

I am waiting for the US to realise their mistake and come home
VOTE BREXIT

Noooooooooooo Jy that would make Trump a British citizen.

Mind you if that's not grounds for a second indyref I don't know what is

Lawson added, "It would be tiptop if India, Singapore and Nigeria all realised what an awful bish they've made of the whole affair and voted to rejoin the UK. Also, Botswana and Israel. And Fiji - they're the rugby players who wear the skirts, aren't they? But not Yemen. They can keep the place. Bloody nightmare."

Hows about we burn down the White house (again) just to remind them what they are missing?

What worries me most about those "leading" the voice of [s]Brexit[/s]the Scottish Independence Campaign is that they are to a man and woman, reasonable, rational straight talkers who make a strong case every day with factual logical statements.

@tmh the constituents do matter imho as does the likely background to any negotiation, a Greek default plunging the EU and eurozone into a massive recessionary tailspin complete with the people of Europe realising they are on the hook for the largest sovereign default in history (not a bad effort for a country of 11m people), numerous contagion risks and a likely substantially worse migrant crises (see my link above from the German news website)

DrJ - Member
I looked up "Appeal to Authority" on Wikipedia and there was just a picture of jamba's nan.

Crikey ...

DrJ if my assumption is correct you are a computer / software developer / programmer is it not?

Do you have social or communication problem?

I have worked with may software engineers in my life and they are definitely cocooned in their own world. Most with PhDs too. Most ordinary people called them geeks. Most IT people look down on others because of they perceived ability to comprehend codes.

[b]So what's your beef with calling other's nan? [/b]

Your inability to communicate? [b]P[/b]ermanent [b]h[/b]ead [b]d[/b]amage? 😯

edit: no, you will not improve your social environment if you communicate in such a way by calling people's nan regardless whether you are in EU or not. It is your failure to communicate ... failure to communicate ... 😮

@dd fixed that for you

If its any help i think most of us would accept that those who wish toleave Unions tend to be the most unrealistic, least coherent and most "dreamy" in their assessment of what will come afterwards as you so wonderfully demonstrated on this thread. For some reason THM is going much easier on you and your economics than he ever did with AS. There is little difference between you and him - you may actually be the less realistic of the two

he likely background to any negotiation

* Not an impossible scenario

** more credible than The BS you spout but of course i am overstating it to make a point.

For clarity for jamby - I am not saying this will happen i am saying its stupid to debate like this - using fantastical unlikely scenarios to show your side has the greater negotiating position.

Everyone knows the smaller one more reliant on the bigger one - who wants access to the thing the bigger thing controls access to- has the weakest position. Its about the easiest thing in the world to work out hence why its just outside your skillset.

Nope Jambas - still different things.

Fortunately Greece does not have the capacity to sent EU into a recessionary tailspin neither is it relevant to the debate about whether it is stronger to negotiate trade deals from within or from outside the EU. IMO, the answer is pretty straightforward.

now how about these Leave Representatives continuing to lie about the size of the UK contribution - are they going to continue lying in the same way the DO did about the status of a currency? My guess is yes....

* Not an impossible scenario

Well, apart from the fact that it's a reserved issue for Westminster.

As i said its an unlikely scenario but not impossible and my whole point was to not frame the debate in terms of things that could happen but are very unlikely.

Its a pointless sidebar but if the rUK vote leave and scotland votes stay and Hollyrood /the scottish people refuse to accept it,the EU may well like to shit stir and say dont worry you can have the UK place with no change, it is hard to think rUk will be sending in tanks to make them stay and if Hollyrood hold another referendum it will be pretty hard for the rUK to ignore the wishes of the people - pretty pointless to try and keep them as well- like ignoring the request if a wife to divorce or the EU going no you cannot leave as we want you to stay.

I accept you will just say tough shit they cannot but the reality would be more complex than that

Its all hypothetical so all a bit pointless.

I don't think it would be as close as it was JY, however could somebody tell a poor benighted teuchter like me why it was so important that Scotland stayed linked to a larger partner yet a yearish after that it is vital the UK pull out of the EU? Still; THM/Zulu/Jamby were fond of telling us we wouldn't get to be part of the EU,so I guess they got that one correct.

the EU may well like to shit stir and say dont worry you can have the UK place with no change,

😆 @ KB

why it was so important that Scotland stayed linked to a larger partner yet a yearish after that it is vital the UK pull out of the EU?

Very few folk have the same view on both unions - I think THM Is the only pro person on both unions but there may be others.

Imagine all those that signed with shite deals with EU-SSR form their own "club" to compete with current ones ... 🙄

could somebody tell a poor benighted teuchter like me why it was so important that Scotland stayed linked to a larger partner yet a yearish after that it is vital the UK pull out of the EU?

Scotland is subsidized by the rest of the UK, and the UK subsidizes the EU.
Balancing the subsidy against the benefits is what people are discussing here.

5th richest country in the world vs an indepedent nation of 5m overly reliant on oil (SNP price projection of $100) and without a clear idea of the currency it will use ? UK won't be bullying anyone, it will be an adult trade negotiation

Some scathing words from the Guardian today "abject failure", this from a pro-Remain left leaning paper.

[i]The shift in focus from taking in refugees to dealing with the consequences of keeping most of them out amounts to an admission of abject failure in developing coherent EU policies on the crisis.[/i]

Luxembourg minister today, "we no longer have a clear plan, we are heading towards anarchy"

couldnt agree more jamby we need further integration and cooperation with the EU to find solutions, the leaders of the EU shouldnt be wasting time helping dave pacify the xenophobic nutjobs on his backbenchers

Despite the selective memory ducks, I will oblige

Under certain conditions, it makes sense for states, regions, and/or nations to pool* their sovereignty and in some case move to a common currency area. Economists talk about optimum currency areas (OCA) and here is a decent summary link

http://lexicon.ft.com/Term?term=optimum-currency-area

If the criteria for an OCA are met, this leads to/requires a common monetary and fiscal policy and therefore in effect political union

The UK is a very good example of a region that satisfies the criteria for an OCA and has a long history as a very successful union that has bought benefits to all parties (despite the yS BS). For that reason, I believe that it is in the interests of Scotland and rUK to remain part of such an OCA - its a win-win situation

The EU is a very good example of a region that does not satisfy the criteria for an OCA and has a long history of the negative consequences that result (despite the pro € BS). For that reason, I believe that it has always been in the interests of the UK to remain outside the OCA that is the € - well done Gordon for keeping Tony in his box. On top of this, the € has been based on monetary union without fiscal and political union - doh! - and you will recall Mark Carney's views on that in the independence debate - in short, crazy idea!

However, being opposed to an OCA for the reasons above does not lead automatically to opposition to a free-trade zone based around the four "freedom" pillars. IMO, they make great sense and are of benefit for us and other nations in the EE. For that reason, I believe that it remains in our interests to be part of the EU but not part of the folly that is the €. In fact, I think our current deal (despite the many imperfections) is a good one and I would prefer that the loonies and xenophobes (and others) did not jeopodise this beneficial position.

If you are able to access the link you will immediatialy see why it is complete nonsense to reject Shengen when part of the €. But there are no historical surprises when it comes to bad management of the flawed project.

* note, how the xenophobes resist use of the word "pool". They prefer "lose" or "give" up as they portray convenient negative images

Some scathing words from the Guardian today "abject failure", this from a pro-Remain left leaning paper.

I have been pretty sctahing about LvG at Man U bit i have not stopped supporting the team

What exactly is the inference i am meant to draw? I lack your skill in non sequiturs so I am at a loss as to what you think you just showed.

Very few folk have the same view on both unions - I think THM Is the only pro person on both unions but there may be others.

On this thread maybe, I reckon there's a lot of us out there. It's an intellectually consistent view. The Scottish nationalist position of wanting away from corrupt, undemocratic, bureaucratic Westminster and wanting to stay in the EU has always been a puzzle to me. I think it belies the anti-Englishness that a lot of the vote is founded on. Same applies to the anti-EU crowd, except substitute the English with Johnny Foreigner in general. Suspect their numbers will stand up to scrutiny about as well too.

It's usually better to be in the tent, pissing out IMO.

It's an intellectually consistent view.

Yes i agree, it was as close as I get to complimenting him 😛

Its just interesting how the majority[ on stw it appears anwya but i may be wrong] dont have a consistent view on unions per se that was all

Mine is fairly consistent - vote to leave the Uk to stop the tories ruling you

Stay in the EU to stop the excesses of what the tories ruling you would like to get away with 😉

Very few folk have the same view on both unions - I think THM Is the only pro person on both unions but there may be others.

Well I too am pro both. Who on earth are you talking to to get that idea?