Should the UK remain a member of the EU or leave the EU?

[Mark of Carnage]

Bit of fun for second most important event of our generation. The first of course occurred on 18/5/14

[MartinL]

From my experience a lot of people have strong views on whether we should stay in or get out without actually knowing why. Most of the noes just spout things like straight bananas etc or are your kipper types who don't like anything foreign. The yeses just think we will be better off without really knowing why.
Big thing to have a referendum on when so many know so little about the subject.

[habinagedu]

I know I don't believe for a minute the flier being handed out at the abbey saying we get ten pounds back from the eu for every pound put in. I took a leaflet from the first simpleton who offered me one and then gave it back to his mate, simpleton two.

[Lurid]

Ah, but for every leaflet you hand back, they hand out another ten. Or this could all be irrelevant nonsense...?

[cambcam]

Feb 21, 2016 14:59:40 GMT MartinL said:

From my experience a lot of people have strong views on whether we should stay in or get out without actually knowing why. Most of the noes just spout things like straight bananas etc or are your kipper types who don't like anything foreign. The yeses just think we will be better off without really knowing why.
Big thing to have a referendum on when so many know so little about the subject.

That's a fair summary and pretty much as I see it.

I really have no idea which way to vote at the moment, and finding balanced reasoning and information is not easy at all. My natural right of centre leanings leave me very suspicious about the EU and its motives, but sticking two fingers up and walking away seems a hell of a risk and one I'm not sure is worth taking.

The money markets tend not to like change, and I think that will ultimately tip the vote in a 'remain' favour - the general public will be very cautious to risk regarding their own personal circumstances; Investments/savings/shares/pensions/property values etc etc.

I'm edging towards a safe 'remain' vote for those reasons. The lesser of two evils perhaps, we shall see.

[charliecufc]

Unbending Brexiteer here.


It's a case of democracy and accountability for me. The EU Commission (responsible for drafting and repealing all legislation) are unelected. The MEPs we send to Brussels can only vote on what the Commission proposes, and UK representatives make up about a tenth of the entire EU parliament. It's a terrible and cynical system that leaves us starved of any influence there at all.

The left of centre 'In' campaign tends to focus on EU initiatives regarding the environment, workers rights etc. as why we should renew our membership, but there's no reason why we can't match these regulations as an independent nation. In fact, you'd have a much better chance of seeing your worldview come into fruition if you devolved power, rather than diluting it up the food chain as we're currently doing. Plus, I don't think progressive politics will see much sympathy in the next EU parliament in 2019 - all you need to do is have a look at the types of parties currently topping the polls in Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands, France and Austria to gauge what the make-up will be.

I understand the economic uncertainty upon a Brexit, but considering we run a huge trade deficit with the EU I'd imagine they'd be more keen to broker a deal than us. We have a enough muscle to negotiate a bespoke free trade agreement, and we'd be unshackled from some truly grotesque EU measures. Google the Common Agricultural Policy for starters.

[Alan]

We must leave to break the dominance of London and the finance industry over the UK econony, get all the eastern european cheap labour out to force up wages and end the gross distortion of the UK property market that means buy to let speculators can outbid first time buyers who then get extortionate rent subsidised by other taxpayers.

[utopia]

Feb 22, 2016 22:28:09 GMT Alan said:

We must leave to break the dominance of London and the finance industry over the UK econony, get all the eastern european cheap labour out to force up wages and end the gross distortion of the UK property market that means buy to let speculators can outbid first time buyers who then get extortionate rent subsidised by other taxpayers.

The cheapest labour isn't from Eastern Europe. There is more migration from outside the EU than within it. EU migrants make a net contribution on average. Migrants from outside do not. There are areas of the economy where EU migration has driven down wages: coffee shops and some building trades being the obvious ones. However, if we want free trade with the EU then we will end up with free movement of people just like Switzerland and Norway. Our political parties should concentrate on reducing migration from outside the EU. No free trade with the EU would lead to a massive recession.

If you want to end the property market distortion you need to vote out our domestic nimbies and set higher interest rates. The EU has little to do with property prices. Loans of 4.5 times joint income at low interest and a lack of building are the problem. Also the pathetic tenents' rights that give zero security of tenure.

I am instinctively pro-European for bigger reasons though. European countries no longer dominate the world. We are now competing with China, the USA and India. We need to stick together rather than fighting amongst ourselves. If we are divided we will be ruled from outside. We will have to do grubby deals with China, India, Russia as individual nations set against each other. Collectively we are more important and get better terms. 100-150 years ago we could fight amongst ourselves and still dominate the world because we were technologically superior. Even 20 years ago we were far advanced of China and India. Where will we be in 20 years time? Smaller economically, politically and militarily than China, India, the USA and possibly, even, countries like Brazil (although they are knackered at the moment). Collectively, as part of the EU, we will still be part of the economic powerhouse of the World. We will have a much easier time of things. Europe is the finest place in the world culturally. We're privileged to be Europeans. I don't mind us helping out the Eastern Europe financially through the EU. In the long term it helps us to be a strong block. I absolutely draw the line at expansion to Turkey though. That would be a disaster.

[pappasmurf]

I suspect the result in June will be very close.
I Welcome this opportunity to get rid of Scotland

[charliecufc]

Feb 23, 2016 13:07:45 GMT utopia said:

Feb 22, 2016 22:28:09 GMT Alan said:

We must leave to break the dominance of London and the finance industry over the UK econony, get all the eastern european cheap labour out to force up wages and end the gross distortion of the UK property market that means buy to let speculators can outbid first time buyers who then get extortionate rent subsidised by other taxpayers.

The cheapest labour isn't from Eastern Europe. There is more migration from outside the EU than within it. EU migrants make a net contribution on average. Migrants from outside do not. There are areas of the economy where EU migration has driven down wages: coffee shops and some building trades being the obvious ones. However, if we want free trade with the EU then we will end up with free movement of people just like Switzerland and Norway. Our political parties should concentrate on reducing migration from outside the EU. No free trade with the EU would lead to a massive recession.

If you want to end the property market distortion you need to vote out our domestic nimbies and set higher interest rates. The EU has little to do with property prices. Loans of 4.5 times joint income at low interest and a lack of building are the problem. Also the pathetic tenents' rights that give zero security of tenure.

I am instinctively pro-European for bigger reasons though. European countries no longer dominate the world. We are now competing with China, the USA and India. We need to stick together rather than fighting amongst ourselves. If we are divided we will be ruled from outside. We will have to do grubby deals with China, India, Russia as individual nations set against each other. Collectively we are more important and get better terms. 100-150 years ago we could fight amongst ourselves and still dominate the world because we were technologically superior. Even 20 years ago we were far advanced of China and India. Where will we be in 20 years time? Smaller economically, politically and militarily than China, India, the USA and possibly, even, countries like Brazil (although they are knackered at the moment). Collectively, as part of the EU, we will still be part of the economic powerhouse of the World. We will have a much easier time of things. Europe is the finest place in the world culturally. We're privileged to be Europeans. I don't mind us helping out the Eastern Europe financially through the EU. In the long term it helps us to be a strong block. I absolutely draw the line at expansion to Turkey though. That would be a disaster.

I don't think the free movement of people (so long as there's border checks) in itself is the problem. It worked fine before 2004 when the EU consisted solely of Western European countries with roughly similar economies, welfare provisions and standards of living. The best way round the issue of mass migration from tinpot states and the resulting wage compression is in my opinion to resemble the Danish approach and slap an embargo on public services and benefits to everyone (Britons, EU and non-EU migrants) until they've made a contribution to the public purse, either personally or through and employer. This does not contravene the EU's laws on discrimination as the same rule applies to all, and you will see a more manageable, skills dictated and economically beneficial level of migration. Your suggestion that we should pull up the drawbridge to the rest of the world is a bit crude and unfair, although certainly a more realistic outcome.

This is of course assuming we vote to stay, or leave and can't wrangle our own Free Trade agreement that doesn't include the free movement of people, which I believe we could.

I've never understood why Europhiles stoop to talking down the UK by portraying it as some piddly country unable to stand on its own two feet. We are the 4th/5th largest economy (depending on how you measure it) and the 21st largest by population. We're not even small in terms of geographical size. We have deep-rooted ties with the Commonwealth and wider Anglosphere, and our friendship with European nations will remain outside of a political union. It is painstakingly obvious that we are big and ugly enough to thrive outside the EU, and coupled with being overwhelming net contributors (as you rightly allude to), we can negotiate a far better deal than Iceland, Norway and Switzerland. Better yet, we'd have a democratically elected and fully accountable government once we've weathered the period of uncertainty and finalised a Brexit. Hopefully we will find our collective balls and go for it.

You won't have a say in Turkey joining the EU, and nor will any MEP you vote for in the next European elections. You're right about it being a disaster though.

[Hugh Jerection]

Personally I'll be voting leave, though it's a close call.

The main reasons for me are -

TTIP leading the NHS subject to privatisation (with help from Cameron's Health and Social Care Act 2012 s72). Imo this is the real reason Cameron wants us to stay in the EU and is a huge threat to the NHS/ GPs. If we remain in the EU, companies can sue the UK government (tax payers) for interfering with free trade in new courts the EU are creating (as in the recent case -Achmea v Slovak Republic, 29.5 of damages).

EU is pushing ahead with its expansion strategy to include Turkey. Not only will this not work culturally but will lead to large immigration pushing down wages.

Anti democratic bail out conditions placed on Ireland, Greece and Portugal. Anti democratic changes to the Lisbon Treaty mean smaller countries have less say to changes proposed.

The EU have imposed a budget deficit limit on member states of 3%, leaving member states strangled with its own growth stategies. Even basic economists understand that government investment leads to growth. 3% is too low and only helps Germany (imo).

I also have concerns about the directives used by the European courts to allow EEA members to public funds without working or on a flimsy piggybacking claim of another EEA member.

That said I have huge concerns about only being answerable to the current conservative government. For all its fault, the Human Rights Act does put the people, generally, before government.

There are many other points that people need to look at rather than thinking people that vote out are little Englanders or people that remain are tree hugging lefties. This is a big decision, but I wouldn't trust Cameron, he hasn't changed a thing, as confirmed by all states other than ourselves.

[cufctheparrot]

Feb 23, 2016 14:51:35 GMT pappasmurf said:

I suspect the result in June will be very close.
I Welcome this opportunity to get rid of Scotland

Considering that most of Scotland and Wales appear to want us to stay in, and England is largely split, I almost feel as if it would be worth me voting to leave the EU, just to see how Scotland would react, especially after last years vote by them to stay in the Union.

[cufctheparrot]

Feb 21, 2016 16:34:01 GMT habinagedu said:

I know I don't believe for a minute the flier being handed out at the abbey saying we get ten pounds back from the eu for every pound put in. I took a leaflet from the first simpleton who offered me one and then gave it back to his mate, simpleton two.

What it actually said was 'FOR EVERY £1 WE PUT INTO THE EU, WE GET ALMOST £10 BACK through increased trade, investment, jobs, growth and lower prices'

The way I read it was that it is the equivalent of spending through marketing to build revenue through increased business. So for a 10 fold return we are investing 10% of the Nations wealth in marketing, which appears to be roughly in line with what major companies may invest in marketing. As a result we will neither be benefiting or losing out from being in or out of the EU. So if all things are equal, then it is down to whether you believe the EU is democratic or the best way to run a country.

All largely irrelevant though because when it comes down to standing in the booth and putting a cross in the box, a large percentage of people will chicken out and go for the 'safe' option, just like they did in Scotland's referendum.

[cambcam]

Feb 22, 2016 22:28:09 GMT Alan said:

We must leave to break the dominance of London and the finance industry over the UK econony, get all the eastern european cheap labour out to force up wages and end the gross distortion of the UK property market that means buy to let speculators can outbid first time buyers who then get extortionate rent subsidised by other taxpayers.

The sudden influx of cheap labour has been a disaster as far as I can see. Unfortunately, we are not going to be able to put that genie back in its bottle, but we certainly can't allow the problem to get any worse.

The housing market is indeed completely distorted, but to my (simple) mind it's the manifestation of extreme supply and demand issues. With a rapidly growing population (does anyone even know what it is?) that ratio is only going to get worse and we all know what that means.

The first time buyers are having a torrid time, but there is no quick-fix or one-off 'silver bullet' legislation that is going to begin to compensate for the aforementioned population growth and skewed supply and demand. The fashionable anti buy-to-let, anti landlord agenda is unfortunately too late. The buy-to-let ship has already sailed, and frankly, anyone going that route in this climate needs their bumps feeling.

The 'targeting' of investors and buy-to-let landlords is risky and potentially counter-productive; it may have some political mileage given public perceptions, but investors will not want to borrow money against property (for obvious reasons of interest rates rises/reduced margins(yields) etc. ) but will not stop buying outright - they will seek only cash purchases. This will reduce the amount of money spent on each purchase and consequently create a heightened demand at lower end of the market - i.e. first time buyer style properties, pushing them up and even further away from those needing the most help. This would very likely see a narrowing of differentials between the lower and upper ends of the housing market which may be no bad thing, but I'd very surprised to see any noticeable positive change for those that really need it. First time buyers have it tough enough pitched against financed buy-to-let landlords and investors, but as that group turn away from finance to cash purchases only, the first time buyers have little to no chance. Besides, a housing slump were it to happen, would see ferocious investment by opportunists that have been waiting for some time for that sort of market. There are plenty of people waiting in the wings to exploit that situation unfortunately.

The dangers of the uncertainty regarding Brexit and the reaction of the money markets were touched on earlier. Who in their right mind would invest in anything at the moment? It certainly makes sense for everyone to tread cautiously and keep their powder dry for a while.

Granted, those are just the thoughts and ramblings of one person and there may well be some straight forward solutions. But I don't think anyone will convince me we were worse off with a pre-Maastricht population of around 53mill, with reasonable housing, reasonable wages and reasonable opportunities, than we are in 2016 with 70 million (or whatever the hell it is) and a population undermined and insecure.

I'm struggling to see why any expansion of the nonsense we have had for 20 years or so would bring about any improvements at all.

[Sandypants]

I'll be voting to stay.

I don't know much about the economics of it all, but the romantic notion that we should be writing our own rules falls totally flat when you see who's in charge of the UK and who's put them there. I'd far sooner trust the EU collective with human rights than Cameron et al who think "human" means you went to Eton.