EU Referendum

[Hacker Khan]

Couldn't agree more. Well other than pointing out those in favour of a 'Stay' vote tend to be Yoghurt knitting, Yurt dwelling Codpiece faces

Au contraire. I work for a global company with several offices in many countries. And the fact that the UK is in the EU is one reason why we have a UK office. Companies want easy access to the UK market and also the EU market. I am not saying that if we were not in the EU the company would close the UK office down straight away and move it to Madrid. Or that my company and many others do not want access to the UK market.

But all companies want to minimise risk, hassle and expense. They like things to be as simple as possible and as predictable as possible. A lot of companies trade globally nowadays, they can locate where ever they want we need to ensure that the UK remains the most attractive proposition for them in order to ensure our children and our children's children have a sustainable economic future. And for me, based on what I have heard from my company and other business leaders, the benefits of staying in the EU outweigh the down sides. Of which I admit there are many. No one I suspect wants unfettered immigration, and we do need to keep trying to control it and ensure we have the infrastructure to support immigrants.

But I would much rather there be a sound economic argument from both sides on why we need to stay in as as various US presidents have said 'it's the ecomony stupid' . And if people listen to that and then vote to leave then fair enough. What worries me is that the agenda is to focused on immigration and fear mongering around this subject.

 

[Hacker Khan]

It seems that no matter the words a STAY campaigner uses to extoll a benefit from being in the EU, a LEAVE campaigner portrays that as STAY playing on fears of losing that benefit by adding 'and you say we might lose that benefit if we leave'. When in fact all the STAY campaigner may be saying is 'look at this benefit'. Indeed it seems that the FEAR campaign is something that LEAVE are talking up. And so while it seems a bit-counter intuitive, I think STAY should almost completely avoid talking about 'losing' anything - just talk of the benefits and let LEAVE come up wit their counter-benefits

And as far as Farage is concerned - well he was very disingenuous on LBC last night. Letting one LEAVE supporter after another talk rubbish about the EU and how England would be after leaving. Some complete madness underpinning the leave arguments of most LEAVE supporters calling in - and Farage did little to counter what they were saying - even although he must have known they were talking complete rubbish. He clearly doesn't care what reasons individuals give if they are to vote LEAVE

Are you putting stay and leave in capitals as some kind of subliminal suggestion process in a Derren Brown way?

 

[ColchesterFC]

The thing is that it is easy for the leave campaign to turn any benefit from being in the EU into a scare story from the stay campaign. For it to be a benefit of being in the EU it must by definition be something we would lose were we to leave as otherwise it couldn't be classed as a benefit of membership.

I don't agree with the tactic as I think that the leave campaign would be better off using a more positive campaign rather than focussing on the negatives of being in the EU.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

The thing is that it is easy for the leave campaign to turn any benefit from being in the EU into a scare story from the stay campaign. For it to be a benefit of being in the EU it must by definition be something we would lose were we to leave as otherwise it couldn't be classed as a benefit of membership.

I don't agree with the tactic as I think that the leave campaign would be better off using a more positive campaign rather than focussing on the negatives of being in the EU.

But I doubt it will happen - would be great though. And the reason I think they won't is that most benefits of leaving are only hoped for or predicted. There is not a lot Leave (I'll drop the CAPS) campaign can say for 100% certain other than the UK won't be in the EU.

 

[Doon frae Troon]

I would have thought that the benefits of staying in the EU were blindingly obvious to anyone living in Scotland.
If I lived in Essex or Kent I would probably have a different view.
The people who live in Essex and Kent have as much right to air their thoughts on The EU referendum as the people who live in Scotland.

 

[ColchesterFC]

And once again you fail or refuse to answer the question. For those of us that don't live in Scotland what are the blindingly obvious reasons that the Scots would see as a reason for staying in the EU?

 

[Deleted member 15344]

I would have thought that the benefits of staying in the EU were blindingly obvious to anyone living in Scotland.
If I lived in Essex or Kent I would probably have a different view.
The people who live in Essex and Kent have as much right to air their thoughts on The EU referendum as the people who live in Scotland.

I'm unsure of the benefits of leaving or staying so can you enlighten me on the "blindingly obvious " please

 

[SocketRocket]

I'm unsure of the benefits of leaving or staying so can you enlighten me on the "blindingly obvious " please

Probably something to do with Scottish Independence but I also wait with baited breath to be enlightened.

 

[SocketRocket]

Au contraire. I work for a global company with several offices in many countries. And the fact that the UK is in the EU is one reason why we have a UK office. Companies want easy access to the UK market and also the EU market. I am not saying that if we were not in the EU the company would close the UK office down straight away and move it to Madrid. Or that my company and many others do not want access to the UK market.

But all companies want to minimise risk, hassle and expense. They like things to be as simple as possible and as predictable as possible. A lot of companies trade globally nowadays, they can locate where ever they want we need to ensure that the UK remains the most attractive proposition for them in order to ensure our children and our children's children have a sustainable economic future. And for me, based on what I have heard from my company and other business leaders, the benefits of staying in the EU outweigh the down sides. Of which I admit there are many. No one I suspect wants unfettered immigration, and we do need to keep trying to control it and ensure we have the infrastructure to support immigrants.

But I would much rather there be a sound economic argument from both sides on why we need to stay in as as various US presidents have said 'it's the ecomony stupid' . And if people listen to that and then vote to leave then fair enough. What worries me is that the agenda is to focused on immigration and fear mongering around this subject.

Au Contraire what? Not a Yoghurt Knitting, Yurt Dwelling Codpiece Face. I'll let you into a confidence, I didn't really think you were that, well! not all of them anyway

 

[drdel]

Many who worry about multi-national companies vacating the UK shore seem to have forgotten there's free trade agreement that pre-dated the UK's joining. It doesn't require EU membership other nations enjoy the same status.

What the EU needs to learn is that an imbalance in trade means the exporter (say mainly Germany) sucks currency from the importers (mainly southern EU members). This has caused the financial challenge that the ECB is trying to rectify by printing money at an amazing level. This has just kicked the can down the road and the Eurozone countries will eventually wake up the to debt imbalance this has caused.

Without addressing this inevitable economic issue demands from members to prop up the EU's budget with be made across all 28. The UK needs to maintain its autonomy otherwise our contribution will rise disproportionally and our economy will suffer.

IF there isn't fundamental reforms the EU's economy will suffer so the UK is, under the present terms, best not to be in the Eurozone and thus it is probably prudent to come out of the EU and continue with the EFTA.

 

[Foxholer]

Regarding the Multinationals. I am not convinced that there would be any significant change after a Brexit.

Then just wait until the 'Stay' campaign get the heads of such companies to say they 'would have to consider their positions' for both existing and new developments! It's not too dis-similar from the situation that Banks and other organisations were in with the Scottish indy issue. I'm also not totally convinced that a Brexit would automatically necessitate a move, but it would certainly be an argument used by governments in their negotiations with the MNs about where to site new developments! It would certainly mean that some sort of FTA - like the original EEC was - would need to be established. Most likely, that would be simplest through EFTA, but successful application for entry into that organisation isn't guaranteed!

why do you believe London will lose the Financial Service industry, it has little to do with us being in the EU and is more to do with the Expertise in that sector, much like many other businesses.

Frankfurt has lusted after London's huge FS industry for years! This would be another, more compelling, argument for them to become the 'centre' for EU FS! With so much of UK's economy dependent on that area, any significant movement of that sector would be disastrous!

Regarding us spending more than we earn! We already do that in the EU so surely staying in will perpetuate that situation. I cant understand why you ask me if I promote it. I should be asking you on the basis of being in favour of us continuing with being a member of a club that we haemorrhage money to.

Well deflected! :rofl: It's part of the 'renegotiation' role to obtain better value for money from the contributions being made!

Indeed, the method of funding/contributions/benefits is one of the things that should be on the agenda for renegotiation imo! It shouldn't simply be a case of those countries with better performing economies funding those with poorer performing ones as there's less incentive to take the pain required to turn low performing ones around!

It's up to the 'Stay' bunch to get the message across that much of the contribution returns and that vfm is being obtained! George didn't help that with his 'surprise' at the £800m bill he 'didn't know about' last year!

 

[Doon frae Troon]

And once again you fail or refuse to answer the question. For those of us that don't live in Scotland what are the blindingly obvious reasons that the Scots would see as a reason for staying in the EU?

The obvious ones are keeping the UK united, human rights and trade union legislation.
Fringe benefits are fishery and agriculture funding.
Transport funding for lowly populated areas.

Others are centralised thinking for defense, finance, manufacturing and open borders.

I would imagine that the Essex/Kent region will have the same lists as a reason for leaving.

 

[Foxholer]

Many who worry about multi-national companies vacating the UK shore seem to have forgotten there's free trade agreement that pre-dated the UK's joining. It doesn't require EU membership other nations enjoy the same status.
...
IF there isn't fundamental reforms the EU's economy will suffer so the UK is, under the present terms, best not to be in the Eurozone and thus it is probably prudent to come out of the EU and continue with the EFTA.

UK isn't a member of EFTA! Membership isn't guaranteed, but would be the logical step!

That 'fundamental reform' is, supposedly, what DC is negotiating!

What the EU needs to learn is that an imbalance in trade means the exporter (say mainly Germany) sucks currency from the importers (mainly southern EU members). This has caused the financial challenge that the ECB is trying to rectify by printing money at an amazing level. This has just kicked the can down the road and the Eurozone countries will eventually wake up the to debt imbalance this has caused.

I don't believe it's the trade imbalances that (alone) have caused the problems and the 'QE' that the ECB is doing! It's the overall economies of several/many of the 28 that are causing the problems - and the simple fact that there are 28 imo! Much of the action is still being taken as a result of the fallout from the 2008 Financial slump imo!

And most, if not all, EU countries, including UK, France and Germany, have been 'breaking the' EU economic rules for some time now! So either the rules need to be adjusted (flattened to allow for spikes) or some sort of sanction needs to be applied to the 'offenders' - that acts as an incentive rather than simply adding to the burden! The simple fact that UK tends to have a different (earlier) economic cycle than the rest of Europe doesn't help - and is actually an argument for Brexit imo!

 

[Doon frae Troon]

Probably something to do with Scottish Independence but I also wait with baited breath to be enlightened.

As normal with SR......it is actually the complete opposite. :lol:

 

[Doon frae Troon]

Straw poll in a popular Scottish media outlet.

Stay in 87%
Out 13%

1200+ responses in 12 hours.

 

[ColchesterFC]

The obvious ones are keeping the UK united, human rights and trade union legislation.
Fringe benefits are fishery and agriculture funding.
Transport funding for lowly populated areas.

Others are centralised thinking for defense, finance, manufacturing and open borders.

I don't see any of those things as overwhelming or compelling reasons to stay in the EU. None of those things would have to change if we left.

It's very difficult to have a United UK while you and others that didn't get the result you wanted in the referendum keep going on about having another vote. It's a bit hypocritical from anyone on the side of Scottish independence to now talk about a United UK.

With the amount we pay in and the amount we get out we could still have fishery and agriculture funding and for transport for lowly populated areas. We'd remain in NATO and as a member of the G7 so we'd have centralised thinking on defence etc. And what does "open borders" actually mean? We have to show a passport to travel abroad from the UK and I can't imagine border posts springing up between EU countries just to check UK passports so what would actually change?

 

[Deleted member 15344]

As normal with SR......it is actually the complete opposite. :lol:

Can you please answer my question

I'm unsure on the pro and cons of staying or leaving etc

So can you state the "blindingly obvious" reasons to stay

 

[Doon frae Troon]

How about #392:lol:

 

[Deleted member 15344]

How about #392:lol:

None of what you posted is "blindingly obvious"

The U.K. will still be united if the UK voted to leave the EU

Human rights etc legislation wouldn't be harmed

We might even have better benefits on fishery and agricultural due to not piling in massive amounts of money into EU and getting less out - so that money can be used for subsidiary's to those areas

Centralised thinking ?!! What the heck is that supposed to mean

Defence - well still part of NATO

Finance and Manufacturing we can think for ourselves

And open borders ?! I have to show my passport leaving and entering the UK anyway

So any actual "blindingly obvious" reasons ?

 

[Doon frae Troon]

I don't see any of those things as overwhelming or compelling reasons to stay in the EU. None of those things would have to change if we left.

It's very difficult to have a United UK while you and others that didn't get the result you wanted in the referendum keep going on about having another vote. It's a bit hypocritical from anyone on the side of Scottish independence to now talk about a United UK.

With the amount we pay in and the amount we get out we could still have fishery and agriculture funding and for transport for lowly populated areas. We'd remain in NATO and as a member of the G7 so we'd have centralised thinking on defence etc. And what does "open borders" actually mean? We have to show a passport to travel abroad from the UK and I can't imagine border posts springing up between EU countries just to check UK passports so what would actually change?

Jings.............................HOW MANY TIMES must I say that I am not overly keen on independence.
If there was a devo max option I would have voted for that but as I had a postal vote I was unable to choose that option.
As most Scots I am keen to see the UK prime minister honour his Vow to Scotland.

Can we please get back to the OP now and stop this constant referral to Scottish Independence on this thread.