Strongest argument yet from a remain voter

Scroll to see replies

Yes, and we should back up the Swiss on this and unite with them moving forward.

If we enter the EEA I will just leave the country and move to Australia as that will solve absolutely nothing.

So what do you want from an agreement that Switzerland has, that the EEA countries don't have?

Reply 61

PilgrimOfTruth

Original post by MagicNMedicine

plus justice and home affairs where we already had opt outs.

Opt outs for how long? Likely until the 6th EU Treaty was signed and sealed after which we would have been bagged, tagged and owned totally. At that point they could impose anything and basically eradicate UK Laws completely in favour of EU Laws governed by a central EU Justice system.

Reply 62

welshiee

Original post by MagicNMedicine

So what do you want from an agreement that Switzerland has, that the EEA countries don't have?

More negotiating power at the table. Each trade agreement is negotiated independently. With joining the EEA we are essentially at the will of the EU countries and what they decide. Thats the main reason Switzerland voted against joining.

Also, Switzerland's model allows for only partial application of EU law which is imperative in bringing down costs for businesses in the UK that do not even deal with the EU but have to currently comply.

Reply 63

MagicNMedicine

Original post by welshiee

When you say trade agreement, what sort of trade agreement do you mean?

Trade agreements with the EU or with third parties?

EFTA would give us tariff free trade with the EU and other EFTA countries, across the board.

The EEA is not a customs union, members can strike their own trade deals with third countries unlike the EU.

Reply 64

welshiee

Original post by MagicNMedicine

When you say trade agreement, what sort of trade agreement do you mean?

It's not one trade agreement. Its a set of bilateral trade agreements. Switzerland and the EU have over 100 trade agreements that are negotiated directly between the two parties involved. This is the best model for the UK moving forward.

Trade agreements with the EU or with third parties?

Both. We'd have a set of bilateral trade agreements with the EU and other FTA's with the wider world negotiated on our own terms.

EFTA would give us tariff free trade with the EU and other EFTA countries, across the board.

Yes, but there's two options as it currently stands in EFTA. You either join the EEA or you negotiate a set of bilateral trade agreements. One is a good option for the UK. The other is a disaster.

The EEA is not a customs union, members can strike their own trade deals with third countries unlike the EU.

Of course but there is still more application of EU law whereas bilateral trade agreements give you partial application.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36639261

Reply 65

Malevolent

Jesus you're obsessed :lol:

Reply 66

1420787

Original post by welshiee

[video="youtube;aqFUEkOCOf4"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqFUEkOCOf4[/video]

Who cares about democracy? Who cares about sovereignty? Who cares about anything right? This plonker couldn't even name an MEP and openly admits to being uneducated on the subject, which is no surprise given most people I know who've looked into the EU in depth and researched it become strong leave voters, and she also gives her reason for staying in the EU as free movement, something that is entirely possible without being in the EU as you can still be a part of EFTA with bilateral trade agreements.

Most of the Leave voters I know dislike black people.

Reply 67

welshiee

Original post by offhegoes

Most of the Leave voters I know dislike black people.

From a remain voter.

Reply 68

TheLittlestElf

Welshie I think someone should just ban you, basically spamming up the place :lol:

Reply 69

1420787

Original post by welshiee

From a remain voter.

Some Remain voters are racist. It is highly probably that more Leave voters are racist.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 70

welshiee

Original post by offhegoes

It looks like it's being held by a policeman?

Yes. It's called 'confiscation'.

Reply 71

Rorschach II

Original post by TaintedLight

This doesn't prove anything. I can post just as many (if not more) "interviews" of leave- voters that will make you laugh, face palm or frown.

it's bad enough the leave campaign and co made dumbfounded claims to win votes and now you people are going to pick out certain interviews that are deliberately meant to represent the remain voters' knowledge on the matter?

Now that is depressing!

there was a time when I used to regard your posts highly....👎🏼

It's the same when people quote the £350 million figure a week one group of leave campaigners used; same principle.

Original post by JordanL_

Truly horrifying that people can have different values and priorities.

Even though the EU is democratic and has served our interests better than the last 4 (at least) of our elected governments.

This is bs.

For example considering the Climate Change Levy in the UK (UK carbon tax) was implemented in 2001 (April 1st) and the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU carbon tax) was implemented in 2005, we beat the EU in this regard.

Though I admit I haven't checked the relative tax rates, but if the tax rates were initially high, the industries would leak carbon (carbon leakage) and therefore undermine the efforts of the carbon tax.

So regardless of the relative tax rates, we beat the EU to it.

An the EU carbon tax system, although a force for good, is so flawed and is in desperate need for a lot of reforms.
I'll explain how if someone requested.

And you're a hypocrite; you have abhorred, slandered and libelled leave voters, despite them just having "a different values and priorities".

And @JordanL_ who has it been who legalised same-sex (gay) marriage before for example Germany, another EU member state? (They have civil partnerships, which however do not grant the same benefits, therefore being institutionalised discrimination. Marriage for example grants tax reductions, whilst civil partnerships do not, in Germany.) It was the UK! We have legalised it before them! Look at all those "no"s! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_the_European_Union#Same-sex_unions And read the rest of the page if you want to be a bit disappointed by the EU.

And the subsidies for farmers (a part of CAP, the Common Agricultural Policy) has absolutely destroyed entire environments, because it is such a flawed and broken system!

Farmers with less than 5 hectares of land aren't entitled, promoting economic inequality.
Farmers are and have been absolutely destroying forests because the amount they can claim is decided by the amount of land they have at their disposal, though they barely need to use any of it.

This deforestation, useless and unnecessary, increases flooding (well-established.)

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 72

TaintedLight

Original post by TimmonaPortella

I'm wounded.

Obviously you can find stupid people supporting anything. Interviews like this are not a scientific tool. They do, however, help to remind us that the smart vs ignorant narrative that a lot of people seem to be buying into in relation to this might be a little on the superficial side.

Original post by welshiee

Yes, there are idiots on both sides. Well done for explaining the obvious. The point I was making was exactly that. The remain voters have been continuously calling the leave voters stupid and less intellectual and the media have seized upon the opportunity to selectively pick out idiots that voted leave to push that narrative.

You thread title would suggest otherwise. But no matter.

Original post by XcitingStuart

It's the same when people quote the £350 million figure a week one group of leave campaigners used; same principle.

What...?? How many "groups" of leave campaigners were there?

Reply 73

Rorschach II

Original post by TaintedLight

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2016/jun/23/eu-referendum-live-results-and-analysis

It's reasonable to conclude areas where more residents had higher education / income skewed to remain. Not all too superficial unless we are nitpicking.

You thread title would suggest otherwise. But no matter.

What...?? How many "groups" of leave campaigners were there?

At least 2; Vote Leave was separate to Nigel Farage and his gang.

Same principle is it not?
Let's not revel in hypocrisy.

Reply 74

Rorschach II

@JordanL_ Please answer my post.

@JordanL_

@JordanL_

@JordanL_

Reply 75

TaintedLight

Original post by XcitingStuart

At least 2; Vote Leave was separate to Nigel Farage and his gang.

Same principle is it not?
Let's not revel in hypocrisy.

I don't think there were more than 2. Save for independents like Kate there weren't any "group" per say. But whatever.

Are you unable to explain this hypocrisy? Cuz I honestly don't get it and, knowing you, you are prone to sprout bs.

Reply 76

Rorschach II

Original post by TaintedLight

Mentioning the £350 million figure a week by one of the leave campaigners is "misrepresenting the leave voters' knowledge" is it not?

Read your post again:
http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?p=66237907#post66237907

Ergo the hypocrisy.

Reply 77

TaintedLight

Original post by XcitingStuart

One of the leave campaigners...? That propoganda came from the official leave campaign ... Any ways I'm somewhat glad you at least acknowledge it's the incorrect figure.

If you remember you rambled about it as if it was true

Reply 78

username1204031

Original post by Rorschach II

It's the same when people quote the £350 million figure a week one group of leave campaigners used; same principle.

...The OFFICIAL group of leave campaigners?

One example of many. Our current government has shown complete disregard toward the environment - subsidising fracking while cutting renewables subsidies, cutting carbon capture funding, and blocking further EU environmental legislation.

The EU implemented the best workers rights (WTD) and consumer rights in the world. Our government are already discussing changes to those.

And you're a hypocrite; you have abhorred, slandered and libelled leave voters, despite them just having "a different values and priorities".

That's a bit hyperbolic.

And @JordanL_ who has it been who legalised same-sex (gay) marriage before for example Germany, another EU member state? (They have civil partnerships, which however do not grant the same benefits, therefore being institutionalised discrimination. Marriage for example grants tax reductions, whilst civil partnerships do not, in Germany.) It was the UK! We have legalised it before them! Look at all those "no"s! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_the_European_Union#Same-sex_unions And read the rest of the page if you want to be a bit disappointed by the EU.

Again, you're giving individual examples. The EU never stopped us from legalising same-sex marriage, they just didn't allow it across the entire union, so we lost nothing by being part of it. We'd have lost the Working Time Directive by not being part of it.

And the subsidies for farmers (a part of CAP, the Common Agricultural Policy) has absolutely destroyed entire environments, because it is such a flawed and broken system!

Farmers with less than 5 hectares of land aren't entitled, promoting economic inequality.
Farmers are and have been absolutely destroying forests because the amount they can claim is decided by the amount of land they have at their disposal, though they barely need to use any of it.

This deforestation, useless and unnecessary, increases flooding (well-established.)

I agree that the CAP should be reformed.

Reply 79

Midlander

Original post by welshiee

Yes who cares about democracy. We have 150,000 Tory members who will decide the PM on behalf of the country. We have an unelected upper house and head of state. We have a voting system that gives Parliaments bearing no relation to the popular vote.

Better get onto building that fence at Dover, and stockpiling **** to throw at the continent.

Posted from TSR Mobile