Turn on thread page Beta

EU referendum: Where does your vote lie? watch

  • View Poll Results: In or Out of EU?
    In
    62.00%
    Out
    37.00%
    I won't vote.
    1.00%

    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Further integration will occur either way.

    If the country votes In then a Labour PM will see that as license to do everything but join the Euro.
    Possibly. But a grexit and brexit in quick succession could possibly topple the EU.

    I think it depends entirely on the margins of the referendum. If it is close I think all political parties will realise the necessity of resisting further integration, keeping the UK with one foot in and one foot out so to speak. And again it depends on what kind of concessions Cameron secures, and who the next Labour prime minister might be.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tehFrance)
    Please, a Labour PM would join the Euro, I think Blair was all for it until Brown said no!
    Brown and Balls for that matter.

    But given how unpopular joining the Euro still is, along with the perpetual Eurozone crisis, no one in their right minds would advocate joining the Eurozone.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Swanbow)
    Possibly. But a grexit and brexit in quick succession could possibly topple the EU.

    I think it depends entirely on the margins of the referendum. If it is close I think all political parties will realise the necessity of resisting further integration, keeping the UK with one foot in and one foot out so to speak. And again it depends on what kind of concessions Cameron secures, and who the next Labour prime minister might be.
    None of those will sink the EU. There are plenty of countries that completely rejected euro-skeptics at the Euro elections. People here assume Europe is far more anti EU than it really is.

    I think the negotiations may sway some symbolically but without anything massive I think that most people would end up voting the same way either way.
    Offline

    15
    (Original post by Swanbow)
    Brown and Balls for that matter.

    But given how unpopular joining the Euro still is, along with the perpetual Eurozone crisis, no one in their right minds would advocate joining the Eurozone.
    Ah Balls, I miss Ed Balls... Twitter won't be the same

    Yes, I think we'd need a lunatic of a PM to join at this time.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zippity.doodah)
    :lol: califrnia is part of a nation state. the UK *is* a nation state. the EU is a confederacy of nation states. don't blur lines.
    No **** sherlock. What the hell does that have to do with the question if whether the UK should be subdivision of the EU? That is the question at hand here. Calling the UK a nation-state is useless to this debate. It is still a state. British people benefit from the freedom of movement in the EU as Californians benefit from the freedom of movement in the USA. You are asking do I believe the benefits of such things make it worth it, that same question can be levelled at Californians in the USA or a Bavarian in Germany. The benefits don't change because your state is a nation state or not. :banghead:
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Reformed2010)
    No **** sherlock. What the hell does that have to do with the question if whether the UK should be subdivision of the EU? That is the question at hand here. Calling the UK a nation-state is useless to this debate. It is still a state. British people benefit from the freedom of movement in the EU as Californians benefit from the freedom of movement in the USA. You are asking do I believe the benefits of such things make it worth it, that same question can be levelled at Californians in the USA or a Bavarian in Germany. The benefits don't change because your state is a nation state or not. :banghead:
    I would beg to differ there. In the US is there the level of income inequality there is in the EU between states? Within,taking your example of Germany, is there? No, there isn't. I'm more than welcome for you to show me which two German or US states have incomes where one is significantly higher than the other if I am mistaken.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    I would beg to differ there. In the US is there the level of income inequality there is in the EU between states? Within,taking your example of Germany, is there? No, there isn't. I'm more than welcome for you to show me which two German or US states have incomes where one is significantly higher than the other if I am mistaken.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    You're ignoring my argument. That again has nothing to do with the UK being a nation state.

    Anyway If income disparity is the key factor for separation then yes Californians can argue they want to leave the USA. California like the UK is a net contributor to their union budget. The degree in which regional inequality is acceptable is subjective. What you find too much is not the same to others.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reformed2010)
    No **** sherlock. What the hell does that have to do with the question if whether the UK should be subdivision of the EU? That is the question at hand here. Calling the UK a nation-state is useless to this debate. It is still a state. British people benefit from the freedom of movement in the EU as Californians benefit from the freedom of movement in the USA. You are asking do I believe the benefits of such things make it worth it, that same question can be levelled at Californians in the USA or a Bavarian in Germany. The benefits don't change because your state is a nation state or not. :banghead:
    right, so if we joined a world government with every other country in the world, you'd be saying "what about the security benefits?" to that as well? seriously? just because there are more countries in a state that doesn't mean the nation in question necessarily benefits overall.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zippity.doodah)
    right, so if we joined a world government with every other country in the world, you'd be saying "what about the security benefits?" to that as well? seriously? just because there are more countries in a state that doesn't mean the nation in question necessarily benefits overall.
    I never said it does hence the occurrence of civil wars in Syria and terrorism like ISIS in Iraq. However there is a mountain of evidence that a central authority with the power to regulate and pass laws does help maintain peace within its jurisdiction. Hence why states like the USA and Australia lack any serious armed conflict within. I want the EU to act as a pacifier, passing rules and enforcing them, encouraging the 28 states to obey the rule of law not war. I believe Britain respecting the European Court of Justice and European Court of human rights judgements helps us in the long run. I like the human right laws made by the European Council and the European Union.

    Now you clearly don't agree it works or should be trying, I disagree.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    I would beg to differ there. In the US is there the level of income inequality there is in the EU between states? Within,taking your example of Germany, is there? No, there isn't. I'm more than welcome for you to show me which two German or US states have incomes where one is significantly higher than the other if I am mistaken.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    GDP per Capita in Mississippi is roughly equivalent to GDP per capita of the Czech Republic and less than $1 500 away from Poland, whereas the richest "state" is District of Columbia with $135 000, roughly equivalent to Monaco.

    There is no difference between Southeastern United States and Eastern Europe.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...GDP_per_capita

    If you meant individual income, there's still a difference of $35 000 between Mississippi and Maryland. (median household)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ates_by_income
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reformed2010)
    No **** sherlock. What the hell does that have to do with the question if whether the UK should be subdivision of the EU? That is the question at hand here. Calling the UK a nation-state is useless to this debate. It is still a state. British people benefit from the freedom of movement in the EU as Californians benefit from the freedom of movement in the USA. You are asking do I believe the benefits of such things make it worth it, that same question can be levelled at Californians in the USA or a Bavarian in Germany. The benefits don't change because your state is a nation state or not. :banghead:
    California doesn't currently benefit from freedom of movement within the USA. People and businesses are leaving to red states for a less punitive regulatory environment and lower taxes.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Mighty_Bush)
    California doesn't currently benefit from freedom of movement within the USA. People and businesses are leaving to red states for a less punitive regulatory environment and lower taxes.
    So then you believe the people of California should impose control orders on its borders and stop their citizens from freely leaving their state whenever and whether they wish. I think that would be economic suicide.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reformed2010)
    So then you believe the people of California should impose control orders on its borders and stop their citizens from freely leaving their state whenever and whether they wish. I think that would be economic suicide.
    No, I don't believe it. It also doesn't follow from what I said.

    I was correcting an error in your post. If you said Texans then you would be right.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Mighty_Bush)
    No, I don't believe it. It also doesn't follow from what I said.

    I was correcting an error in your post. If you said Texans then you would be right.
    If you don't believe restricting the movement of Californians will have an negative impact on its economy at least in the short term then fine. Or that on a micro level will have an impact. I am not going to waste my time. Have fun.
    Offline

    15
    (Original post by SotonianOne)
    If you meant individual income, there's still a difference of $35 000 between Mississippi and Maryland. (median household)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ates_by_income
    I'm surprised that NY isn't in the top 10 for 2014, unless that's due to the wealthy workers choosing to live in Connecticut and commute to NYC?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tehFrance)
    I'm surprised that NY isn't in the top 10 for 2014, unless that's due to the wealthy workers choosing to live in Connecticut and commute to NYC?
    There's that and New Jersey. That's why 3 of 5 richest counties in the U.S. are in New Jersey, bordering NY.

    New York is generally average, and upstate New York is pretty poor.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reformed2010)
    If you don't believe restricting the movement of Californians will have an negative impact on its economy at least in the short term then fine. Or that on a micro level will have an impact. I am not going to waste my time. Have fun.
    You are good at constructing strawmen.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Mighty_Bush)
    You are good at constructing strawmen.
    You are **** at playing devils advocate.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Immigrants will tell you that they have a homeland.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reformed2010)
    You are **** at playing devils advocate.
    I wasn't playing devil's advocate. I was pointing an error in your post. California is currently losing people due to its being noncompetitive as a result of the leftist policies you advocate.
 
 
 

1,315

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.