Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Why are people voting to remain in Europe? Watch

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tengentoppa)
    1. Between TTIP, the lobbying at the European parliament, and the accepted wisdom of free-market economics, the EU is really not that left-wing.
    2. Using the word EUSSR makes you sound like a child.
    1. Depends which side you place national socialism on.
    2. Ad hominem?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by otester)
    1. Depends which side you place national socialism on.
    2. Ad hominem?
    1. I dearly hope that's not an insinuation that the EU is remotely related to Nazism..
    2. It wasn't an attack on your argument. It was a separate piece of advice to not use such puerile terms.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HOLA255)
    You're voting away your own control of the borders
    I don't believe in "the borders". I don't have any more problem with someone from France moving to my community than I do with someone from Fife, Folkestone or Fermanagh. We're all European citizens.

    It may be sensible - because we are an island - to check documents on entry to ensure that certain people aren't illegal migrants, but that's about it.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    TTIP is still being negociated and once written then has to be formally agreed by governance on both sides of the pond. In fact I believe part of it was recently kicked into the long grass by the US! People talk about TTIP like it is a done deal and that it will be forced on us. Neither is true. Sure it is being negociated behind closed doors but once a text has been agreed prepare to see all sorts of changes or even if it gets agreed at all.
    TTIP is only one aspect I've mentioned in the overall employment and finance picture, but I can accept that the deal is not yet complete. However, as TTIP stands, it stands as a risk to financial stability (per a US study), a risk to jobs (admitted by the European Commission), a risk to small businesses (research), a risk to Scottish food industry (research) and provides 'lots of risks and no benefits' (per UK Government report per Freedom of Information Act request).

    However, does this mean that change will happen? One would hope so IF the EU & US & EU Members agree BUT this is contrary to the EU & US saying they don't want 'TTIP light' (https://www.euractiv.com/section/tra...at-ttip-light/) and! this is reflected in the EU-Canada (CETA) deal that is similar to TTIP, where the EC ignored the public consultation that said NO to TTIP or NO to give corporations rights to sue States (ISDS) by 97% of the respondents (http://www.globaljustice.org.uk/news...c-consultation) b/c the EU went ahead with it anyway!

    How can I suggest this? Well, on the TTIP point, a StopTTIP European Citizens' Initiative has already been rejected at EU level that has expressed opposition (https://stop-ttip.org/ttip-study-ratification/) which! links in with the overarching theme of how much the EU listens to EU Citizens - In response to the Dutch referendum to ratify the EU-Ukraine deal where 61% said NO, however, plans are still in place to go ahead with it anyway! as EU leaders say 'we'll manage it' (http://www.express.co.uk/news/politi...402.1458079126)

    (For Reading on CETA/TTIP: http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/...-a6671886.html / http://www.theecologist.org/Intervie...an_cousin.html)

    (Original post by Aceadria)
    Most people would rather stay in something that is flawed and hope for change then push for change on their own terms.
    I can accept that and can understand how preferable it is to hold onto what you know. However, it is 'flawed' and 'change is needed and it will take 'hope' exactly to be able to bring about. If the UK Renegotiation was anything to go off, it is difficult to push change and the deal is by no way guaranteed. This much was admitted by Martin Schulz, the President of the European Parliament, who rejected the deal having effect in a Treaty (that the European Court of Justice would take notice of, when looking at the example of how the Danish 'deal' worked out) and that already, groups in Parliament are forming to oppose changes they don't agree with, such as the President of the Socialist and Democratic Party opposing the child benefit change.

    This leads me onto MEP's generally, because the MEP's are our only connection into Brussels and YET! when British MEP's oppose a measure, only 20% of the time is it heard. This can be reinforced by the findings of votes made b/w 2009-2011, which found that 576/1936 British MEP's opposed, while 485/576 votes happened anyway! (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...-Brussels.html) and what about the European Council when the UK was outvoted? One such occasion, that has been admitted by Cameron, is the protection of British steel (http://www.express.co.uk/news/politi...escue-UK-steel).

    Surely! it will be more beneficial to us to maintain trade and access to the Single Market with the EU, but have more power to represent ourselves in trade negotiations and protect our national interests/businesses for we can flourish! There are arguments of 'how can we!' when we see countries thriving around us like India BUT! India is self-governing and flourishing on its own and I believe we can too! without all the red-tape WHICH! businesses are supporting (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/...tay-in-the-eu/) as are farmers (http://www.express.co.uk/news/politi...rs-poll-Brexit)

    When confronted with membership of the EU or trade with the EU with access to the single market through EFTA - EFTA was preferred by 71% of those surveyed (http://www.brugesgroup.com/alternati...-and-join-efta)

    (Original post by ckfeister)
    And not average people are ambitious and like rapid change, EU has made us from the ill EU country into the growing dominant power.
    As has previously been mentioned in the thread, the EU has helped us and in no way or form do I desire to see the EU broken up as some may argue. I believe the EU had humble beginnings and it has brought forth fruit, but now getting too big for its boots. In the European Elections, a clear message was sent to the EU that the general public are questioning what they are doing, and this was followed by the Conservative-majority Government that followed.

    Now! Full-Fact, as previously mentioned, has confirmed that the EU is our largest trading partner, as is the UK the EU's biggest customer with the US as its 2nd, though exports inside the EU are decreasing while exports outside are increasing. For this reason, I do not believe it is ambitious to acknowledge this, to back away from the EU's political union, cut the red-tape that farmers don't like, fisherman don't like and businesses don't like - while still engaged with trade.

    I can understand the benefits the EU has brought and from a trade aspect, of what it means to remain in. However, again I don't feel it is ambitious to be able to represent ourselves, but to be ourselves. There comes a time, to place in an analogy, that the child has to live home because they have grown and desire to be independent, but it by no means means that they will be disconnected as some argue! and certainly not a 'rapid change' as that is subject to at least, 2yrs per Article 50. It is even questionable how much change, depending on whether we leave EU and join EFTA (starting point), but more importantly, the EU-UK negotiations.

    (Original post by L i b)
    I don't believe in "the borders". I don't have any more problem with someone from France moving to my community than I do with someone from Fife, Folkestone or Fermanagh. We're all European citizens.It may be sensible - because we are an island - to check documents on entry to ensure that certain people aren't illegal migrants, but that's about it.
    This links in with my opening point in my first post in regards to immigration, that immigration is not so much the issue, but the control of it. The danger of personalities is in the way they put themselves across and put forward certain messages/stereotypes that lead those who favour 'Brexit' to be against immigrants and wanting to keep everyone out - that is not so! because we benefit from immigration, but at the same time there is good immigration, there is bad immigration and so control is needed - especially in the world's current climate BUT revising how movements works is not going to happen and so, control is ultimately the only defence.

    To vote 'remain', would be to await approval by the European Council by a Qualified Majority Voting that a country may use a 'emergency brake', with the provision so ambigious as far as when it can be applied. Nevertheless, the provision would allow a brake for 4yrs.

    To vote 'leave', we will already have a 'emergency brake' provision under EFTA that a State can use, an 'appropriate measures' provision, that we can use when we deem it appropriate and not other States. However the key part for me, is that outside, the European Court of Justice cannot wrench back the UK's hands to allow people in that they have denied - which by way of enforcement, one case was settled where the UK was overruled to allow a non-EU immigrant into the UK without a residence permit O_o

    As you said, it is sensible to check documents and make sure we know whose coming in, but can we always do that and control that?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tengentoppa)
    1. I dearly hope that's not an insinuation that the EU is remotely related to Nazism..
    2. It wasn't an attack on your argument. It was a separate piece of advice to not use such puerile terms.
    The out campaign compare the EU to Nazism all the time. In the utter absence of facts they have to spread lies and hyperbole. Project fear!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aceadria)
    Most people would rather stay in something that is flawed and hope for change then push for change on their own terms.
    Clever way of putting 'lets play it safe'
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by animus01)
    TTIP is only one aspect I've mentioned in the overall employment and finance picture, but I can accept that the deal is not yet complete. However, as TTIP stands, it stands as a risk to financial stability (per a US study), a risk to jobs (admitted by the European Commission), a risk to small businesses (research), a risk to Scottish food industry (research) and provides 'lots of risks and no benefits' (per UK Government report per Freedom of Information Act request).

    However, does this mean that change will happen? One would hope so IF the EU & US & EU Members agree BUT this is contrary to the EU & US saying they don't want 'TTIP light' (https://www.euractiv.com/section/tra...at-ttip-light/) and! this is reflected in the EU-Canada (CETA) deal that is similar to TTIP, where the EC ignored the public consultation that said NO to TTIP or NO to give corporations rights to sue States (ISDS) by 97% of the respondents (http://www.globaljustice.org.uk/news...c-consultation) b/c the EU went ahead with it anyway!

    How can I suggest this? Well, on the TTIP point, a StopTTIP European Citizens' Initiative has already been rejected at EU level that has expressed opposition (https://stop-ttip.org/ttip-study-ratification/) which! links in with the overarching theme of how much the EU listens to EU Citizens - In response to the Dutch referendum to ratify the EU-Ukraine deal where 61% said NO, however, plans are still in place to go ahead with it anyway! as EU leaders say 'we'll manage it' (http://www.express.co.uk/news/politi...402.1458079126)

    (For Reading on CETA/TTIP: http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/...-a6671886.html / http://www.theecologist.org/Intervie...an_cousin.html)



    I can accept that and can understand how preferable it is to hold onto what you know. However, it is 'flawed' and 'change is needed and it will take 'hope' exactly to be able to bring about. If the UK Renegotiation was anything to go off, it is difficult to push change and the deal is by no way guaranteed. This much was admitted by Martin Schulz, the President of the European Parliament, who rejected the deal having effect in a Treaty (that the European Court of Justice would take notice of, when looking at the example of how the Danish 'deal' worked out) and that already, groups in Parliament are forming to oppose changes they don't agree with, such as the President of the Socialist and Democratic Party opposing the child benefit change.

    This leads me onto MEP's generally, because the MEP's are our only connection into Brussels and YET! when British MEP's oppose a measure, only 20% of the time is it heard. This can be reinforced by the findings of votes made b/w 2009-2011, which found that 576/1936 British MEP's opposed, while 485/576 votes happened anyway! (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...-Brussels.html) and what about the European Council when the UK was outvoted? One such occasion, that has been admitted by Cameron, is the protection of British steel (http://www.express.co.uk/news/politi...escue-UK-steel).

    Surely! it will be more beneficial to us to maintain trade and access to the Single Market with the EU, but have more power to represent ourselves in trade negotiations and protect our national interests/businesses for we can flourish! There are arguments of 'how can we!' when we see countries thriving around us like India BUT! India is self-governing and flourishing on its own and I believe we can too! without all the red-tape WHICH! businesses are supporting (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/...tay-in-the-eu/) as are farmers (http://www.express.co.uk/news/politi...rs-poll-Brexit)

    When confronted with membership of the EU or trade with the EU with access to the single market through EFTA - EFTA was preferred by 71% of those surveyed (http://www.brugesgroup.com/alternati...-and-join-efta)



    As has previously been mentioned in the thread, the EU has helped us and in no way or form do I desire to see the EU broken up as some may argue. I believe the EU had humble beginnings and it has brought forth fruit, but now getting too big for its boots. In the European Elections, a clear message was sent to the EU that the general public are questioning what they are doing, and this was followed by the Conservative-majority Government that followed.

    Now! Full-Fact, as previously mentioned, has confirmed that the EU is our largest trading partner, as is the UK the EU's biggest customer with the US as its 2nd, though exports inside the EU are decreasing while exports outside are increasing. For this reason, I do not believe it is ambitious to acknowledge this, to back away from the EU's political union, cut the red-tape that farmers don't like, fisherman don't like and businesses don't like - while still engaged with trade.

    I can understand the benefits the EU has brought and from a trade aspect, of what it means to remain in. However, again I don't feel it is ambitious to be able to represent ourselves, but to be ourselves. There comes a time, to place in an analogy, that the child has to live home because they have grown and desire to be independent, but it by no means means that they will be disconnected as some argue! and certainly not a 'rapid change' as that is subject to at least, 2yrs per Article 50. It is even questionable how much change, depending on whether we leave EU and join EFTA (starting point), but more importantly, the EU-UK negotiations.



    This links in with my opening point in my first post in regards to immigration, that immigration is not so much the issue, but the control of it. The danger of personalities is in the way they put themselves across and put forward certain messages/stereotypes that lead those who favour 'Brexit' to be against immigrants and wanting to keep everyone out - that is not so! because we benefit from immigration, but at the same time there is good immigration, there is bad immigration and so control is needed - especially in the world's current climate BUT revising how movements works is not going to happen and so, control is ultimately the only defence.

    To vote 'remain', would be to await approval by the European Council by a Qualified Majority Voting that a country may use a 'emergency brake', with the provision so ambigious as far as when it can be applied. Nevertheless, the provision would allow a brake for 4yrs.

    To vote 'leave', we will already have a 'emergency brake' provision under EFTA that a State can use, an 'appropriate measures' provision, that we can use when we deem it appropriate and not other States. However the key part for me, is that outside, the European Court of Justice cannot wrench back the UK's hands to allow people in that they have denied - which by way of enforcement, one case was settled where the UK was overruled to allow a non-EU immigrant into the UK without a residence permit O_o

    As you said, it is sensible to check documents and make sure we know whose coming in, but can we always do that and control that?

    Did you actually write that?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JordanL_)
    The out campaign compare the EU to Nazism all the time. In the utter absence of facts they have to spread lies and hyperbole. Project fear!
    I believe both sides of the spectrum can generalise as well as compare numbers and scrutinise, but there are facts from both sides covering various issues - stereotypes and personalities often get in the way to detract from the picture, for isn't it any wonder why attention on the EU drifted to Cameron and the off-shore accounts and now the Labour MP for expressing anti-semitic views 2yrs ago. HOWEVER aside from the personalities, it is a case of weighing up either way, when consider all the issues, which often times involves doing some digging ourselves.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HOLA255)
    You're voting away your own control of the borders, when the time comes, don't bother moaning about rampant immigration in the UK.
    Lol, you do realise those who vote to remain are in favour of open door mass uncontrolled unlimited migration? It's not a mistake on their part, they believe in a world with no borders.

    But I think a campaign solely on immigration is stupid, far more effective cases to make against the EU, I'm voting out but immigration is not my main concern
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Well, I don't really care about that. I want what is best for the financial services industry. I don't want to have to work in Paris if I want to work in finance.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nemo86)
    Did you actually write that?
    Sorry, but when on a forum, I believe the intention is to discuss and now turning to insults? (unless I am mistaken and you meant the opposite, but didn't sound like from how you responded) I feel very passionate about this vote, as I had with having a referendum on it because so many people were concerned about it and wanting a say. As I have expressed in my earlier vote, stereotypes and personalities get in the way, which calls for a greater need to research yourself - which is exactly what I have done and referencing them as I do in my studies.
    , so yes! I did write all that

    Studying EU Law has taught me plenty that the EU has its benefits, with Employment Law specifically driving to home how the EU brought in significant changes in Employment Law (although it is disputed to what extent because the UK contributed to it, with the EU being seen as the embodiment of all member states than a single body). This is why I am not fully against the EU and how, if the nation votes to 'leave', we should still be involved with the EU in one form or another. However, there are underlining issues that raise serious questions - one shocking fact that I didn't expect at all! in my Human Rights lecture, was the ruling of the European Court of Justice in one case ruled a Member State was in breach of Human Rights despite following EU law O_o which confused me because the EU Treaty seeks to uphold human rights and it led me to research further only to find the European Court of Justice said the EU should not sign the European Convention and that is the EU's current position to this date.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by animus01)
    Sorry, but when on a forum, I believe the intention is to discuss and now turning to insults? (unless I am mistaken and you meant the opposite, but didn't sound like from how you responded) I feel very passionate about this vote, as I had with having a referendum on it because so many people were concerned about it and wanting a say. As I have expressed in my earlier vote, stereotypes and personalities get in the way, which calls for a greater need to research yourself - which is exactly what I have done and referencing them as I do in my studies.
    , so yes! I did write all that

    Studying EU Law has taught me plenty that the EU has its benefits, with Employment Law specifically driving to home how the EU brought in significant changes in Employment Law (although it is disputed to what extent because the UK contributed to it, with the EU being seen as the embodiment of all member states than a single body). This is why I am not fully against the EU and how, if the nation votes to 'leave', we should still be involved with the EU in one form or another. However, there are underlining issues that raise serious questions - one shocking fact that I didn't expect at all! in my Human Rights lecture, was the ruling of the European Court of Justice in one case ruled a Member State was in breach of Human Rights despite following EU law O_o which confused me because the EU Treaty seeks to uphold human rights and it led me to research further only to find the European Court of Justice said the EU should not sign the European Convention and that is the EU's current position to this date.
    I'm impressed.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nemo86)
    I'm impressed.
    Then I am mistaken, as I thought could be the case, but hard to work out sometimes when see other posts exclaim the same to others, but meant as an insult. It truly disappoints me that the whole referendum debate could not be handled better, with battle-lines causing those who know the facts, to be subjective about the facts XD when we need facts to be able to weigh up and acknowledge both sides, all in order to aid us in making a decision. Taking the Scottish referendum as an example, there were Scots that were unsure what to vote for because of lack of information, and even here on TSR, I see the poll where people don't know which. My hopes is that come referendum day, they would have some idea, because every vote counts (unlike general elections in a safe seat to vote the opposite XD)

    (Original post by Omen96)
    Lol, you do realise those who vote to remain are in favour of open door mass uncontrolled unlimited migration? It's not a mistake on their part, they believe in a world with no borders.

    But I think a campaign solely on immigration is stupid, far more effective cases to make against the EU, I'm voting out but immigration is not my main concern
    I agree with you on that, as immigration is not the only issue and there are other issues that ought to be addressed. Focusing on immigration as the reason for 'out' just presents us as anti-world and 'pulling up the drawbridge'. We don't want that XD
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HOLA255)
    You're voting away your own control of the borders, when the time comes, don't bother moaning about rampant immigration in the UK.
    Personally I think it's a good thing, having unrestricted movement across EU borders.

    It gives employers are larger pool of potential candidates to hire from, making it easier for them to get the best person for the job. If someone from the UK wants a particular job in Europe, it makes it easier to just go and get it rather than having to worry about the right to live or work there. It makes the market far more efficient.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by animus01)
    Then I am mistaken, as I thought could be the case, but hard to work out sometimes when see other posts exclaim the same to others, but meant as an insult. It truly disappoints me that the whole referendum debate could not be handled better, with battle-lines causing those who know the facts, to be subjective about the facts XD when we need facts to be able to weigh up and acknowledge both sides, all in order to aid us in making a decision. Taking the Scottish referendum as an example, there were Scots that were unsure what to vote for because of lack of information, and even here on TSR, I see the poll where people don't know which. My hopes is that come referendum day, they would have some idea, because every vote counts (unlike general elections in a safe seat to vote the opposite XD)



    I agree with you on that, as immigration is not the only issue and there are other issues that ought to be addressed. Focusing on immigration as the reason for 'out' just presents us as anti-world and 'pulling up the drawbridge'. We don't want that XD
    Anyone who wants to stop immigration is uninformed. Immigration should not stop but it should certainly not carry on the way it has. There needs to be control and sustainability, not open door and mass immigration. If that's racist then so be it but I stick by my point.

    The arguments should focus on EU policy and EU federalisation. We are not voting for an EU as it is now but as it will be in the next 50 or so years. I don't believe in federalisation or at least on this scale. To govern countries of such different economic structures, demographics, political associations, social law, cultures, military power and so on, by a set of common standards and law is stupid. In theory it sound great and for global issues there is some reason for it but when it delves into national policy which it has done, there will always be winners and losers. You can't expect a bloc of 28 (soon to be 33 and higher) nations to benefit equally. I don't see how we have benefited.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Now there are plenty of reasons why I'm voting to stay within Europe. Here are some of my reasons.

    The first reason is that I would like to have the chance to work within another country who is registered in the EU, without having to pay any extra tax etc.

    The second reason I'd like us to stay within the EU is because we'll look stronger as a country. If we were by ourselves we won't be as much of a threat as if we were within the EU. The alliance we'd have with the EU and America, make it easier for the world to become one. We need to go into the future where the whole world has formed an alliance with each other, and voting to get out makes it look like we're taking a step back in time, just before the second world war (just before the EU was formed).

    However there is one thing I don't agree with, is that the amount of money we're spending to be in the EU. Some countries are benefiting massively with the money the EU give to them for development. A lot of the cases, they are receiving more than they are giving.

    Luckily we are a rich country, even though we are giving more than what we are receiving, we still have the trading systems in place, so we are getting something in return also with a lot of power towards other countries.

    These are some of my points, the list goes on, of course there are drawbacks too, however I think the advantages outweigh them.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)
    I don't believe in "the borders". I don't have any more problem with someone from France moving to my community than I do with someone from Fife, Folkestone or Fermanagh. We're all European citizens.

    It may be sensible - because we are an island - to check documents on entry to ensure that certain people aren't illegal migrants, but that's about it.
    This idea of "no borders" is so ingrained in the left/liberal wings that for anyone to suggest we should have borders or control they are suddenly met with fascist, xenophobic and racist inflicted insults. This is the problem with the argument. For anyone to suggest we should have borders they are suddenly Hitler revived in the eyes of the other side
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HOLA255)
    You're voting away your own control of the borders, when the time comes, don't bother moaning about rampant immigration in the UK.
    Don't be talking about immigration as if it is the EU's fault. The reason why we have an increased amount of immigration within the country is simply because people within the EU have a higher work ethic than we do. Some of our population don't even do well in school, and then they start to begin complaining about why they aren't getting any jobs, when they have no where near the amount of skills as they do.

    You may even come to the point of saying 'well they don't even speak english'. Well try going to Poland, and speak polish. I bet you cant? They are at an advantage with their home language and some of the english language, so don't blame the EU for immigration.

    Guaranteed even if we leave the EU, we'd still have immigrants coming in, because we're going to be needing people with the skills to cover the work gap. Immigration is a national problem on our end, nothing to do with the EU.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by _icecream)
    Well blame the politicians, the UK did open it's borders to 8 new Eastern European countries in 2004 when they didn't have to.
    Germany, France and other richers EU countries only allowed free movement in 2011. The UK could've applied for an extention of 7 years but they didn't
    Partly the reason I will never vote for Labour again, they are too extreme on many of their policies
    Online

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drunq)

    However there is one thing I don't agree with, is that the amount of money we're spending to be in the EU. Some countries are benefiting massively with the money the EU give to them for development. A lot of the cases, they are receiving more than they are giving.

    Luckily we are a rich country, even though we are giving more than what we are receiving, we still have the trading systems in place, so we are getting something in return also with a lot of power towards other countries.
    It would be kind of stupid, if you wanted to harmonise standards of living, pay, rights, etc, etc across the EU if the bigger nations got more out than the smaller nations. All you'd do is create a situation where it was even easier for bigger economies to bully smaller ones into doing whatever they wanted just so they could fight over the scraps from their table. The EU redistributes wealth, all governments, of any size, do the same. It's exactly the same as the UK government using London as a cash cow to support the rest of the country, very few people seem to he problems with thet though.

    (Original post by Omen96)
    This idea of "no borders" is so ingrained in the left/liberal wings that for anyone to suggest we should have borders or control they are suddenly met with fascist, xenophobic and racist inflicted insults. This is the problem with the argument. For anyone to suggest we should have borders they are suddenly Hitler revived in the eyes of the other side
    No it isn't. There might be a problem with the people making the argument but the position of anti-Statism is pretty old and well-developed both from the left and right of the economic spectrum.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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

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