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

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NoFunAtParties)
    Do we really bend our knee? We had a good compromise. We weren't in the Euro, numerous bills didn't include us because we didn't to be in them. The amount of laws is negligible, it's the impact of those laws. Certain things i agree with. The Common Agricultural Policy was a disaster. And the EU is not perfect. But we have no plan now, nothing we could get would be better than what we had. We'll still be subject to those laws if we want access to the EU
    We have to constantly compromise and often be overruled on areas, if we voted to remain we would have surrendered our last veto toward treaty change and for nothing, it would have been the very end of our sovereignty as we couldn't stop any vital changes whatsoever.

    Why don't the some 53 countries with a free trade agreement to the EU not have political union?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AverageExcellence)
    How can the European Union have the UK's best interests at heart when it must compromise with 27 other nations many of which with different (and often opposing) directions? At least the UK parliament hopes to achieve what is best for the country, if we keep localising it then you might as well say why do i have a local councillor who doesn't reflect my views.

    A national parliament isn't perfect but it offers far better scope to deliver on the national interest than the EU does
    How can Westminster have Yorkshire's interests at heart when it must compromise with 43 other English counties as well as whatever the regions are called in Scotland, Wales and Ireland? At least a local council would hope to achieve what is best for its area.

    And why don't you have a local councillor who reflects your views? Did you vote for one who didn't reflect your views?

    /jk The point is that I don't see why people are so upset that the top layer of this isn't Westminster. If they're higher up than your local MP it probably doesn't matter.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lerjj)
    How can Westminster have Yorkshire's interests at heart when it must compromise with 43 other English counties as well as whatever the regions are called in Scotland, Wales and Ireland? At least a local council would hope to achieve what is best for its area.

    And why don't you have a local councillor who reflects your views? Did you vote for one who didn't reflect your views?

    /jk The point is that I don't see why people are so upset that the top layer of this isn't Westminster. If they're higher up than your local MP it probably doesn't matter.
    I can see your point, and i won't pretend the EU was intrinsically negative towards our national interests, it served a purpose but the question that you really have to ask yourself is where are we and the EU going to be in 20 years? the EU is having to constantly bail out ailing southern european economies with its own money, as soon as another EU economy falters along with Greece the music is going to stop and the party is going to end.. that isn't doom saying that is a real fear that is not centuries away.

    As for the MP argument i guess you're right, Westminister clearly does no service to some areas of the country though i don't think the other kingdoms can really argue as they at least have large control over their local interests through devolved parliaments. We have EU commissioners who are not elected who propose legislation and only 9% of the vote in the commission, coupled with the 'real power' that is the council of ministers which must constantly parlay for good relations by compromising. The difference is that we don't find ourselves in constant deadlock in the UK or being intrinsically bound by legislation, if the government passes unfavourable policy and there is protest then the government can easily U-turn or a new government can undo it. Once legislation goes through in brussels it is nigh-on impossible to change.

    We have to ask ourselves how has it become the political norm that to enter a free trade block we have to join an entrenched political union with designs on becoming a superstate with speak of united armies? that can only erode the power of the UK and France.. but many young remainers are arguing as internationalists with no regard to the national interest, so i guess the controversy is a matter of where you believe your best interests lay.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Remain were too pessimistic, the risks weren't unfounded but exaggerated.

    Leave used rhetoric and lies, the latter currently being undone already.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Samiz)
    I agree with what you're saying, sorry to be picky but Nigel Farage didn't lie, as a lot of people seem to think.

    The Vote Leave Campaign used the £350m figure, Farage wasn't part of this official campaign and even said himself in the past that he personally wouldn't have used that figure and preferred the £10b per year net figure.

    So the Official Vote Leave campaign lied, but this does not make it any more acceptable. As a Leave voter the thing that annoyed me most was the perseverance of the £350m per week; it's not as if using the correct figure would have made it sound much better.
    True, but mainly because nobody has a clue how much £350m/week is. Or £10bn/year. Given both stats, I can tell you that £350m/week is much more than the latter, but that's about all.

    What proportion of your tax is that? That's a better indicator of how much money we're spending.
    Spoiler:
    Show
    Lets use the correct £10bn/year figure. I'll make a few numbers up roughly, because I don't want to look everything up in detail, but this is going to be within a factor of 2 probably:

    There are ~65m people in the UK and about 40m taxpayers. Average salary is £30k/year. Tax brackets are complicated and I'd have to look them up, but given that some of that is tax free and some is taxed at 20% we'll call it an average 10%. So that's £120bn. VAT is 20% on everything you buy, minus a few things, so round the overall figure up to £200bn paid in income tax and VAT alone. (I don't remember what NI is, which is the other biggie, but we'll just ignore it for now).

    So you pay £200bn in taxes and £10bn i,e, 5% is spent on the EU, over half of which comes back to us in the form of funding for various projects.

    Now, I seem to remember someone else calculating this as 1%, but can't find the document right now and can't see where to make up much more tax amounts (maybe NI is quite a lot/maybe average salary is >30k)
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JamesN88)
    Remain were too pessimistic, the risks weren't unfounded but exaggerated.

    Leave used rhetoric and lies, the latter currently being undone already.
    Remain also used lies let's not forget.

    But yeah. How much better would it have been if both campaigns did not use any lies, and focused on the positives (which exist for both) of leaving or remaining.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AverageExcellence)
    I can see your point, and i won't pretend the EU was intrinsically negative towards our national interests, it served a purpose but the question that you really have to ask yourself is where are we and the EU going to be in 20 years? the EU is having to constantly bail out ailing southern european economies with its own money, as soon as another EU economy falters along with Greece the music is going to stop and the party is going to end.. that isn't doom saying that is a real fear that is not centuries away.

    As for the MP argument i guess you're right, Westminister clearly does no service to some areas of the country though i don't think the other kingdoms can really argue as they at least have large control over their local interests through devolved parliaments. We have EU commissioners who are not elected who propose legislation and only 9% of the vote in the commission, coupled with the 'real power' that is the council of ministers which must constantly parlay for good relations by compromising. The difference is that we don't find ourselves in constant deadlock in the UK or being intrinsically bound by legislation, if the government passes unfavourable policy and there is protest then the government can easily U-turn or a new government can undo it. Once legislation goes through in brussels it is nigh-on impossible to change.

    We have to ask ourselves how has it become the political norm that to enter a free trade block we have to join an entrenched political union with designs on becoming a superstate with speak of united armies? that can only erode the power of the UK and France.. but many young remainers are arguing as internationalists with no regard to the national interest, so i guess the controversy is a matter of where you believe your best interests lay.
    I fully agree that the EU commission is undemocratic and I would support a European Parliamentary model. One of the main reasons this hasn't gone ahead (other than the obvious fact that the commision probably aren't in favour!) is that Britain has always opposed it as being the first step to a "European-Superstate". Maybe now we've left, the remaining countries can finally try and push through some treaties to change the nature of the commission.

    And yes, I don't really feel any national identity with England, and don't mind being part of a larger Europe. But if you think this result is going to reinforce that, you're mistaken. This country has been deeply divided along nationalist lines in the last few years and it's terrifying.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Samiz)
    Remain also used lies let's not forget.

    But yeah. How much better would it have been if both campaigns did not use any lies, and focused on the positives (which exist for both) of leaving or remaining.
    I was impressed with Alex Salmond who despite supporting Remain openly came out and said to people that both sides were sprouting nonsense.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JamesN88;66123595[b)
    ]I was impressed with Alex Salmond[/b] who despite supporting Remain openly came out and said to people that both sides were sprouting nonsense.
    Not often you get to say that. For what it's worth, I thought Cameron did a fairly good job, and I'm pretty disappointed by Corbyn's attitude. I thought he was supposed to be radical, yet he couldn't have been more lethargic. 7/10 for his performance.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lerjj)
    Not often you get to say that. For what it's worth, I thought Cameron did a fairly good job, and I'm pretty disappointed by Corbyn's attitude. I thought he was supposed to be radical, yet he couldn't have been more lethargic. 7/10 for his performance.
    I'm not even convinced Corbyn voted Remain.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JamesN88)
    I'm not even convinced Corbyn voted Remain.
    I don't even care - if he felt that staying in the EU was the right thing to do he should have campaigned more effectively.

    If he did think that leaving was correct, however, then he should have stuck by his principles and campaigned for that. I would still have been disappointed, because I wouldn't agree with that viewpoint, but currently he just looks unmotivated by the whole thing. This was not a good move on his part.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lerjj)
    Not often you get to say that. For what it's worth, I thought Cameron did a fairly good job, and I'm pretty disappointed by Corbyn's attitude. I thought he was supposed to be radical, yet he couldn't have been more lethargic. 7/10 for his performance.
    If Cameron did a good job he would've won. As i said, he did not use the fact that there is no better alternative. He called this referendum, and this was his fight to lose. I'm not suggesting Corbyn isn't to blame as well, but as i said, the remain camp were dreadful. And Cameron led that.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    The remain campaign was so appallingly bad that it beggared belief.

    I have for quite some time come to realise that it really isn't the best people who rise to the top in most professions but the biggest bs******.Ok perhaps everyone else knew that,I naively didn't.

    I have never had so little faith in the political system as I now have.

    As for Cameron having a good campaign that really made me laugh. Yeah right. If you ignore the fact that this chancer won an election based partly on a promise to reduce immigration to 100,000 and then is able to effectively claim that this is in fact almost impossible to do.Among other things I'm too angry to bother with.

    The main thing is that this ******* took a gamble with the whole future of this country by asking millions of the great unwashed and some of the most innumerate people in Western Europe to vote on something that required a reasonable amount of economics to fully understand and that he didn't even have the political nous to realise that most people in England hate the lot of them so much that they would **** over their own country to teach them a lesson.

    Useless lying ******* .
 
 
 
  • 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
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
    Useful resources
  • 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.