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

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    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.

    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    But Welshie is pushing a counter-narrative which is just as false: that people who actually research the EU tend to vote Leave. I know all about it and I voted Remain - probably because, unlike the preponderance of Leave voters, I also have a healthy scepticism of our own government, democracy etc. For me, as every vote becomes when you actually look into both options properly, the vote to Remain was a least worst vote.
    Actually, not true. See above. The remain campaign has, through the media, being pushing a disgusting narrative ever since the results came out.

    Also, its true that the both the least knowledgeable and the most knowledgeable about the EU voted to leave. I'll admit, there were a lot of morons who voted leave as well based on arguments like 'lets get the immigrants out' but for people like myself who voted leave for all of the right reasons, the desired result was obtained and I'll be more than happy if we obtain an EFTA plus bilateral trade agreements deal and free movement still exists. I am more aligned with Daniel Hannan on this than Nigel Farage. In a thriving economy where supply and demand is being well managed I'd actually increase the level of immigration to fuel further growth.

    The fact is, I am also sceptical of our own government which is why people should not take their eyes off the ball now and should continue to push for devolution, proportional representation and a better way of doing things moving forward. For me, suggesting that we stay in an overly bureaucratic EU that needs severe reform because we need it to protect us is as dumbfounded as hiring someone to protect your child from the babysitter you employed. If we do not trust our government that is an issue we must tackle and address head on alone.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Sheds a tear for all those remain muppets that marched on London.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    This cracks me up every time ................................ .......I laugh if its someone off TSR.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by illegaltobepoor)
    This cracks me up every time ................................ .......I laugh if its someone off TSR.
    THE TEARS ARE STRONG WITH THIS ONE :rofl:
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TimmonaPortella)
    Oh, I'm sure there are lots of people with a reasonable understanding of the EU institutions who voted remain. I think one could maintain (and I do) that greater control for our domestic systems is preferable whilst conceding that our own systems are not perfect. In any event, I think it's still worthwhile to point out that at least some of the pro EU sentiment, especially amongst the youth vote, seems to have its basis more in empty virtue-signalling than serious consideration of the EU's institutions, history, and legal framework.
    I completely agree and I deplore virtue-signalling (the right engage in it as much as the left, by the way, it's just that they consider different things virtues). Equally there are many Leave voters who voted as a vague, ill-directed protest against foreign faces, I see even relatively sophisticated Leave voters around the Internet railing against Muslims even though these are quite plainly not to do with the EU.

    Every vote has those few people on each side who understand what's going on, plus a vast hinterland of, essentially, thickos who vote on feelings and emotions. The fact that there are far more of the latter is why democracy is so flawed and why we use parliamentary democracy rather than direct democracy for day-to-day government.

    I do think that in this vote the Remainers were more likely to have some appreciation of what the EU is and does than the Leavers but I don't want to put too fine a point on it.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by welshiee)
    Also, its true that the both the least knowledgeable and the most knowledgeable about the EU voted to leave. I'll admit, there were a lot of morons who voted leave as well based on arguments like 'lets get the immigrants out' but for people like myself who voted leave for all of the right reasons, the desired result was obtained and I'll be more than happy if we obtain an EFTA plus bilateral trade agreements deal and free movement still exists. I am more aligned with Daniel Hannan on this than Nigel Farage. In a thriving economy where supply and demand is being well managed I'd actually increase the level of immigration to fuel further growth.
    That is not such a terrible option, although it begs the question why did you vote out if you are going to keep following all the rules?

    The calculus you have made in voting for that EFTA type agreement is presumably that we give up our voice in the EU institutions in return for being able to make our own trade agreements with non-EU countries.

    What is most ironic about this to me (especially given that it's by far the most likely outcome) is that thinking Leavers have voted to give up our sliver of sovereignty over EU law-making, even though we will have to follow those rules.

    It'll be a good thing in many ways: finally obstinate Britain will stop blocking the financial transaction tax and other tax reform laws.

    An EFTA agreement will save much of the City, but plenty of jobs will still be lost because banks and multinational corporations will want a base in a powerful country with a say in EU legislation, i.e. Frankfurt. I have no special attachment to the City, other than that I and many people of our class/education have oriented their careers around it, but it has to be said that the benighted place is a large chunk of the British economy so we are shooting ourselves in the foot to lose it.

    The fact is, I am also sceptical of our own government which is why people should not take their eyes off the ball now and should continue to push for devolution, proportional representation and a better way of doing things moving forward. For me, suggesting that we stay in an overly bureaucratic EU that needs severe reform because we need it to protect us is as dumbfounded as hiring someone to protect your child from the babysitter you employed. If we do not trust our government that is an issue we must tackle and address head on alone.
    Devolution is one reason why I voted Labour at the last election (although I would scarcely have voted anything else). I believed a Miliband/Sturgeon government would sort out a proper devolved settlement based on EU NUTS 1 Statistical Regions.

    The problem with wantonly throwing away the protections the EU gives us is that we have absolutely nothing in place to take over its functions. We have no trade union movement any more and we have an increasingly right-wing Tory government which even in its liberal incarnation has taken a very heavy axe to workers' rights. Even as the less rabid countries of the EU like France work to veto TTIP, we will hungrily sign the same deal bilaterally with the US, only with a fraction of the negotiating power.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    The calculus you have made in voting for that EFTA type agreement is presumably that we give up our voice in the EU institutions in return for being able to make our own trade agreements with non-EU countries.

    What is most ironic about this to me (especially given that it's by far the most likely outcome) is that thinking Leavers have voted to give up our sliver of sovereignty over EU law-making, even though we will have to follow those rules.
    Complete myth.

    Currently, we have to follow those rules at all times because we are part of the EU and EEA - full application of EU law.
    Norway have to follow those rules as they are part of EFTA and the EEA - full application of EU law.

    Switzerland have to follow those rules only when dealing with the EU as they are a part of EFTA, but not part of the EEA, and have a set of bilateral trade agreements in place instead. This means, Switzerland only has partial application of EU laws.

    I have voted for that very Switzerland type deal, not the Norway one, which is fundamentally different. I do not want us to be part of the EEA.

    And yes, only when dealing with the EU we have to apply with the laws they set but we are now also in a position whereby we can restructure our economy and make ourselves less dependent on the EU in the long run as we'll be able to negotiate with the wider world more quickly, whilst they take on average 10 years to negotiate deals due to a ridiculous number of deals.

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

    The Switzerland model would be perfect. The Norway model would be worse than what we already had. People thinking they both have the same relationship with the EU because they are both EFTA members really have no clue what they are on about.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by welshiee)
    Complete myth.

    Currently, we have to follow those rules at all times because we are part of the EU and EEA - full application of EU law.
    Norway have to follow those rules as they are part of EFTA and the EEA - full application of EU law.

    Switzerland have to follow those rules only when dealing with the EU as they are a part of EFTA, but not part of the EEA, and have a set of bilateral trade agreements in place instead. This means, Switzerland only has partial application of EU laws.

    I have voted for that very Switzerland type deal, not the Norway one, which is fundamentally different. I do not want us to be part of the EEA.

    And yes, only when dealing with the EU we have to apply with the laws they set but we are now also in a position whereby we can restructure our economy and make ourselves less dependent on the EU in the long run as we'll be able to negotiate with the wider world more quickly, whilst they take on average 10 years to negotiate deals due to a ridiculous number of deals.

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

    The Switzerland model would be perfect. The Norway model would be worse than what we already had. People thinking they both have the same relationship with the EU because they are both EFTA members really have no clue what they are on about.
    I know how the relationship is different. But how long is it going to take us to strike all these deals? It took Switzerland ten years to do this after the population rejected the EEA, and it was easier for them as it was done piecemeal as the EU itself was forming.

    How on earth can we hope to negotiate so many agreements without pitching the UK into another recession (as Switzerland suffered in the 1990s?) I don't know about you, but even as someone relatively privileged I have only just got over the last recession.

    It is also a bit of a pipe dream that we will negotiate agreements that favour Britain, since our civil service has been eviscerated by cuts and we haven't had anybody charged with striking a trade deal since we went into the EEC in 1973.

    It's also worth noting that Switzerland's recent referendum to restrict immigration will if implemented void all of its existing trade agreements with the EU.

    In fact today there is an article in the Guardian detailing the tribulations they are having trying to get this binding referendum shoehorned into the real world.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ement-citizens

    I do understand about more flexibly being able to trade with other countries and that is a plus point. However I expect, seeing as the EU is a massive market, most goods will be produced to EU rules and specifications wherever they are being sold. Compliance may be costly, but it's even more costly to make two types of every product.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    I know how the relationship is different. But how long is it going to take us to strike all these deals? It took Switzerland ten years to do this after the population rejected the EEA, and it was easier for them as it was done piecemeal as the EU itself was forming.

    How on earth can we hope to negotiate so many agreements without pitching the UK into another recession (as Switzerland suffered in the 1990s?) I don't know about you, but even as someone relatively privileged I have only just got over the last recession.

    It is also a bit of a pipe dream that we will negotiate agreements that favour Britain, since our civil service has been eviscerated by cuts and we haven't had anybody charged with striking a trade deal since we went into the EEC in 193.

    It's also worth noting that Switzerland's recent referendum to restrict immigration will if implemented void all of its existing trade agreements with the EU.

    I do understand about more flexibly being able to trade with other countries and that is a plus point. However I expect, seeing as the EU is a massive market, most goods will be produced to EU rules and specifications wherever they are being sold. Compliance may be costly, but it's even more costly to make two types of every product.
    There are many things we should be doing to improve the situation. The problem is, will governments have the guts to do what is required?

    1) Cut taxes to bring in foreign investment - slash corporation tax big time
    2) Streamline the public sector to lower overhead and bring more jobs into the private sector
    3) Take advantage of low bond yields to borrow and invest in infrastructure
    4) More of a focus on vocational education and rebuilding of physical jobs, rather than just reliance on a white collar service sector
    5) Investment in green/clean energy moving forward

    Also, I am not saying it is going to be easy, far from it, but in my opinion the rewards at the end of the road will be much sweeter than if we stay in an EU that I can only see failing. I see leaving and reengaging with the wider world as much about us as I do as it being a contingency plan because I cannot see the Eurozone or the Euro surviving, and restructuring our economy to have a more globalised focus is paramount to our future endeavours.

    Finally, I do not care about the free movement of people. I am happy with it still being in place as that had nothing to do with why I voted.

    I voted because I wanted to leave an economic EU fish tank full of rules and dive into the big wide open sea. With no risk there is no reward. I get why people are scared of this but staying in the EU is like being the adult that never leaves home. Its time to fly the EU nest and its time for the UK to flourish.

    Its why I want PR because I want a government that does what is right regardless of political alignment on the spectrum. We need a government that works in the interests of all moving forward, not one that will impose harsher austerity or one that will print money like its back in fashion.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    tbf, they look like the type of people who thought they were "too cool" (or too lazy) to vote, and then came out blaming the older generations for "screwing them over"...
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    There isn't even a clear consensus on how much EU regulation Norway follows, figures quoted are ranging from 9%-75%.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norw...nion_relations

    http://christopherhowarth.uk/how-muc...adopt-9-or-75/
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chemting)
    tbf, they look like the type of people who thought they were "too cool" (or too lazy) to vote, and then came out blaming the older generations for "screwing them over"...
    I'm surprised it hasn't kicked off yet, the anarchists usually turn out for that very reason.
    Online

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TimmonaPortella)
    All terribly depressing stuff OP, particularly the first clip.

    So how many of these mouth-breathers do we think added to the 'voters with degrees' statistic? I bet it was a couple.
    As though a formal education is somehow indicative of any independence of mind, or absence of indoctrination, when they all read and consume the exact same media consensus, and reinforce each others views endlessly, devoid of an objective consideration of any other viewpoint...

    There is a sort of monopoly they see themselves as having, on correctness, moral and intellectual. A perfect example of education as not 'how to think' but as 'what to think'.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by welshiee)
    There are many things we should be doing to improve the situation. The problem is, will governments have the guts to do what is required?

    1) Cut taxes to bring in foreign investment - slash corporation tax big time
    2) Streamline the public sector to lower overhead and bring more jobs into the private sector
    3) Take advantage of low bond yields to borrow and invest in infrastructure
    4) More of a focus on vocational education and rebuilding of physical jobs, rather than just reliance on a white collar service sector
    5) Investment in green/clean energy moving forward
    I believe Osborne has done all of those things.

    1) In the last budget he reduced corporation tax. The lower threshold of income tax is also the highest it has been in my lifetime.
    2) Successive governments have attempted to streamline the public sector. To be fair, this government have done very well. Councils the length and breadth of the land are now running a deficit and have cut all but services they are obliged to deliver. The NHS is running a deficit and education is creaking at the seams. Good one Osborne.
    3) This might actually happen now Osborne has decided to ditch austerity. But then we did borrow £70 billion last year. That can't happen indefinitely.
    4) I think this government have introduced vocational training in the form of apprenticeships where companies basically get free labour paid for by the government. That said, from what I have seen, the quality of those coming into the scheme is so low, it isn't particularly useful, especially in more skilled vocations.
    5) The Tories have cut investment in Green energy. Gone are the days when you could get free insulation and caverty walling. They have cut the feed-in-tarrif.

    What has any of this got to do with Europe?
    Online

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by welshiee)
    The more people study and learn about the EU the more likely they are to want to leave it. There's a reason a large proportion of the EU's activities are not transparent. Of course, the remain voters see leaving such an institution as being a backward step but the reality is we've left a fish tank for the big old sea.
    So why welshie, are you being negative and saying it's a stich up on the other thread? Please tell me you're not a spinning remainer, mate?

    Everything you've said is true, multitudes see it in the UK and across Europe, we are not letting them push anything through with no fight. referendums are now impossible to contain across the EU, all they can do is become more authoritarian and then the whole thing is gone. they are trying to push an army and all of it after Brexit. i'm telling you they will not stitch anything up without mass upheaval.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    I swear all remainers haven't a clue what they are talking about...
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AngryRedhead)
    Lmao at this German trying to shame Brits for having a choice in how their own damn country is run

    Came in to post this :rofl:

    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    she's hot though
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JamesN88)
    My main reasons/opinions that led me to vote Remain were

    Democracy: The EU isn't undemocratic but not as democratic as it could be, but enough at present for a semi-integrated union.
    Ok some serious education required here. The key issue regarding how democratic the EU is, is to understand just how tiny a part of the EU Britain is and how little impact it has within that "democracy". A democracy is all well and good but if you are one person amongst many then your vote has no sway at all.

    Here are the facts then.

    In order to win a EU vote you need a "qualifying majority". Sounds good, ok let's look at what that means.

    To achieve a Qualifying Majority you need to satisfy 2 things:

    - a majority of member states - 15 member states - vote in favour
    - a minimum of 260 votes out of the total 352 votes are cast in favour

    So first off, if the UK wanted to achieve something, some change in the EU, it would need the backing of 14 other member states which for the most part it will never get.

    Secondly note that there are a TOTAL of 352 votes in the EU. The UK has only 29 of those votes. Read that again. The UK has only 29 votes. So does France, Germany and Italy.

    You need 260 votes to achieve a majority so to effect any change at all the UK requires 231 votes from other member states, which of course, never happens.

    So whilst the whole thing appears to be a democratic process, it is a democracy in which the UK has bugger all standing and will NEVER have any significant impact.

    It is like buying 1 share in HSBC and hoping there by to have the power to vote off the CEO at the next AGM. Utterly futile.

    This is the reason why so many changes that the UK has tried to implement in the EU have been constantly rejected. It can not and never will achieve a "Qualifying Majority".

    Being out of the EU means we can have the freedom to be the country that we want and live under the laws we want. Being out of the EU means that YOU the people still get to vote and have a say in national affairs. Inside the EU you would have had no vote whatsoever. Inside the EU, Westminster would disband, UK Parliament would disband, there would be no Liberal Party, No Labour Party, No Conservative Party, no local parties whatsoever. Your voice would be lost . . . forever.

    By Leaving we have saved democracy. We have ensured that a meaningful democracy remains for old and young alike. Inside the EU our mouths would have been taped shut.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    What has any of this got to do with Europe?
    Who said it has?
 
 
 
  • 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
    Brussels sprouts
    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.