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

Why are people voting to remain in Europe? Watch

    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mojojojo101)
    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.



    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.
    So you think anyone who wants borders of any kind are racist?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Omen96)
    So you think anyone who wants borders of any kind are racist?
    what?.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    How do you explain the 300,000 non-EU immigrants that legally came to the UK despite a target of 100,000? These are the ones we could turn away tomorrow if we wanted. But we either don't or can't. And why is it that despite record levels of immigration, we still have historically low levels of unemployment? It just doesn't make sense. It is almost as if all these immigrants are actually helping our economy.
    100k net is their target not 100k over all that's around 350-400k of migrants over all per year


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    The UK is not in Schengen.

    While they might have to take EU citizens, they are under no obligation whatsoever to take any non-EU immigrants if they don't want to.

    Not to mention, not everyone is selfish like you
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by animus01)
    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)
    I really don't know why you are debating with me when I agreed with the idea that it is ludicrous to stay in a flawed system simply because we feel it is 'better than the unknown'.
    Offline

    14
    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.
    (Original post by otester)
    The average person is unambitious and hates change, even if it's for their own benefit.
    I find this view curious. The EU is change. We've had it for a tiny amount of time compared to our separate, bordered countries. How is it more ambitious stepping backwards to segregation than continuing our step forward to co-operation? Shouldn't we push for change in the EU rather than give up hope for unity and return to that familiar war-torn ground of dog eat dog?

    Also, what are your thoughts on the realistic possibility that the UK will become only England and Wales if we leave the EU?

    It all sounds like moving into the past to me.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    I'm a member of the Conservative Party.

    I accept the need for borders, just not borders with our fellow European citizens. The main object of borders should be to prevent economic issues arising - and I think the EU has achieved that fairly well. I do not think it is legitimate to prevent free movement because some of our fellow Europeans seem a bit foreign, smell of garlic or like having a couple of shelves in Londis for their local foods.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paul514)
    100k net is their target not 100k over all that's around 350-400k of migrants over all per year


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Agreed. And a quick look at non EU immigration stats shows that the government have missed their targets year on year for years. Yet somehow if we leave the EU we will magically be able to fix or borders.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Omen96)
    Lol, you do realise those who vote to remain are in favour of open door mass uncontrolled unlimited migration from europe? It's not a mistake on their part, they believe in a europe with no borders.
    n
    Fixed that for you.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Davij038)
    Fixed that for you.
    It's open to the world considering anyone from anywhere can walk into Europe
    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.
    Finally - someone who sees sense! All this government scaremongering is driving me positively bonkers!!!
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Omen96)
    It's open to the world considering anyone from anywhere can walk into Europe
    Cool story bro.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    Agreed. And a quick look at non EU immigration stats shows that the government have missed their targets year on year for years. Yet somehow if we leave the EU we will magically be able to fix or borders.
    It means Europe Union migration will go down.



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by macromicro)
    I find this view curious. The EU is change. We've had it for a tiny amount of time compared to our separate, bordered countries. How is it more ambitious stepping backwards to segregation than continuing our step forward to co-operation? Shouldn't we push for change in the EU rather than give up hope for unity and return to that familiar war-torn ground of dog eat dog?

    Also, what are your thoughts on the realistic possibility that the UK will become only England and Wales if we leave the EU?

    It all sounds like moving into the past to me.
    Perhaps you're right, macromicro. But seeing how negotiations have already yielded some pretty poor results (in the grand scheme of things), and certain high-profile EU leaders have stated that they will not budge on key issues, I don't see what other option the country has.

    I personally don't have an issue with the way the EU is set up - a few reforms may be necessary (e.g. how trade policy is agreed upon seems a bit odd) but on the whole I do feel it's done an OK job so far. But I also feel that Brussels needs to be more 'open' to feedback.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by macromicro)
    I find this view curious. The EU is change. We've had it for a tiny amount of time compared to our separate, bordered countries. How is it more ambitious stepping backwards to segregation than continuing our step forward to co-operation? Shouldn't we push for change in the EU rather than give up hope for unity and return to that familiar war-torn ground of dog eat dog?

    Also, what are your thoughts on the realistic possibility that the UK will become only England and Wales if we leave the EU?

    It all sounds like moving into the past to me.
    The EU is just a continuation of corporatism in the West which seeks to group nations into regional blocks and then be tied together with "trade agreements" which allow the multi-nationals to bypass democracy and impose their will.

    Scotland can't survive on it's own and if it tries to, it will fail and end up rejoining, we get the last laugh either way.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Davij038)
    Cool story bro.
    Umm, are you ignoring the fact millions from the middle east and Africa have come to Europe illegally recently lol? You are not doing yourself any favours by implying that, it makes everything you said less reliable if you can't even acknowledge that let alone the fact individual EU countries have independent migration laws for non-EU countries so people can come into the UK through other countries say Sweden. It's the reason that while EU migration accounts for majority of migration, majority of immigrants in the UK are actually of Asian and African origin, not European. But you can carry on denying everything. The fact you deny swarms of migration recently considering it's everywhere and every government is addressing it, god help you
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Omen96)
    Umm, are you ignoring the fact millions from the middle east and Africa have come to Europe illegally recently lol? You are not doing yourself any favours by implying that, it makes everything you said less reliable if you can't even acknowledge that let alone the fact individual EU countries have independent migration laws for non-EU countries so people can come into the UK through other countries say Sweden. It's the reason that while EU migration accounts for majority of migration, majority of immigrants in the UK are actually of Asian and African origin, not European. But you can carry on denying everything. The fact you deny swarms of migration recently considering it's everywhere and every government is addressing it, god help you
    I'm not denying the fact that migrants have come in from outside Europe, I'm denying that the blame for this rests with the EU rather than nation states. Most of the immigration you speak of didn't come via Europe but came through previous British administration to get foreign labour (e.g nurses from the Philippines).

    I fail to see how the EU not existing would have prevented the refugee crisis or made it easier to manage.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aceadria)
    Perhaps you're right, macromicro. But seeing how negotiations have already yielded some pretty poor results (in the grand scheme of things), and certain high-profile EU leaders have stated that they will not budge on key issues, I don't see what other option the country has.

    I personally don't have an issue with the way the EU is set up - a few reforms may be necessary (e.g. how trade policy is agreed upon seems a bit odd) but on the whole I do feel it's done an OK job so far. But I also feel that Brussels needs to be more 'open' to feedback.
    I agree it looks bleak at times but equally the EU is only a baby. It's experiencing teething problems that we all knew would occur and nothing that is remotely surprising - power, sovereignty, governance, migration, trade, etc. Who didn't expect these concerns? It will be a long process until the EU is in harmony both internally and externally.

    Our options are to let the EU mature and negotiate issues over a much longer (more realistic) period of time or return to a state of seclusion and borders pre-WW2, and most likely lose 10% of our population and 40% in size as a direct result.

    The main argument I take seriously from the eurosceptics is that the UK could perhaps be individually stronger than as part of the EU - it may have more flexibility and opportunity to become a superpower and hence lead the planet. There is no real way to know this. It takes huge assumptions for the future and biased readings of history to say one way or another. I'm trying to make the decision based on the long-term goals of global unity and co-operation, the end of war and maximising human progression. Do we risk leaving what was created in pursuit of those three things? Are we simply insulted at being a small fish in the big EU pond? How much national pride over pride for the human race is in the decision to leave the EU? These questions are difficult to answer! I want to pick the choice that brings the entire planet closer to optimal progression regardless of how well the UK itself is doing - at the moment staying in the EU seems more fruitful to this end.

    (Original post by otester)
    The EU is just a continuation of corporatism in the West which seeks to group nations into regional blocks and then be tied together with "trade agreements" which allow the multi-nationals to bypass democracy and impose their will.
    How will they bypass democracy and impose their will? And what do they will? Do you not think it's possible that the EU is simply a union of nations attempting to prevent war and optimise trade/migration, but going through problems you would expect for such a grand cause? It was never going to be easy but should we give up altogether? I'm not convinced by the "big evil corps" taking over the world theory.

    Scotland can't survive on it's own and if it tries to, it will fail and end up rejoining, we get the last laugh either way.
    We certainly won't be laughing at our lost revenue from Edinburgh or from losing our largest art hub in Glasgow or from the loss in confidence (financial and political) we will experience during and after.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Because we have more than half a brain
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by macromicro)
    How will they bypass democracy and impose their will? And what do they will? Do you not think it's possible that the EU is simply a union of nations attempting to prevent war and optimise trade/migration, but going through problems you would expect for such a grand cause? It was never going to be easy but should we give up altogether? I'm not convinced by the "big evil corps" taking over the world theory.
    TTIP will introduce IDS which allows multi-national corporations to sue other governments (who sign TTIP) if they don't a particular law they have.

    At first it may have started out that way, now it's being turned into a corporate super-state with it's own army, so what started out with peaceful intentions will likely result in more war/instability as witnessed in the Ukraine.
 
 
 
  • 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.