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

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Right now we have a net migration rate of 300k per year, a staggering proportion of newly arrived E.U migrants work in low skilled positions with the continued expansion of the E.U to perhaps include Albania, the Balkans , Ukraine (45 million) and Turkey (77 million) with minimum wages vastly below the U.Ks new living wage of £9 per hour we can safely say that many will come here. What does that mean? Well people in highly skilled jobs pay net in taxes meaning schools, nhs and welfare provision is funded by this taxation. A person on minimum wage will on average pay a little under £1000 in taxes per year which means when you take into account of needing to build new hospitals , schools and homes the supposed cost benefit for mass unskilled labour seems very low. Migration is very unequal with most labour division moving from east - west

    That's not even including what will happen if we build over green spaces to fit in more people, we currently grow over 60% of our food if we cannot does this we will rely more on imports and food prices could rise massively.

    The E.U have us bent over a barrel , our laws aren't really our own, the eu's goal is a federal superstate and world superpower. As Europe have spent the last century in 2 world wars I'd argue that pressing for such a superstate would be unwise when these countries have no history of being one united country, this couldn't work like the USA.

    Yes economically we may suffer for the first year or two of Brexit but is one year of economic growth worth handing over our sovereignty and what our country will be like in 20 years really wise? Don't think for the next year think for the long term future for our children and grandchildren do we want the U.K to have an NHS, affordable housing, good quality schooling and good welfare provision or do we want to hand our entire future over to the E.U? Right now we are the fifth largest economy , richer than Canada, Australia and NZ who have very good standards of living and don't belong to a massive club that says they have to take unlimited people from poorer nations. We can build a stronger economy outside of the EU with people we want paying good amounts of taxes in skilled employment.

    What's short term economic pain vs a lifetime of being a slave to the EU? Think for the next 20 years not for tomorrow.

    Vote Leave!!!
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vickidc18)
    Right now we have a net migration rate of 300k per year, a staggering proportion of newly arrived E.U migrants work in low skilled positions with the continued expansion of the E.U to perhaps include Albania, the Balkans , Ukraine (45 million) and Turkey (77 million) with minimum wages vastly below the U.Ks new living wage of £9 per hour we can safely say that many will come here. What does that mean? Well people in highly skilled jobs pay net in taxes meaning schools, nhs and welfare provision is funded by this taxation. A person on minimum wage will on average pay a little under £1000 in taxes per year which means when you take into account of needing to build new hospitals , schools and homes the supposed cost benefit for mass unskilled labour seems very low. Migration is very unequal with most labour division moving from east - west



    Our current national debt is 89% of GDP. The US is 103%, Italy is 132%, Greece is 179%, Japan whose economy has been stagnant for 20 years is off the scale at 230%

    The Office for Budget Responsibility predicted in 2013 that over the next 50 years it would rise to 174% if we only have no net migration. With 140,000 net migration it rises to 99%. With 260,000 net migration it falls to 75%.

    Overall immigration is good for the economy because on balance migrants are younger and more economically active than native populations and that is true both for immigrants and emigrants.


    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...opulation.html

    Leave cannot win an economic argument about the benefits of migration. Leave can say that leaving the EU allows us the freedom to select our immigrants.

    We don't know whether an "open door" policy to EU migrants or selecting the "best" migrants from around the world actually brings in more of the best migrants. "There's nowt so queer as folk" and for example steps to exclude bogus students from India has undoubtedly reduced the number of genuine students from India who would not have been caught by the clamp down on bogus students



    The E.U have us bent over a barrel , our laws aren't really our own,
    There is a fallacy here. If we leave, either we deal with the EU on the EU's terms, as Norway does or we negotiate our relations with the EU on a subject by subject basis, as Switzerland does. In either case, that bargain, unless we withdraw from it, governs our relationship. We don't have the freedom to make it up as we going along, Let us say we and the EU agree the definition of grade 1 vegetables for the purposes of UK-EU trade. We can't suddenly unilaterally change our laws and say that a bent carrot is good enough. Either it fits the treaty we have made or it doesn't. If we withdraw from that treaty, then not only carrots are affected but so are cauliflowers and onions, Most of the things that the general public find irksome about EU rules will still exist.


    the eu's goal is a federal superstate and world superpower. As Europe have spent the last century in 2 world wars I'd argue that pressing for such a superstate would be unwise when these countries have no history of being one united country, this couldn't work like the USA.

    Yes. Cameron has got an opt out from this for what it is worth. In reality we would, if we stay in, have to continue fighting this battle indefinitely.


    Yes economically we may suffer for the first year or two of Brexit but is one year of economic growth worth handing over our sovereignty and what our country will be like in 20 years really wise? Don't think for the next year think for the long term future for our children and grandchildren do we want the U.K to have an NHS, affordable housing, good quality schooling and good welfare provision or do we want to hand our entire future over to the E.U? Right now we are the fifth largest economy , richer than Canada, Australia and NZ who have very good standards of living and don't belong to a massive club that says they have to take unlimited people from poorer nations. We can build a stronger economy outside of the EU with people we want paying good amounts of taxes in skilled employment.

    What's short term economic pain vs a lifetime of being a slave to the EU? Think for the next 20 years not for tomorrow.
    How do you know the bad times will last 1 year not 21 years?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    *sigh*

    The EU is the future.

    Let's go through your list.


    Firstly I am reliably informed that inAustralia and Canada immigration is just as contested as in the UK. Secondly the UK has a declining birth rate and thirdly a lot of UK natipnLs Won't do the work that EU migrants will do ( this won't change outside the EU).

    EU expansion (which was supported by Britain) has halted with the current crises and will take a while to resume. Turkey does not want to join and would not be accepted (plenty of member states would veto it) and this claim just shows how desperate the Outters are.

    I don't get your point on the world wars, the EU is designed and has been successful in preventing war ( NATO readily acknowledges this) we have as separate nation states caused two world wars- by pooling sovereignty it makes it far harder to go to war which is why neocons like Gove dislike it.


    Sovereignty is an illusion painted by a bunch of corporatists worried that states acting in concert could pose s threat to their existence. You think that the tax exiles running the Mail, Express and The Sun are advocating brexit to help the little guy?

    The long term future of the UK, Europe and the earth relies on institutions like the EU to tackle problems like climate change, HR abuse and tax evasion (three things the fringe nutters in the media want to distract you from with bogus deportation schemes, crooked bananas and of course how much benefits s Romanian nurse is legally entitled to)

    The EU is far from perfect (the UK certainly isn't either) . But it's better than being a slave to corporate interests in which we really have no say.



    (Some smart arse may point out that banks and big business favour staying in. This is true- they do this because they favour stability and value the free trade- they'd be quite happy if we scrapped the workers protections and 'red tape' (a horrible thing, which like H&S legislation is proof that the EU is the reincarnation of the third reich...or at least that's what the Thatcherite nut jobs think) from the EU.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    Yes. Cameron has got an opt out from this for what it is worth. In reality we would, if we stay in, have to continue fighting this battle indefinitely.
    I am not sure Cameron has anything in this respect.

    There is a mechanism today for the EU treaties to be self-amending, sometimes by Qualified Majority Voting. Does Cameron's deal mean that the UK can now veto such amendments that previously would be decided under QMV? That the UK itself will be exempted from them if it votes against? I suspect that the answer to both questions is no.

    If a future UK Europhile government voluntarily hands more powers to the EU, as the Blair government did on a large scale and the Cameron government has done on a smaller scale, does this deal mean that a future Eurosceptic government could reclaim them? Or is the ratchet effect still present? I strongly suspect it is.

    This is the actual text of the draft decision:

    "It is recognised that the United Kingdom, in the light of the specific situation it has under the Treaties, is not committed to further political integration into the European Union. The substance of this will be incorporated into the Treaties at the time of their next revision in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Treaties and the respective constitutional requirements of the Member States, so as to make it clear that the references to ever closer union do not apply to the United Kingdom.

    "The references in the Treaties and their preambles to the process of creating an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe do not offer a legal basis for extending the scope of any provision of the Treaties or of EU secondary legislation. They should not be used either to support an extensive interpretation of the competences of the Union or of the powers of its institutions as set out in the Treaties."

    What the EU has 'conceded' is that the rhetorical reference to ever closer union can't be used to invent powers that don't otherwise exist under the treaties, which was never its position anyway. The powers that exist under the treaties are unaffected.*

    The EU's aim is a unitary state. If that is not the UK's aim, then UK withdrawal is inevitable. This will happen either by explicit withdrawal via e.g. a Leave vote (I consider this less likely) or by the rEU evolving into something that is radically different from the UK's relationship to rEU (I consider this more likely). In the latter case, there is really very little difference between that outcome and the likely Association Agreement that would emerge following UK invocation of Article 50.

    (*actually pretty much the whole thing is of this character: the decision simply explains that Cameron's requests can be worded such that the EU has already given him what he wants. Which, of course, only means that what he has asked for, at least phrased as it has been in the decision, is not what any eurosceptic wants.)
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    Our current national debt is 89% of GDP. The US is 103%, Italy is 132%, Greece is 179%, Japan whose economy has been stagnant for 20 years is off the scale at 230%

    The Office for Budget Responsibility predicted in 2013 that over the next 50 years it would rise to 174% if we only have no net migration. With 140,000 net migration it rises to 99%. With 260,000 net migration it falls to 75%.

    Overall immigration is good for the economy because on balance migrants are younger and more economically active than native populations and that is true both for immigrants and emigrants.
    Why do people continually insist that leaving the EU = no immigration? It just means we can pick and choose our immigrants. Won't the benefits immigrants bring compared to the detriments rise if we can have control over who comes in? If you're worth having, we'll still take you.

    This whole net benefit of immigration argument is pointless.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I'm still yet to see a solid argument of why we should stay, every large company/news outlet promoting to stay seemingly has strong reasons to stay, in the terms of tax relief, grants and labour recruited from overseas. Even a lot of the economic reports, when delved into, originate in companies such as BP, Goldman etc, which also rely on overseas labour. I tend to try and avoid those sources as they have an interest to stay, so with that in mind, can someone give me a solid argument beyond 'we don't know what will happen'. One thing which is becoming increasingly clear is that the EU is likely to fail economically in the coming years. If we stay, we're accountable and being the leading GDP in Europe, we'll be the ones picking up the eastern europoors from the dirt, along with Germany and France. So with this sole factor in mind, how can the argument that we don't know what will happen economically be a worse option than certain recession?
    The only argument that i'm really taking seriously currently is that if we leave, not a great deal will change in terms of the economy. Most companies will be relatively unaffected, on the basis that work permits, tax incentives etc will all likely remain to stop them leaving. Remember it's in the UKs interest regardless to retain these key jobs, so it's unlikely we'll get any losses from it. Also regarding the increase of price in goods via tariffs, it's once again not in the nation's interest. A lot of countries in Europe rely on us for a sizable sum of their GDP. They want to retain their exports to us, they will reduce their tariff. It's simply enough. And if not, new jobs will be created over here, and we'll have our own industry again. Honestly looking at a scope which is beyond the next 5 years, I really do fail to see any valid arguments for staying..Please can someone enlighten me as there is surely some.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KimKallstrom)
    Why do people continually insist that leaving the EU = no immigration? It just means we can pick and choose our immigrants. Won't the benefits immigrants bring compared to the detriments rise if we can have control over who comes in? If you're worth having, we'll still take you.

    This whole net benefit of immigration argument is pointless.
    Not necessarily. Its likely that a pre requisite for trade deals with eu and other countries will include a requirement to allow a certain number in.
    The idea that if we leave the eu we will have control of our borders is delusional, said by the prime minister himself...

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KimKallstrom)
    Why do people continually insist that leaving the EU = no immigration? It just means we can pick and choose our immigrants. Won't the benefits immigrants bring compared to the detriments rise if we can have control over who comes in? If you're worth having, we'll still take you.

    This whole net benefit of immigration argument is pointless.
    Those you vote to leave on the back of immigration are gonna learn this the hard way if we do leave.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Davij038)
    *sigh*

    The EU is the future.

    Let's go through your list.


    Firstly I am reliably informed that inAustralia and Canada immigration is just as contested as in the UK. Secondly the UK has a declining birth rate and thirdly a lot of UK natipnLs Won't do the work that EU migrants will do ( this won't change outside the EU).

    EU expansion (which was supported by Britain) has halted with the current crises and will take a while to resume. Turkey does not want to join and would not be accepted (plenty of member states would veto it) and this claim just shows how desperate the Outters are.

    I don't get your point on the world wars, the EU is designed and has been successful in preventing war ( NATO readily acknowledges this) we have as separate nation states caused two world wars- by pooling sovereignty it makes it far harder to go to war which is why neocons like Gove dislike it.


    Sovereignty is an illusion painted by a bunch of corporatists worried that states acting in concert could pose s threat to their existence. You think that the tax exiles running the Mail, Express and The Sun are advocating brexit to help the little guy?

    The long term future of the UK, Europe and the earth relies on institutions like the EU to tackle problems like climate change, HR abuse and tax evasion (three things the fringe nutters in the media want to distract you from with bogus deportation schemes, crooked bananas and of course how much benefits s Romanian nurse is legally entitled to)

    The EU is far from perfect (the UK certainly isn't either) . But it's better than being a slave to corporate interests in which we really have no say.



    (Some smart arse may point out that banks and big business favour staying in. This is true- they do this because they favour stability and value the free trade- they'd be quite happy if we scrapped the workers protections and 'red tape' (a horrible thing, which like H&S legislation is proof that the EU is the reincarnation of the third reich...or at least that's what the Thatcherite nut jobs think) from the EU.
    Well said.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Davij038)
    *sigh*

    The EU is the future.

    Let's go through your list.


    Firstly I am reliably informed that inAustralia and Canada immigration is just as contested as in the UK. Secondly the UK has a declining birth rate and thirdly a lot of UK natipnLs Won't do the work that EU migrants will do ( this won't change outside the EU).

    EU expansion (which was supported by Britain) has halted with the current crises and will take a while to resume. Turkey does not want to join and would not be accepted (plenty of member states would veto it) and this claim just shows how desperate the Outters are.

    I don't get your point on the world wars, the EU is designed and has been successful in preventing war ( NATO readily acknowledges this) we have as separate nation states caused two world wars- by pooling sovereignty it makes it far harder to go to war which is why neocons like Gove dislike it.


    Sovereignty is an illusion painted by a bunch of corporatists worried that states acting in concert could pose s threat to their existence. You think that the tax exiles running the Mail, Express and The Sun are advocating brexit to help the little guy?

    The long term future of the UK, Europe and the earth relies on institutions like the EU to tackle problems like climate change, HR abuse and tax evasion (three things the fringe nutters in the media want to distract you from with bogus deportation schemes, crooked bananas and of course how much benefits s Romanian nurse is legally entitled to)

    The EU is far from perfect (the UK certainly isn't either) . But it's better than being a slave to corporate interests in which we really have no say.



    (Some smart arse may point out that banks and big business favour staying in. This is true- they do this because they favour stability and value the free trade- they'd be quite happy if we scrapped the workers protections and 'red tape' (a horrible thing, which like H&S legislation is proof that the EU is the reincarnation of the third reich...or at least that's what the Thatcherite nut jobs think) from the EU.
    All I can gather from your post is that it makes little difference whether we remain or not. We can remain and still do all the things you say are bad.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vickidc18)
    Right now we have a net migration rate of 300k per year, a staggering proportion of newly arrived E.U migrants work in low skilled positions with the continued expansion of the E.U to perhaps include Albania, the Balkans , Ukraine (45 million) and Turkey (77 million) with minimum wages vastly below the U.Ks new living wage of £9 per hour we can safely say that many will come here. What does that mean? Well people in highly skilled jobs pay net in taxes meaning schools, nhs and welfare provision is funded by this taxation. A person on minimum wage will on average pay a little under £1000 in taxes per year which means when you take into account of needing to build new hospitals , schools and homes the supposed cost benefit for mass unskilled labour seems very low. Migration is very unequal with most labour division moving from east - west

    That's not even including what will happen if we build over green spaces to fit in more people, we currently grow over 60% of our food if we cannot does this we will rely more on imports and food prices could rise massively.

    The E.U have us bent over a barrel , our laws aren't really our own, the eu's goal is a federal superstate and world superpower. As Europe have spent the last century in 2 world wars I'd argue that pressing for such a superstate would be unwise when these countries have no history of being one united country, this couldn't work like the USA.

    Yes economically we may suffer for the first year or two of Brexit but is one year of economic growth worth handing over our sovereignty and what our country will be like in 20 years really wise? Don't think for the next year think for the long term future for our children and grandchildren do we want the U.K to have an NHS, affordable housing, good quality schooling and good welfare provision or do we want to hand our entire future over to the E.U? Right now we are the fifth largest economy , richer than Canada, Australia and NZ who have very good standards of living and don't belong to a massive club that says they have to take unlimited people from poorer nations. We can build a stronger economy outside of the EU with people we want paying good amounts of taxes in skilled employment.

    What's short term economic pain vs a lifetime of being a slave to the EU? Think for the next 20 years not for tomorrow.

    Vote Leave!!!
    323k net it's over 600k per year


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Observatory)
    I am not sure Cameron has anything in this respect.

    He has a political commitment binding on the governments of other countries but like all political commitments he will have to reasserted in each generation.

    What it means is that no European politician can use "ever closer union" against the UK to support whatever policy he or she is peddling.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    All I can gather from your post is that it makes little difference whether we remain or not. We can remain and still do all the things you say are bad.
    I suggest you read it again. The whole of Europe is better able to tackle tax avoidance, climate change et al as a collective whole with universal standards rather than as separate entities
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Davij038)
    I suggest you read it again. The whole of Europe is better able to tackle tax avoidance, climate change et al as a collective whole with universal standards rather than as separate entities
    But it isn't doing and there is no reason it will have to. Greece would have been better off out of the eurozone. It's has surrenderd its democracy to the EU.

    Would you have supported the position that the Soviet Union should have been reformed rather than dismantled? I know that is an extreme analogy but it is all I can think of. What happens if the EU just acts like the USA to countries external to Europe? Then it is just another imperialist super power.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Look at what those EU *******s have done now. How dare they away our freedoms?

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a6895226.html
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    No, thanks.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    But it isn't doing and there is no reason it will have to.
    Yes it is.

    http://www.eea.europa.eu/media/audio...heme-work/view


    Would you have supported the position that the Soviet Union should have been reformed rather than dismantled? I know that is an extreme analogy but it is all I can think of.
    Uh, yes actually and that would have been better than what we have now with the onset of Russian overt nationalism.

    What happens if the EU just acts like the USA to countries external to Europe? Then it is just another imperialist super power.
    Unlikely, unless it can get all 28 states to agree. In addition, you do realiser his can essentially happen now as were are already under NATO (and have the likes of Turkey and a potential Trump run US as allies)
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Davij038)
    Yes it is.

    http://www.eea.europa.eu/media/audio...heme-work/view




    Uh, yes actually and that would have been better than what we have now with the onset of Russian overt nationalism.



    Unlikely, unless it can get all 28 states to agree. In addition, you do realiser his can essentially happen now as were are already under NATO (and have the likes of Turkey and a potential Trump run US as allies)
    :five:

    So I'm right. In or Out makes little difference to these problems.

    In all likely hood I'm gonna spoil my ballot i think.
 
 
 
  • 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.