Should the UK remain a member of the EU

[SasaS]

Well, that's what media do, cater to the perceived worldview of their customers. There is no one truth here anyway. Have a good time and drink responsibly.

[Jairzinho]

Well, that's what media do, cater to the perceived worldview of their customers. 

 

u wot m8

[SasaS]

apologies, they shape innocent minds of good and well-meaning country folk as their rotten capitalist masters tell them to

[njackets]

All but a handful of senior Tories want to stay in the EU, yet people are STILL arguing the point that the main reason they want to stay in the EU is so they don't get fucked by the Tories.

[Bjornebye]

Fuck Britain. 

[Rico1304]

Fuck Britain.

 

You've had a good go from what I can gather.

[Section_31]

We'll do what the neo liberal elite wants, that is an ever closer European union nibbling at Russia and turning every country into a privatised wank fest. Cameron wants us in, that says it all.

[mattyq]

All but a handful of senior Tories want to stay in the EU, yet people are STILL arguing the point that the main reason they want to stay in the EU is so they don't get fucked by the Tories.

Haha, deluded, moi?

All but a handfull of senior Tories want to leave the EU. This is a fact

 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/08/most-tory-party-members-will-vote-to-leave-eu-says-bernard-jenkin

[Jairzinho]

apologies, they shape innocent minds of good and well-meaning country folk as their rotten capitalist masters tell them to

 

Correct.

[Nightcat]

Interesting news.

 

In my opinion you should vote to leave the E.U. I also phoned up my cousin in Leith, he is outraged with the SNP's stance on this.

 

And what this is "Russia will be happy if UK leaves the EU" stuff. This is bullshit of the worst kind.

[Neil G]

We'll do what the neo liberal elite wants, that is an ever closer European union nibbling at Russia and turning every country into a privatised wank fest. Cameron wants us in, that says it all.

Like I said earlier in the thread, it's the right wing press who'll be calling the shots on this one, not big business.

 

How do you suggest the multinationals will swing the result their way? Assuming you're not talking about them outright rigging the vote, what tactics and messages do you think they can deploy that will get anywhere close to matching the press's anti-immigrant rhetoric for effect?

[Rico1304]

Like I said earlier in the thread, it's the right wing press who'll be calling the shots on this one, not big business.

How do you suggest the multinationals will swing the result their way? Assuming you're not talking about them outright rigging the vote, what tactics and messages do you think they can deploy that will get anywhere close to matching the press's anti-immigrant rhetoric for effect?

Uncertainty in the markets will scare investors, that'll lead to share prices falling and growth slowing. Loss of jobs or at least stagnation for a while.

[karl1987]

Haha, deluded, moi?

All but a handfull of senior Tories want to leave the EU. This is a fact

 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/08/most-tory-party-members-will-vote-to-leave-eu-says-bernard-jenkin

 

 

Instead of posting stuff from last year how about stuff posted only a few hours ago?

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35616946

 

Which shows the majority of mps and more importantly the cabinet ministers who call the shots wanting to stay in.

[Neil G]

Uncertainty in the markets will scare investors, that'll lead to share prices falling and growth slowing. Loss of jobs or at least stagnation for a while.

Doesn't really have the same gut level emotional resonance as "take control of our borders and stop the Romanians stealing our jobs and ISIS blowing up our buses", does it?

 

For every scare story Remain can come up with, Leave will have one that trumps it. Plus there are enough pro-Brexit or at least neutral business voices for the papers to have regular front page stories about how leaving won't harm the British economy.

[Hooch]

Cameron wanting us to stay in is kind of concerning.

[sir roger]

Very interesting how the Tory cabinet split is being (under) reported in this case by the likes of Kuntssenberg, as opposed to the hysterics over Corbyn's shadow cabinet disagreements.

 

I feel that despite it's annoyances & frustrations, the EU positives far outweigh its negatives, and while I am happy to accept that there are lots of people who disagree with me after careful consideration of the pros & cons, I can't help think that a lot of 'outers' are basically xenophobic people who find it easiest to blame immigrants for every perceived problem.

[Sputnik1]

Very interesting how the Tory cabinet split is being (under) reported in this case by the likes of Kuntssenberg, as opposed to the hysterics over Corbyn's shadow cabinet disagreements.

 

I feel that despite it's annoyances & frustrations, the EU positives far outweigh its negatives, and while I am happy to accept that there are lots of people who disagree with me after careful consideration of the pros & cons, I can't help think that a lot of 'outers' are basically xenophobic people who find it easiest to blame immigrants for every perceived problem.

 

 

So that's your 'pro' argument is it, calling the anti side xenophobic immigrant haters? You don't work for the tories do you?

[Rico1304]

Doesn't really have the same gut level emotional resonance as "take control of our borders and stop the Romanians stealing our jobs and ISIS blowing up our buses", does it?

For every scare story Remain can come up with, Leave will have one that trumps it. Plus there are enough pro-Brexit or at least neutral business voices for the papers to have regular front page stories about how leaving won't harm the British economy.

That's why I'm after facts. Uncertainty ALWAYS impacts the markets, so you've got months (years) of uncertainty whilst the exit is sorted and then a while until the dust settles...and then it might be shit or ace. But I'm not seeing anything saying it'll be ace based on facts.

[Neil G]

That's why I'm after facts. Uncertainty ALWAYS impacts the markets, so you've got months (years) of uncertainty whilst the exit is sorted and then a while until the dust settles...and then it might be shit or ace. But I'm not seeing anything saying it'll be ace based on facts.

I think you're missing my point here. I'm not talking about what the facts might show, I'm talking about narratives that will sway large numbers of voters one way or the other and decide the result. Narratives trump facts in elections every time. People who make the effort to cut through rhetoric and propaganda and establish facts for themselves are a minority among the electorate, and not just in this country.

 

No warning the Remain side can sound about the economic risks of leaving can compete with Leave's promise of regaining full control of our borders and clamping down on immigration, imo. It doesn't matter that the facts don't bear this out, that we'll inevitably still have to accept a large degree of EU migration as part of a post-exit trade agreement. Most people won't be aware of this because it hasn't been given much of an airing in the media, whereas the 'Leave and take control of our borders' message has been repeated incessantly for years, to the point that large sections of the electorate have internalised it.

[Rico1304]

Sorry.

 

You're right, there's lots of emotional arguments to be played out. Hopefully good sense will prevail but I think it'll be close.

[thechap]

we'll inevitably still have to accept a large degree of EU migration as part of a post-exit trade agreement. 

 

Says who??  It will one presumes be the Tory's who are in the negotiating seat for such negotiations.  If they don't want to guarantee losing the next election then they won't agree to take more people unless we need those people.  

 

 

As for Dave's 'negotiations', well, whatever side you are going to argue for - Leave or Remain - make your arguments in a reasonable and honest manner.  However, anyone - ANYONE - who argues that what Cameron came back with fundamentally changes our relationship with the EU, as he promised he would do, is simply fucking lying to us and treating the people for fools.  It's utter bollocks.

 

For me the EU is a failed institution that had noble origins but ultimately took too much control over too many aspects of the lives of hundreds of millions of people.  It got greedy.

[Neil G]

Says who??  It will one presumes be the Tory's who are in the negotiating seat for such negotiations.  If they don't want to guarantee losing the next election then they won't agree to take more people unless we need those people.  

 

 

As for Dave's 'negotiations', well, whatever side you are going to argue for - Leave or Remain - make your arguments in a reasonable and honest manner.  However, anyone - ANYONE - who argues that what Cameron came back with fundamentally changes our relationship with the EU, as he promised he would do, is simply fucking lying to us and treating the people for fools.  It's utter bollocks.

 

For me the EU is a failed institution that had noble origins but ultimately took too much control over too many aspects of the lives of hundreds of millions of people.  It got greedy.

You've answered your own question. You say you think the government could drive a hard bargain on immigration once we're out, then in the next paragraph you (correctly) point out just how little the other EU governments were prepared to concede even when they were trying to persuade us to stay in. You mention UK electoral politics as a concern - what do you think was motivating the Polish and French governments when they were resisting Cameron's demands?

 

Our hand will be weaker once we're out, on just about every issue on the table. The EU will play hardball to dissuade other countries from leaving.

[thechap]

They couldn't have conceded a single substantial thing without treaty change which was never going to happen.  This 'negotiation' has been a false promise all along.  

 

I don't see how you think I've answered my own "Says who??" question.

 

If we vote to leave then negotiation will REALLY begin because our leaving will fundamentally have forced change on the EU.  I don't for one second think that the manufacturers of EU land will want to see any kind of trade disagreements or trade war with the UK because we buy far more from them than they buy from us.  It would be a political and economic catastrophe for France or Germany to try and punish the UK.  They absolutely need our trade and that gives us a very strong hand indeed.

 

One of the driving forces of the Leave campaign is that we can't effectively control who comes here from the EU.  We would have an opportunity to change this by our exit.  What leverage would the EU have over us to force us to accept more migrants? which was your point I was questioning.

[mattyq]

I think you're missing my point here. I'm not talking about what the facts might show, I'm talking about narratives that will sway large numbers of voters one way or the other and decide the result. Narratives trump facts in elections every time. People who make the effort to cut through rhetoric and propaganda and establish facts for themselves are a minority among the electorate, and not just in this country.

 

No warning the Remain side can sound about the economic risks of leaving can compete with Leave's promise of regaining full control of our borders and clamping down on immigration, imo. It doesn't matter that the facts don't bear this out, that we'll inevitably still have to accept a large degree of EU migration as part of a post-exit trade agreement. Most people won't be aware of this because it hasn't been given much of an airing in the media, whereas the 'Leave and take control of our borders' message has been repeated incessantly for years, to the point that large sections of the electorate have internalised it.

I'd disagree with that, mate. I reckon it's the other way round.

Look at the Scotland referendum...they Indy lot had a very compelling narrative led by 2 excellent campaigners and politicians yet they lost out as the narrative just didn't compete with the inconvenient facts of currency, economics and the EU.

Referendums almost always reinforce the status quo as change is messy and potentially dangerous and people need compelling facts, not just a good narrative, for it to happen

[mattyq]

They couldn't have conceded a single substantial thing without treaty change which was never going to happen.  This 'negotiation' has been a false promise all along.  

 

I don't see how you think I've answered my own "Says who??" question.

 

If we vote to leave then negotiation will REALLY begin because our leaving will fundamentally have forced change on the EU.  I don't for one second think that the manufacturers of EU land will want to see any kind of trade disagreements or trade war with the UK because we buy far more from them than they buy from us.  It would be a political and economic catastrophe for France or Germany to try and punish the UK.  They absolutely need our trade and that gives us a very strong hand indeed.

 

One of the driving forces of the Leave campaign is that we can't effectively control who comes here from the EU.  We would have an opportunity to change this by our exit.  What leverage would the EU have over us to force us to accept more migrants? which was your point I was questioning.

I'd agree...the Negotiation was bullshit all along. A bit of stage managed theatre to appease some in his party

Interesting you mention one of the drivers of this whole thing is immigration. Haven't we had control of non EU migrants the whole time? Have those numbers gone up or down?

Immigration is nothing to do with us being in the EU and you'd be foolish to think it was. It's basic Class and Economics..the rich benefit hugely from immigrattion and that's not going to change whether we're in the EU or out