EU Brexit - How will you vote given the latest "news"

[andyb]

Can you précis that for me

He wants out.

 

[Diddy]

You seem to pick and label each OUT campaigner yet forget the history of the IN campaigners, what the Murdoch hacking scandal has to do with what is best for our countries interests is beyond me, you can slate each candidate individually on any side but its what they bring to the table for this debate that matters, you come across as a person that rather than bring something positive to the table of why we should stay IN other than a very biased factually misleading video would rather play a character assasination game which can be done on any campaigner IN or OUT.

So 3.3million jobs are linked to the export of goods and services, and the point is?.... we sell alot more than we buy, we have the better hand to do a better deal and even if we were offered the worse deal currently on the table then it is nothing near the daily contribution to the EU we have to make for this alledged free trade.. now I'm just speaking on a worse case there as an example of our position on this, it is highly likely that we would get a very good trade deal + then we can also trade with the rest of the world unrestricted, India has said today that if we leave it is interested in trading with us into the multi-billions so that is just one country and then we have the rest of the world - how can getting these deals that with other nations be a risk to the 3,3million jobs, the way I see it we are going to have to take on a bigger workforce to cope. Even with no deals ever made, why is there any real serious risk to the 3.3million jobs, they are not suddenly going to find themselves out of a job because we are not an EU member, the In campaign just doing what it does best, Scaremongering.

It says the European Union is the biggest individual Economy in the world, yes it is and while every other economy has grown in the world guess which one hasn't for over a decade and has a added effect of hampering our own economical growth as we are shackled to it, now when I say every other economy has grown in the world I mean everyone even those small countries, the EU cannot even set up a full trade deal with America after 40yrs yet your little independent countries manage to do so within a year. This is another big point overlooked by the IN campaign when making their case, the fact its the only stagnant Economy in the world and leading predictions estimate it will stay stagnant or even shrink in its current form, this will have a knock on effect to us if we remain, personally I believe that the 5th biggest economy in the world (UK) will have no problem getting trade deals and seeing a rapid growth if we leave, common sense without the scremongering and the ifs, may, coulds denote that been released of all trade restrictions and been able to trade with the rest of the world freely can only be good and promote growth.

The rest of the world is not in the EU but successfully trades with the EU, if economies well down the positional list can enjoy a good trade deal for a very insignificant tariff then why would we be cutting our throats by leaving.


On the discussion of safer IN europe, this is another false claim and misleading statement, most of the UK's intelligence is done through a system external to the EU and its a very good one, an EU wide intelligence service does not exist and is very unlikely to in the near future but there is Europol who still rely on external bodies for vital information and even if we leave there is little chance this intelligence sharing would stop as the UK has amongst one of the best intelligence data systems in the world it is kinda a key hub to europe as appose to the other way around so as goes data sharing then I cannot see any change as its in majority heexternal to the EU.
Safer borders if we are IN ?.. another misguided claim, even though we are not part of the Schengen agreement we as a country don't do any real passport checks on EU citizens so we don't really know who is coming in and because our human rights comes via Brussels we are not allowed to even kick out known rapist, pedo's killers etc until they commit an act over here.. reading the paper the other day of a bloke that committed a rape in his own country, after moving here his history was discovered and he was sent back to his own EU country, he appealed and the EU judge claimed his offence wasn't serious enough for the UK to deport him and give him the right to a family life here ....HMMM and people say we are safer!... even when the intelligence works we have some ridiculous ruling to put a criminals rights ahead of our rights to protect our own. The backlog of criminals walking into the UK legally and illegally waiting for process in order to see them sent back is in the 100,000's now yes agree a proportion are nothing to do with the EU free movement policy but we don't have the time or man-power to get through the backlog and been an EU member makes it easier for illegals to walk in and also doubles the burden with EU crim's walking across the border.

I posted vid of a balanced discussion up but this vid although not entirely factually incorrect is propaganda at best with scaremongering thrown in, its what it doesn't explain that makes it misleading and deceiving, all these big wigs you see making announcements about how bad things will be have A- vested interest in the UK staying as they are looking at there own personal situation or the company they run and B- making claims that have no credible evidence to backup, listen out for the MAY, COULD and MIGHT words used by the IN campaign almost to excess.

The reference to the News International aka Murdoch scandal is to throw light on the fact that these guy's were colluders. These were people on Murdoch's payroll who went out of their way to silence the illegal activity going on their - Bribing the Met, Bribing Scotland yard top man, Remember this is the guy who boasts that he has personally picked the prime minister of the UK from Thatcher onwards. His media empire have a hell of a lot to do with this debate IMHO - "They" have been against the EU since Murdoch took over the paper...and with all his newspapers and sky news ect ect he has a hell of a lot of influence in how people will vote - Im sorry but I don't trust them at all. These guy's are telling people how to think and the amount of bull that they have printed as fact over the EU has been breathtaking...and im going back from 25 years ago lol...that is when the "out" campaign started in earnest.
You say I/We are negative and to a certain extent I would agree - I am quite happy to talk about the positives but you have to fight the out campaigns constant false claims about we wil get this, we will demand that, we can be great again ect ect....It's all very well saying these things but neither you nor I can be sure which way it will go if we stay or leave....Nobody can claim to tell the future....Think back to the Scottish Indi ref - Apparently the SNP ect didn't convince the electorate of their "vision"...Well that's because it is easy to debunk something that hasn't happened...you can't prove "It will be ok"...because the reality is you just don't know.
So negativity comes from having to be boring and list stats ect....3.3 million jobs is a stat. How can you say they are not going to be going anywhere ?
Say Germany upon us leaving is desperate to get going with a trade deal with us...But they can't can they ? They trade as part of the EU and there are 27 other countries who need convincing that trading with the UK on the UK's new terms is good for THEM...There will be some countries out there who may think sod that what's in it for me...my job is to take something back to show MY people.
Lets say we get a trade deal done how long do we think that will take ? Look at the pound now, Do we really want another 2,3,4,10 years of this ? This stuff is going to hit pensions,savings,interest rates the lot....it can't NOT have an effect. So lets say it takes 5 years to get a deal - will it be "free" will it include free movement of people ? Say when the sums are done we end up contributing half of what we do (Because everybody in some way contributes to the EU if they deal with the...no completely free rides exist as far as I can see) - How long will it take us to recoup what we loose in the mean time (Im talking the fact that the pound has fallen and continues to look unsteady)....
I also look at those pushing for out and most of them strike me as the types that would love to get stuck right into all the workers rights that we have come to enjoy due to being part of the EU.....I wouldn't put it past the likes of Gove, Boris ect probably drooling at the thought of scrapping all these pesky workers perks. Can't say the remain camp is full of distinguished chaps....but those at the top and most likely to be in positions of power post brexit scare the bejesus out of me.

 

[Darkwood]

The reference to the News International aka Murdoch scandal is to throw light on the fact that these guy's were colluders. These were people on Murdoch's payroll who went out of their way to silence the illegal activity going on their - Bribing the Met, Bribing Scotland yard top man, Remember this is the guy who boasts that he has personally picked the prime minister of the UK from Thatcher onwards. His media empire have a hell of a lot to do with this debate IMHO - "They" have been against the EU since Murdoch took over the paper...and with all his newspapers and sky news ect ect he has a hell of a lot of influence in how people will vote - Im sorry but I don't trust them at all. These guy's are telling people how to think and the amount of bull that they have printed as fact over the EU has been breathtaking...and im going back from 25 years ago lol...that is when the "out" campaign started in earnest.
You say I/We are negative and to a certain extent I would agree - I am quite happy to talk about the positives but you have to fight the out campaigns constant false claims about we wil get this, we will demand that, we can be great again ect ect....It's all very well saying these things but neither you nor I can be sure which way it will go if we stay or leave....Nobody can claim to tell the future....Think back to the Scottish Indi ref - Apparently the SNP ect didn't convince the electorate of their "vision"...Well that's because it is easy to debunk something that hasn't happened...you can't prove "It will be ok"...because the reality is you just don't know.
So negativity comes from having to be boring and list stats ect....3.3 million jobs is a stat. How can you say they are not going to be going anywhere ?
Say Germany upon us leaving is desperate to get going with a trade deal with us...But they can't can they ? They trade as part of the EU and there are 27 other countries who need convincing that trading with the UK on the UK's new terms is good for THEM...There will be some countries out there who may think sod that what's in it for me...my job is to take something back to show MY people.
Lets say we get a trade deal done how long do we think that will take ? Look at the pound now, Do we really want another 2,3,4,10 years of this ? This stuff is going to hit pensions,savings,interest rates the lot....it can't NOT have an effect. So lets say it takes 5 years to get a deal - will it be "free" will it include free movement of people ? Say when the sums are done we end up contributing half of what we do (Because everybody in some way contributes to the EU if they deal with the...no completely free rides exist as far as I can see) - How long will it take us to recoup what we loose in the mean time (Im talking the fact that the pound has fallen and continues to look unsteady)....
I also look at those pushing for out and most of them strike me as the types that would love to get stuck right into all the workers rights that we have come to enjoy due to being part of the EU.....I wouldn't put it past the likes of Gove, Boris ect probably drooling at the thought of scrapping all these pesky workers perks. Can't say the remain camp is full of distinguished chaps....but those at the top and most likely to be in positions of power post brexit scare the bejesus out of me.

There seems to be this consensus that upon leaving the EU all that laws, rights and trade will just cease to exist until a deal is done, in leaving the EU the only laws that will change are those that are doing us harm, no government who wishes to remain in power is going to suddenly remove workers rights but we can pick and choose those laws that have worked and drop the ones that don't work in our interest.
Trading will carry on as normal if we vote to leave, it will still carry on as we do now with free trade deal as we have a few years to make the change so no sudden shock and masses of panicing headless chickens running around.. when you say I cannot possibly know what will happen then yes to some degree I agree but I am been careful with my arguments that anything I say can be looked up and confirmed and when I express we will most likley be better off then I base it on factual info like mentioned India trade deal which alone is worth a lot.

What drives trade in goods is not governments or banks but the customer and there desires for certain goods, this is how trade and marketing has always worked, the only thing governments can do is open or restrict the markets which brings me to a very valid point in that Brussels tells us who we can trade with and how much, this is to ensure we do most of it with the EU for there own vested interests this props the EU up and limits competition which would see prices drop. Where a trade deal exists and a tariff is imposed it is usually insignificant on the whole.
If we set up a trade deal with a new country who we don't trade with then it comes down to a deal making game and can take a while, when you already have a large 2 way trade with a country then neither is going to risk economic collapse or uncertainty by silly large tarrifs etc We sell alot more than we buy to the EU so its in the EU's vested interest to not damage their own economy by dragging it out or imposing unrealistic tarrifs.... of course they won't tell you this as they don't want to give us any kind of feeling of security, dont forget we are one of the biggest contributers to the EU and it will be a big blow to them to loose that money.

Im not doing what the IN campaign does and somehow predicts the outcome which tend to rain everything from dooms day to WW3 according to them, I use the standard marketing model of supply and demand and the fact all trade restrictions will be lifted, both are circumstances that even using just a bit of common sense will show trade growth, better competition which leads to more jobs and cheaper goods.

The In campaign know the economy will still grow and they led a very misleading headline about families been thousands worse off a year by 2030, now what they failed to tell you was they were using 2 figures that showed the growth if we stayed and if we left, now the leaving figure predicted a lower growth so they then figure from the higher one and said that what families will lose, it was made to appear that it would be taken out of their existing income somehow which was not the case, it was just a growth difference. Crucially the prediction was only using trade figures as we are now and didn't include any new trade with the rest of the world, I'll let you work out for yourself that had it included the opening of new trade to the rest of the world then even with a worse case scenario it would have shown a greater growth if we left.
I'll remind you that the EU is the only large economy that has stayed stagnant for over a decade and the majority of Economists including their own predict this to be the case for some time to come which again seems to slip the minds of the 'Remain' side when saying its better to trade from the inside as oppose the outside, common sense would favour the out on all these points and no I'm not plucking all this from thin air as you can look up any of the points I made, also I'm not been selective with my wording whilst hiding the reality here which tends to be a trait of the IN campaign a lately. I'm not sure of your age here but the older generation although not all tend to want to leave where as the younger favour staying, the reason falls down to the older generation has watched and seen both the positives and negatives which have come with been an EU member in a sense they have a more balanced overview where as the younger generation doesn't know any real difference as they have little to reflect back on been young, that and the fact the higher Education system, colleges etc tend to be pro-EU due to lets say financial incentives from the EU.

 

[silverfox1]

This is the trailer for a film/documentary called The Brussels Business made in 2012, I will post a link underneath to the full film on you tube.It is a look into the powerful lobbyists in Brussels all 15000 of them also the ERT who they are and how they came to be, the film is long but worth it to see how the machine works. please watch the trailer at least, I am sure it will make you want to find out more.

[video=youtube;JEaK2OteEws]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEaK2OteEws[/video]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMuUEd6w54E

 

[Adam W]

I think the idea is to listen to the reasons for and against, decide for yourself which sound most convincing, and vote that way.

It is clear that the statistics the big company bosses, or "business leaders" are bandying around hold no substance - one tells us we'll all be £32 a month worse off if we stay in, the next one tells us we'll all be £32 a month better off, with little explanation as to why. They all seem to have an opinion and are using the weight of their company to tell everyone else (particularly their employees) how to vote, which I think is wrong.

I find it quite scary that there are people out there who will vote on the basis of the personalities backing the campaign - vote with/against BoJo because he's a roly-poly buffoon, or vote how Jezza Corbyn tells you to because he speaks with conviction and he has a beard, or vote against him because he dresses like Mr Bean.

 

[Octopus]

I think the idea is to listen to the reasons for and against, decide for yourself which sound most convincing, and vote that way.

It is clear that the statistics the big company bosses, or "business leaders" are bandying around hold no substance - one tells us we'll all be £32 a month worse off if we stay in, the next one tells us we'll all be £32 a month better off, with little explanation as to why. They all seem to have an opinion and are using the weight of their company to tell everyone else (particularly their employees) how to vote, which I think is wrong.

I find it quite scary that there are people out there who will vote on the basis of the personalities backing the campaign - vote with/against BoJo because he's a roly-poly buffoon, or vote how Jezza Corbyn tells you to because he speaks with conviction and he has a beard, or vote against him because he dresses like Mr Bean.

Which is precisely the OPPOSITE of what he's been saying for the last 30 odd years.......

 

[Darkwood]

@ Adam W - Yep - Corbyn spent his whole career as a anti-EU man and he had passion on his views, now he's Labours frontman he has been put in a very arkward position of saying we should stay in, it was squirmish to watch him when he made that speech and the reason he doesn't make many of them on the issue, clearly a man telling one of the biggest bare faced lies regarding his personal opinion on the EU.

 

[sparksburnout]

@ Adam W - Yep - Corbyn spent his whole career as a anti-EU man and he had passion on his views, now he's Labours frontman he has been put in a very arkward position of saying we should stay in, it was squirmish to watch him when he made that speech and the reason he doesn't make many of them on the issue, clearly a man telling one of the biggest bare faced lies regarding his personal opinion on the EU.

exactly, and its a shame he does not have the courage of his convictions, I am really disappointed in him over this. If he was to come out against remaining and others in the labour party followed suit, I think it would sway things in favour of an exit vote quite a bit.

 

[andyb]

All the people you have cited have their own agendas for staying "IN". They are all either in power because of the EU, have their ridiculously inflated pay-packets by virtue of the EU, or their pensions all down to the EU. Over 80% of the top company bosses you have mentioned have contracts with the government (represented incorrectly by D. Cameron), and turkeys do not vote for Xmas. All the Uni's get most of their income from overseas students, and yes the rest of them are bankers, what more reason to ignore them? So these people should be ignored. Listen to the unbiased, now retired and with no personal involvement views of people like Lord Lawson.

All the people I have cited have their own agendas for staying in, that's blatantly obvious. All the people pushing for out have their own agendas also. That doesn't devalue their argument whether in or out.

'The leader of every mainstream party except Ukip, plus the head of the bank of England, the IFS, the OECD, the IMF, every head of state in Nato, 80% of FTSE companies'


Which of these are 'in power because of the EU, have their ridiculously inflated pay-packets by virtue of the EU, or their pensions all down to the EU'?

 

[andyb]

@ Adam W - Yep - Corbyn spent his whole career as a anti-EU man and he had passion on his views, now he's Labours frontman he has been put in a very arkward position of saying we should stay in, it was squirmish to watch him when he made that speech and the reason he doesn't make many of them on the issue, clearly a man telling one of the biggest bare faced lies regarding his personal opinion on the EU.

Corbyn is in an awkward position, he has traditionally been against UKs membership of the EU. He's having to make the case for UKs membership on the grounds of workers rights while maintaining his reservations on the undemocratic nature of the EU.
He still holds the view that the EU is undemocratic and wants to change it.

If you really want to see a hypocrite in action then look no further than Boris Johnson.
He has gone from in to out, not because of party loyalty or idealogical leaning, but purely for self serving reasons.
This is why he delayed his position for so long, he wanted to see which position was more likely to advance his own political career, he's accused of actually writing 2 speeches, one giving his reasons for staying in and the other, which he used, for leaving. He has been challenged on this and refuses to deny it.

 

[Spoon]

he's accused of actually writing 2 speeches, one giving his reasons for staying in and the other, which he used, for leaving. He has been challenged on this and refuses to deny it.

If he did deny it would you believe him?
Politicians.... It's like the boy who cried wolf....

 

[sparksburnout]

All the people I have cited have their own agendas for staying in, that's blatantly obvious. All the people pushing for out have their own agendas also. That doesn't devalue their argument whether in or out.

'The leader of every mainstream party except Ukip, plus the head of the bank of England, the IFS, the OECD, the IMF, every head of state in Nato, 80% of FTSE companies'

Which of these are 'in power because of the EU, have their ridiculously inflated pay-packets by virtue of the EU, or their pensions all down to the EU'?

All of them are, and if you can't see it you must be blind. 80% of the top FTSE companies have government contracts to preserve, how the hell do you think they are going to vote? Even Jeremy Corbyn, the supposed leader of the labour party is living a lie. He has been anti-EU all his life and now suddenly he is all for it, what a load of carp. Both the IFS and the OECD have direct benefits to staying in, and their opinions are biased and should be disregarded. You need to look at the opinions of previously respected people who have no agenda and only want the best for the COUNTRY, not themselves! And this is NOT the governor of the bank of England, who isn't even British.

 

[Adam W]

Corbyn is in an awkward position, he has traditionally been against UKs membership of the EU. He's having to make the case for UKs membership on the grounds of workers rights while maintaining his reservations on the undemocratic nature of the EU.
He still holds the view that the EU is undemocratic and wants to change it.

If you really want to see a hypocrite in action then look no further than Boris Johnson.
He has gone from in to out, not because of party loyalty or idealogical leaning, but purely for self serving reasons.
This is why he delayed his position for so long, he wanted to see which position was more likely to advance his own political career, he's accused of actually writing 2 speeches, one giving his reasons for staying in and the other, which he used, for leaving. He has been challenged on this and refuses to deny it.

I get the impression Corbyn has communist leanings, and as such he'd probably want out of the EU, although I don't believe leaving the EU would suddenly stop all trade with Europe.

As I said before I think everyone should be free to make their own decision on this and not pressured into what to vote for by any person or political party - the Tories seem to be split down the middle on the issue, which is fine by me.
Unfortunately for Corbyn the likes of Tony Blair (who's done very well out of the EU since leaving office, financially, on a personal level) introduced this idea of shipping in immigrant voters who traditionally vote for left wing parties, and the notion that anyone who is against immigration is a "racist" and/or a "bigot".

 

[andyb]

All of them are, and if you can't see it you must be blind. 80% of the top FTSE companies have government contracts to preserve, how the hell do you think they are going to vote? Even Jeremy Corbyn, the supposed leader of the labour party is living a lie. He has been anti-EU all his life and now suddenly he is all for it, what a load of carp. Both the IFS and the OECD have direct benefits to staying in, and their opinions are biased and should be disregarded. You need to look at the opinions of previously respected people who have no agenda and only want the best for the COUNTRY, not themselves! And this is NOT the governor of the bank of England, who isn't even British.

I see where you're coming from now.
Any person or institution in favour of remaining are

biased and should be disregarded

And anybody wanting Brexit

have no agenda and only want the best for the COUNTRY

Who do you have in mind when you say this.

You need to look at the opinions of previously respected people

 

[andyb]

As I said before I think everyone should be free to make their own decision on this

We are free to make our own decisions Adam, nobody's forcing you to vote one way or another.

Unfortunately for Corbyn the likes of Tony Blair (who's done very well out of the EU since leaving office, financially, on a personal level) introduced this idea of shipping in immigrant voters who traditionally vote for left wing parties,

How has Blair done well out of the EU since leaving office? I'm not saying he hasn't, just that I'm not aware of it.

and the notion that anyone who is against immigration is a "racist" and/or a "bigot".

Aren't they? What other reason could there be?

 

[Adam W]

We are free to make our own decisions Adam, nobody's forcing you to vote one way or another.

I never used the word "forcing", Andy, but everyone in favour of staying in the EU has an unsubstantiated prediction of doom and gloom if we leave - war, recession, an end to foreign holidays, trade embargoes... We've got Obama coming over and telling us we'll be at the back of the queue when it comes to trade deals, companies such as Siemens, Rolls Royce and Airbus insinuating to its staff their jobs will be at risk if we leave.

How has Blair done well out of the EU since leaving office? I'm not saying he hasn't, just that I'm not aware of it.

Hours after leaving office he was given a role as peace envoy to the middle east, representing the EU; off the back of that he's secured numerous lucrative foreign business deals for himself.

Aren't they? What other reason could there be?

Seriously? You can't think of any reasons why it might be a bad idea to try to squeeze an additional population the size of Liverpool into an already crowded country every year, other than one person might have a problem with another person's skin tone? How about strain on the NHS, schools, transport, power stations, a lack of space, rising accommodation costs, towns segregated into individual enclaves? You can bully British people into "integrating" by calling them names, but it's a lot harder to make immigrants integrate.

 

[andyb]

I never used the word "forcing", Andy, but everyone in favour of staying in the EU has an unsubstantiated prediction of doom and gloom if we leave - war, recession, an end to foreign holidays, trade embargoes... We've got Obama coming over and telling us we'll be at the back of the queue when it comes to trade deals, companies such as Siemens, Rolls Royce and Airbus insinuating to its staff their jobs will be at risk if we leave.

You did say pressured though Adam, and intimated that you weren't free to make your own decision.
Both side are stupidly predicting doom and gloom but war has only been mentioned by the outers, along with Hitler, Napoleon and others. Recession is a very real possibility but we could live with that, we've had plenty before. Nobody to my mind has mentioned an end to foreign holidays or trade embargoes. All Obama did was tell the truth, ie the US is already negotiating a trade deal with the EU and the UK would have to come after that. Do you really think that America would put us first? Siemens, Rolls Royce, Airbus and any company are entitled to voice their opinion on how a change to market conditions would affect them. I'm sure that if they thought they would do better with the UK outside the EU they would say so. Would you have the same problem with that?

Hours after leaving office he was given a role as peace envoy to the middle east, representing the EU; off the back of that he's secured numerous lucrative foreign business deals for himself.

Tony Blair's role as a peace envoy was a UN position.
See what you've done? you've got me defending someone I loath.:veryangry2:

Seriously? You can't think of any reasons why it might be a bad idea to try to squeeze an additional population the size of Liverpool into an already crowded country every year, other than one person might have a problem with another person's skin tone? How about strain on the NHS, schools, transport, power stations, a lack of space, rising accommodation costs, towns segregated into individual enclaves? You can bully British people into "integrating" by calling them names, but it's a lot harder to make immigrants integrate.

I can think of several reasons to have a debate on immigration. Your post just said ''the notion that anyone who is against immigration is a "racist" and/or a "bigot".''

 

[Octopus]

The biggest reason the big companies want the UK to stay in is so that they can still "divert" profits to a lower country that charges a lower tax band - such as Luxembourg.

 

[andyb]

The biggest reason the big companies want the UK to stay in is so that they can still "divert" profits to a lower country that charges a lower tax band - such as Luxembourg.

I don't think it's an EU thing Murdoch. Companies all round the world do that. Didn't Cameron block an EU initiative a couple of years ago to do with the EU trying to stop tax loopholes?
I'd go as far as to say it's probably the opposite, the mainly millionaire Tories wanting out want less regulation so they can hoard their money and pay no tax.

 

[Adam W]

You did say pressured though Adam, and intimated that you weren't free to make your own decision.

There's a difference between "pressuring" someone to do something - making them feel obliged to do it, and "forcing" them to do something, where they have no option.
It wasn't "the company" sending letters to employees warning them to vote 'in', it was a person working on behalf of that company. Maybe the CEO or managing director. I expect they could find reasons for either vote if it suited them, but in either case I don't feel it's appropriate to be telling employees how to use their vote as if the company owns them.

Both side are stupidly predicting doom and gloom but war has only been mentioned by the outers, along with Hitler, Napoleon and others.

Actually it was David Cameron who mentioned that.

Tony Blair's role as a peace envoy was a UN position.

It wasn't just the UN, it was several organisations, but it's doubtful that Tony Blair would have been given the position if he hadn't been so pro-Europe.

I can think of several reasons to have a debate on immigration. Your post just said ''the notion that anyone who is against immigration is a "racist" and/or a "bigot".''

No it didn't 'just' say that, it said

"Unfortunately for Corbyn the likes of Tony Blair (who's done very well out of the EU since leaving office, financially, on a personal level) introduced this idea of shipping in immigrant voters who traditionally vote for left wing parties, and the notion that anyone who is against immigration is a "racist" and/or a "bigot".

Corbyn seems to be being told which side to support based on Labour's previous ways of securing votes, ie "vote Labour otherwise you're a bigot". Remember Gillian Duffy? She challenged Gordon Brown on issues which were of concern to her, and he simply dismissed her as "bigoted".

 

[Adam W]

the mainly millionaire Tories wanting out want less regulation so they can hoard their money and pay no tax.

Actually many "Tories", David Cameron included, want to stay in the EU. This isn't simply about the "hardworking" "nice" left wanting to stay in and the "greedy" "nasty" right wanting out - workshy layabouts are more likely to vote Labour because they are the party of supporting people who can't be bothered to work, while many hardworking, working class families support conservative ideals. There are probably a lot of Labour supporters who want more of a communist Britain, but unfortunately for them Labour made being pro-Europe one of their core policies.

 

[andyb]

There's a difference between "pressuring" someone to do something - making them feel obliged to do it, and "forcing" them to do something, where they have no option.

You are of course right,

It wasn't "the company" sending letters to employees warning them to vote 'in', it was a person working on behalf of that company. Maybe the CEO or managing director. I expect they could find reasons for either vote if it suited them, but in either case I don't feel it's appropriate to be telling employees how to use their vote as if the company owns them.

Companies can't actually send letters, it would have to be a person. They would still only do what they thought was best for the company.

Actually it was David Cameron who mentioned that.

Cameron made a speech where he spoke (stuipdly in my opinion) about past conflicts in Europe. It was Johnson who the same day stretched that to world war 3.

It wasn't just the UN, it was several organisations, but it's doubtful that Tony Blair would have been given the position if he hadn't been so pro-Europe.

Not sure about that

No it didn't 'just' say that, it said

Corbyn seems to be being told which side to support based on Labour's previous ways of securing votes, ie "vote Labour otherwise you're a bigot". Remember Gillian Duffy? She challenged Gordon Brown on issues which were of concern to her, and he simply dismissed her as "bigoted".

Unless you're referencing a previous post, you definatly did not say that.

 

[andyb]

Actually many "Tories", David Cameron included, want to stay in the EU. This isn't simply about the "hardworking" "nice" left wanting to stay in and the "greedy" "nasty" right wanting out - workshy layabouts are more likely to vote Labour because they are the party of supporting people who can't be bothered to work, while many hardworking, working class families support conservative ideals. There are probably a lot of Labour supporters who want more of a communist Britain, but unfortunately for them Labour made being pro-Europe one of their core policies.

Wow, that's a whole new thread Adam.

 

[Adam W]

Companies can't actually send letters, it would have to be a person. They would still only do what they thought was best for the company.

Would they? Everyone at the top of a company is a company person and they don't go to work for their own financial reward?

Cameron made a speech where he spoke (stuipdly in my opinion) about past conflicts in Europe. It was Johnson who the same day stretched that to world war 3.

Yes, Cameron (pro-EU) warned that Brexit would lead to war and genocide.

Unless you're referencing a previous post, you definatly did not say that.

I definitely did. Post #413 on this thread. I copied and pasted it.

 

[Octopus]

Tony Blair wants to stay in - and he's filth rich!

 

[andyb]

I definitely did. Post #413 on this thread. I copied and pasted it.

I was referring to post 413 in my comment Adam, not your previous post re Brown.

 

[Midwest]

I'm gonna miss this thread on the 24th June.

 

[Octopus]

I'm gonna miss this thread on the 24th June.

and you think it will stop then?

The Scottish referendum was on the 18th September 2014 and Nicola et al remind us constantly that they want another vote.

the SNP are nothing more than a one trick pony!

 

[andyb]

and you think it will stop then?

The Scottish referendum was on the 18th September 2014 and Nicola et al remind us constantly that they want another vote.

the SNP are nothing more than a one trick pony!

I don't think this will end it either Murdoch, unless there's a large majority one way or another.
Farage has already stated that if there is a narrow remain vote he will start pushing for another referendum.

 

[Midwest]

Farage has already stated that if there is a narrow remain vote he will start pushing for another referendum.

I like that kind of thinking; lets keep voting on something until I get the result I want. He must be from the same school of thought as Sturgeon.

 

[Darkwood]

I like that kind of thinking; lets keep voting on something until I get the result I want. He must be from the same school of thought as Sturgeon.

Think about this ill judged comment from farage, only one person could respond it and it would be done as a public attack on farage but I argue that it was deliberately said as a tactical move to ensure if we did get a brexit by a small minority that the goverment wouldn't call a re-vote saying the vote was too close to call it a majority, the desperation for Cameron the EU and the big financial co' to remain part of the EU could see such a stunt pulled, in responding Cameron has now closed one of the options he had to argue the result was too close to be looked on as official majority.

 

[telectrix]

if it's 51-49 for out, that's a majority and cameron and his stay in goons will have to accept it.

 

[Midwest]

Have I got it wrong then? I thought it was just Farage saying if it was small majority for IN, then we should have another referendum?

 

[andyb]

Think about this ill judged comment from farage, only one person could respond it and it would be done as a public attack on farage but I argue that it was deliberately said as a tactical move to ensure if we did get a brexit by a small minority that the goverment wouldn't call a re-vote saying the vote was too close to call it a majority, the desperation for Cameron the EU and the big financial co' to remain part of the EU could see such a stunt pulled, in responding Cameron has now closed one of the options he had to argue the result was too close to be looked on as official majority.

Can't say that I agree DW. With or without Farage's comment, a small majority for out would be met with a call for another referendum fro Cameron.

 

[Darkwood]

Have I got it wrong then? I thought it was just Farage saying if it was small majority for IN, then we should have another referendum?

He did, I'm suggesting it was staged to get Cameron to react and close one of his opportunities if the OUT won by a narrow margin, take a small hit for a bigger agenda

 

[Midwest]

Think Cameron has made it clear, there will be no second referendum?

 

[Darkwood]

Can't say that I agree DW. With or without Farage's comment, a small majority for out would be met with a call for another referendum fro Cameron.

Exactly my point but as Cameron has publically stated as an attack on Farages comment that a small majority win for IN would not see another referendum vote then he can't be seen to do this if the tables were turned to a narrow win for brexit... my whole point was it was a stategic comment to get a response and if so it worked a treat.

 

[andyb]

Exactly my point but as Cameron has publically stated as an attack on Farages comment that a small majority win for IN would not see another referendum vote then he can't be seen to do this if the tables were turned to a narrow win for brexit... my whole point was it was a stategic comment to get a response and if so it worked a treat.

I did get your point DW. My point was that he's a politician, I don't think he'll have a problem with going back on his word.

 

[Midwest]

Exactly my point but as Cameron has publically stated as an attack on Farages comment that a small majority win for IN would not see another referendum vote then he can't be seen to do this if the tables were turned to a narrow win for brexit... my whole point was it was a stategic comment to get a response and if so it worked a treat.

To be fair Cameron has been saying only there will be only one referendum, for some time, as far as I've read?

 

[Darkwood]

To be fair Cameron has been saying only there will be only one referendum, for some time, as far as I've read?

Agree but I think you take that out of the context it was said, when he has said that before he is refering to a referendum down the line for which ever way this vote goes, he has stated if it all goes pete tong then we cannot hold another referendum to reverse the situation, as I recall he was using it as a scare tactic saying if we vote to leave then that is it for good, we cannot have another referendum in several years to rejoin.

 

[Midwest]

I think it says, whatever the Great British Public vote, than that's wots gonna happen. You can't change your mind retrospectively 'cos in a few years time say 'we made the wrong decision' lets change it. If we OUT we ain't getting back IN. If we're IN, we can't keep having this debate about being IN. Whatever the decision, lets just stick to it, I think that's wot people need to entertain, otherwise there's no point in having a referendum, something Sturgeon should get into her head.

 

[Darkwood]

I think its a real shame just for a lesson to sturgeon that they didn't get independence, after the oil prices bottomed out after the vote it would have seen Scotland in a very bad position as she gambled the Scottish economy on the then price of oil with only a little buffer and not a massive collapse in barrel prices that occured, it a question she always avoids directly answering what put to her.

 

[Adam W]

I was referring to post 413 in my comment Adam, not your previous post re Brown.

What? I wrote post #413. What is it you want clarification on Andy, or do you just want to challenge everything I post?

 

[andyb]

What? I wrote post #413. What is it you want clarification on Andy, or do you just want to challenge everything I post?

I think you've misunderstood me Adam, I've not really challenged anything you've said.
I know you wrote post 413, I never attributed the line re ''anyone who is against immigration is a "racist" and/or a "bigot" to you. I know that you were suggesting that Tony Blair introduced the notion. My reply was with that in mind.
Anyway, I'm sorry for giving you the impression that I was just challenging you for the sake of it.

 

[Octopus]

I did get your point DW. My point was that he's a politician, I don't think he'll have a problem with going back on his word.

Hum....... do you believe ANY politician these days? I sure don't

 

[jackhammerJIM]

To start with i believed the horror stories that leaving would destroy our trading ability in Europe and plunge us back into recession .
Having looked into it more there are plenty of countries trading in and with Europe who are not members of the union so i say rubbish to it lets leave .

The EU reminds me of Sepp Blatter and FIFA an absolute corrupt shambles

 

[Darkwood]

The issue with been in the EU is any member has limitation slapped on them as to who and how much they can trade outside the EU - WHY! This is to ringfence and protect the EU's markets and industries at the cost of members trade growth with the rest of the world also the consequence is it also stop external competition with a knock on effect of us paying higher prices for lower quality goods in some industries. If we leave, and the EU knows this, it would give us access to a larger consumer choice and the EU fears the competition would see our preferences for better quality, cheaper goods thus they loose some of our vital trade to there cost.

 

[Octopus]

Did you know that MEP's can't suggest new laws? Its all driven by the unelected commissioners.

Not very democratic, me thinks!

 

[Darkwood]

Did you know that MEP's can't suggest new laws? Its all driven by the unelected commissioners.

Not very democratic, me thinks!

The can suggest but it would be futile unless it was already on the EU's shopping list. :shame:

 

[telectrix]

1 million UK jobs have been taken by EU migrants in the last 5 years. UK economic growth has been held back by EU red tape, inefficiency and corruption. now is the timw to get out once and for all. if the vote is to remain, then we're fooked forever.