Should I stay or should I go now? - The EU Referendum Thread

[Psychosplodge]

Quitting the EU may give the politicians a slight pause, as they're ultimately elected by the public. The EU commission aren't directly elected by any sort of vote I believe?

[Mr Mystery]

Nothing would ever stop the Tories privatising anything - our own grandmothers included.

I just fail to see how we could avoid getting an even worse deal than the TTIP proposal. We may be quite high up the rankings of rich countries, but the ones we'd need to deal with are above us.

And until the Out Campaign can come up with a plausible answer to that, I think it's insanity to leave Europe.

[CoffeeGrunt]

To be honest, the EU-Out argument has so many facets that I doubt politicians would readily admit TTIP was the cause. It also doesn't preclude our own government from signing up to it anyway.

You can say it'd be bad PR all you want, but they simply wouldn't care. Selling the NHS off is bad press, and they've been doing that as hard and sly as they can.

[eldargal]

Stay. The leave campaign is driven purely by emotive wishful thinking and a complete denial of the facts and its a sad testament to the state of public discource that the Stay campaign is doing such a miserable job of highlighting what utter bollocks the Leave argument is.

Leave campaign: 'We won't be hurt in trade, we will sign a trade agreement with America!'
Barack Obama: 'Not going to happen'
Leave campaign: 'Well what does the US President know about US trade relations! Also he should stay out of it, because it doesn't involve him! Even though we have explicitly mentioned trade with his country as a reason to leave!'

[grimmas]

Actually it's the uncertainty that is probably their best argument for Out. We are going to get f**ked over if we stay in. The question of going out is "is it going to be worse if we leave?" To be honest if I've got a chance to do better that's what I'm going to go for.

Oh a Barak Obama ain't going to be in power so what he says has as little weight as any other non British citizen.

[Psychosplodge]

The EU isn't run for our interests is it? Just being able to do whats best for us rather than whats best for 28 different countries surely benefits us.

[Mr Mystery]

But then, unless you're an Old Etonian, the UK isn't exactly run in your interests anyway.

The EU is a co-operative. The Out campaign like to focus on what they perceive to be the downside, but time and again are exposed as only telling part of the story. And when they're inevitably caught out and called out on it, it's back to 'SECURE UR BURDERS!' 'EY OOK UR JURRRRRRBS'.

But the most important thing - The Out Campaign have, at no point, made a single, persuasive, factual argument as to exactly how we're going to get all these necessary and new trade deals in our favour. Look at the TTIP. Look at it. That's what the US wants to foist upon Europe. It requires every member state to agree to it. Every. Single. One. If just one vetos, bye bye TTIP as it is now.

That is bargaining power. That is a position of strength.

On our own? Take it or leave it, smallfry.

The US has expressed before they like us in, because we're their backdoor into Europe. That's negotiating power on it's own. But sod it, lets just abandon that, so the US has to buddy up to a different EU Member state. We'll totally get one over on them in the next agreement, yeah?

[eldargal]

No, because while like every layer of government it ultimately ends up being run to benefit various groups of elites the economic benefits of EU membership are greater than if we quit.

- - - Updated - - -

But then, unless you're an Old Etonian, the UK isn't exactly run in your interests anyway.

The EU is a co-operative. The Out campaign like to focus on what they perceive to be the downside, but time and again are exposed as only telling part of the story. And when they're inevitably caught out and called out on it, it's back to 'SECURE UR BURDERS!' 'EY OOK UR JURRRRRRBS'.

But the most important thing - The Out Campaign have, at no point, made a single, persuasive, factual argument as to exactly how we're going to get all these necessary and new trade deals in our favour. Look at the TTIP. Look at it. That's what the US wants to foist upon Europe. It requires every member state to agree to it. Every. Single. One. If just one vetos, bye bye TTIP as it is now.

That is bargaining power. That is a position of strength.

On our own? Take it or leave it, smallfry.

The US has expressed before they like us in, because we're their backdoor into Europe. That's negotiating power on it's own. But sod it, lets just abandon that, so the US has to buddy up to a different EU Member state. We'll totally get one over on them in the next agreement, yeah?

Exactly. However the EU is run, the fact is it benefits us economically, and leaving would hurt us economically. There are also many other cultural and social benefits. The Leave campaign is based on the premise that we can avoid all the responsibilities and disadvantages of EU membership while maintaining the economic benefits and that is ludicrous. If we leave, it is in Europes interest to punish us for as long as possible as a deterrent for other nations who might think about leaving.

[Psychosplodge]

It's not in the interests of the german car industry to punish us aren't we their largest export market after the US?

[Denzark]

Stay. The leave campaign is driven purely by emotive wishful thinking and a complete denial of the facts and its a sad testament to the state of public discource that the Stay campaign is doing such a miserable job of highlighting what utter bollocks the Leave argument is.

Leave campaign: 'We won't be hurt in trade, we will sign a trade agreement with America!'
Barack Obama: 'Not going to happen'
Leave campaign: 'Well what does the US President know about US trade relations! Also he should stay out of it, because it doesn't involve him! Even though we have explicitly mentioned trade with his country as a reason to leave!'

The leave campaign is not PURELY (which means 100%) wishful thinking. It is also not simply denial of facts. The leave campaign is hampered by much:

Purdah when stay isn't.
Not being a cohesive party and/or sitting government.
UKIP.
People wrongly conflating not wanting unrestricted immigration with racism.

Why can I say 'leave' is not purely wishful emotive thinking:

Because it is 100% fact that policy/legislation that can affect our citizens can be generated externally from our democratic process- by which I mean decided on by people/political parties that will never ever appear on a ballot paper in this country.

Why can I say 'leave' doesn't deny facts?

Because some of the 'facts' are actually scaremongering bollocks.

Such as 'We are safer in Europe'. Wrong - safety in a military sense comes from NATO which no one is saying leave from - not 'Europe' or 'The EU'. Safety in a security/intelligence sense comes from bilateral agreements and our most important grouping in this sense is '5 Eyes' - Aus, Can, NZ, UK, US. I recently referenced a previous head of MI6 in the Politics thread, and can't be arsed to do so again - but it is his SME opinion that the groups 'Stay' talks up as being signs of this great cooperation, are meaningless talking shops.

Trade - I believe we import some £60bn goods from Europe (it may be £60bn more than what we actually export to them, I forget and again can't be arsed to fact check - look in DT website). Are we saying all those firms in Europe are going to want to cut our orders to the tune of £60bn because the EU fannies around with trade agreements? Wrong.

It would be cutting off their nose to spite their face and if that's genuinely how they play do we want to be in bed with them? French refusing to import our beef after it was ruled safe and flying in the face of an EU ruling?




The truth is a little bit Obi-Wan Kenobi when it comes to Europe - it all depends on your 'certain point of view'.