Britain and the European Union

[Jetsun]

I'm not as pro-remain as Karl and Chang and others are pro-leave. Honestly, though I've been 'fighting' on the remain side, it's partly because nobody else was -- in the last 2-3 pages I read before I started posting in here, I didn't see much but anti-EU propaganda. I asked for a "stunningly cogent argument" and got, pretty much, more angry rhetoric.

 

Polemic arguments breed polemic arguments. I have done what I can to counter the silly things Karl and Chang have been saying, but the more it goes on the more evident it becomes that they don't know how to discuss a subject using cited historical fact, honest data, expert opinion, or anything but rhetoric and anger. Or that they're unwilling to. Either way.

 

This is not to say that the leave side doesn't have its merits. To be honest, I'm almost 50/50. I see the flaws in the EU, the craziness of the decision-making system, the lobbies, the potential for great corruption, the loss of power to Brussels. I somewhat understand the fear of this so-called 'European Superstate' -- it's a possibility, and it's not necessarily a good thing.

 

Obviously, I also see it from the point of view from which I've been arguing. And the benefits of having an EU, and of Britain being part of it, seem to outweigh the negatives.

 

Mostly, I'm curious to see what happens next.

 

I'm still on the fence and doing more research, as soon as I hear any highly emotive polemic arguments from either side I just ignore it and move on to more balanced opinions. 

 

I'm personally more concerned about the power of big business and corporations over the country than the EU at the moment. You can argue that the EU facilitates this but in some ways it regulates it also, as our European neighbours are far more educated and politically active against things like the TTIP and the influence of companies like Monsanto compared to people in Britain. Our current government certainly panders to the big corporations and bends over backwards to help them screwing over the regular people, so leaving the EU would probably mean our current government can do that even more by drawing up its own version of TTIP, which would mean that Britain would be awash with cheap hormone pumped beef and environmental regulations go out the window and the NHS gets sold to anti-ethical drugs companies. Although in the long term a future non Conservative government may have more power to take on those institutions and stick up for the regular worker if we were outside of the EU, if we haven't been completely sold out by then.

Edited June 20, 2016 by Jetsun

[zerostao]

relax guys, no worries---

Prime Minister David Cameron, who is campaigning to remain with the EU, said he would continue as prime minister even if the nation votes for Brexit,

[joeblast]

Obviously, I also see it from the point of view from which I've been arguing. And the benefits of having an EU, and of Britain being part of it, seem to outweigh the negatives.

 

Mostly, I'm curious to see what happens next.

I love how some folks write about the ways in which the EU undermines the laws of every country it winds up getting its tentacles into, and then even more amusing are the responses that say well the morphine aint that bad, I dont really see the problem with letting the drip just keep drippin

[Miffymog]

Bad news for the leave camp, current bookie odds are;

 

remain 1.25

leave 4.00

 

This is the worst odds for 'leave' for as long as I've been monitoring them, which is since Christmas. When it comes to putting money on an outcome, people tend to be slightly more considered in their actions than when answering opinion polls, which is why I trust bookie odds a bit more than opinion polls. My own preference is that we leave, but its really not looking like it will go that way.

[Apech]

Just to balance things up we have a voice from Alaska ....

 

 

... is this convincing?  

[Jetsun]

Just to balance things up we have a voice from Alaska ....

 

 

... is this convincing?

I agree with a lot of what he says, except that the Muslim immigration into the UK has very little to do with the EU, the vast majority of immigration from the EU has been white Christian Eastern Europeans, the Muslim immigration largely comes from straight from Pakistan.

 

At the moment the only way for the new Muslim arrivals that Germany has imposed on the EU to get into to get into the UK is to obtain an EU passport which takes a number of years being settled in a different country. Turkish entrance to the EU will never happen.

[Apech]

I agree with a lot of what he says, except that the Muslim immigration into the UK has very little to do with the EU, the vast majority of immigration from the EU has been white Christian Eastern Europeans, the Muslim immigration largely comes from straight from Pakistan.

 

At the moment the only way for the new Muslim arrivals that Germany has imposed on the EU to get into to get into the UK is to obtain an EU passport which takes a number of years being settled in a different country. Turkish entrance to the EU will never happen.

 

 

Good points and certainly nothing to do with Brexit.

 

The part that I agree with is that we should do more to uphold our western 'enlightenment' values.  It seems that we have become almost ashamed of ourselves.  Probably because of our success. 

[Karl]

It's obvious to the man in the street that our immigration policy hasn't made anyone richer except the fat cats at the top. Our public services are over loaded and creaking from lack of finance, we have a severe housing shortage, debt is extremely high in both private sector and public sector, the defecit is increasing once again and the public debt on which we pay interest is ballooning, productivity is lower than it was in 2001 and wages haven't recovered since 2007.

 

Even if we take out the Muslim element of immigration equation we are left with lots of extra people and no obvious advantage from having them.

 

The inflow of immigrants each year equals a city the size of Bristol or Oxford. Half of these immigrants are from the EU and we have no way to reduce that flow. Meanwhile the government is doing nothing to control overall immigration regardless of the EU. We should ask what exactly does that mean ? Why was Cameron unable to stick to his election promise of curbing the numbers ?

 

I think it's fairly simple. Just as in 1985 when the round table of big business decided that they had to put forward a plan to save the EU from economic collapse, so today, there is an East vs West corporate strategy in the wake of the rise of China and the BRICS. To keep Europe competitive the fundamental answer was to reduce labour costs. The way to reduce labour costs is to increase the pool of willing labour. This works for big corporates, but it doesn't facilitate innovation, it creates a serf economy which is less productive, but suits big business and big government. This was the situation in India when all high paying jobs that went to high achieving graduates were Government jobs. The corporations are focused on their own businesses and the state on its tax income, they are treating countries like factories, just as once we had a feudal system of total stagnation which served a few at a cost to the many.

 

As long as we can fit more people into Britain, then more will be permitted to settle here and the indigenous population will have to accept it. Muslims make up a huge potential workforce and represent the kinds of people for whom hard work, low pay and few public services are acceptable. The culture of the country doesn't matter, it's just a factory floor and the more cheap labour the better.

[Karl]

Good points and certainly nothing to do with Brexit.

 

The part that I agree with is that we should do more to uphold our western 'enlightenment' values.  It seems that we have become almost ashamed of ourselves.  Probably because of our success.

 

Precisely. This is one reason why I find it difficult to use immigration as the key reason to leave. However, if we do leave, then the Government has no excuses left for not controlling immigration as they do now.

 

It may already be too late for our western values. This goes back to philosophy. Our attitudes are pragmatic, it's whatever works and sod the consequences. Peter Hitchens believes that Sharia law will eventually dominate, the numbers and family structure make this inevitable. We will be bred out of existence.

[Jetsun]

It's been confirmed that we need to build 240 new houses a day for the ongoing future to keep up with the current levels of immigration... which isn't going to happen . Basically they want to cram everyone in like battery hens so a few people at the top can make a few more million while paying rock bottom wages.

[Karl]

I agree with a lot of what he says, except that the Muslim immigration into the UK has very little to do with the EU, the vast majority of immigration from the EU has been white Christian Eastern Europeans, the Muslim immigration largely comes from straight from Pakistan.

At the moment the only way for the new Muslim arrivals that Germany has imposed on the EU to get into to get into the UK is to obtain an EU passport which takes a number of years being settled in a different country. Turkish entrance to the EU will never happen.

Turkish entrance is already happening. The EU is being blackmailed and those that countenance blackmail eventually succumb to all the blackmailers demands. It is the policy of the U.K. Government that Turkey enters the EU and we are spending a load of public money to ensure it happens. No one imagined Merkel would open Europe to millions of immigrants, but she did. The Balkan countries were appropriated in the EU despite not conforming to EU requirements-this is how Greece got in, as they reduced the entry requirements. All the economic principles of the EU have been bypassed-there were rules to stop states getting too deep into debt, there were rules to prevent money printing, but they have all been ditched to save the project. If Turkey is required to save the project, then Turkey will get in and all the rules will be dropped to facilitate it.

 

Cameron keeps waving the veto that we have over Turkey, but a Britain in the EU will comply with the EU, Cameron has shown this to be true in his failed negotiations. Just like he tells us there will be no EU army, when the creation of one is in progress. Cameron means to 'dock' us in Europe because that's what the corporates want.

[Karl]

It's been confirmed that we need to build 240 new houses a day for the ongoing future to keep up with the current levels of immigration... which isn't going to happen . Basically they want to cram everyone in like battery hens so a few people at the top can make a few more million while paying rock bottom wages.

Of course. 1 house every 4 minutes.

That doesn't show the full picture. Imagine the number of languages, customs and cultures. Think how every school, doctor, ward, company, police, driving school will require people to reach multiple languages. Imagine neighbourhoods with people unable to talk to one another, without any common culture.

[Apech]

 

... the song at the end is quite good.

[joeblast]

https://twitter.com/LaszloAndorEU/status/744475670462496772/photo/1

 

even if you're on "their" side, it still doesnt mean they wont kill you to help their cause.

 

funny how the gunman couldnt remember where he lived while in court.

 

*cough*bullshit*cough*

 

they're making a mockingbird of it

[Karl]

Remain campaign director Will Straw sent the above email to the Stronger In mailing list yesterday. The thinking behind it is revealed in a recording of a conference call, obtained by Guido, which took place yesterday afternoon. Straw told Remain campaigners that voters had been “pulled up short” by the murder of Jo Cox, and that Stronger In should now attack the Leave side for creating “division and resentment”. Straw says they should respond to Cox’s death – “the new context that we’re in” – by claiming only they represent “a decent, tolerant” Britain.

 

 

 

“We need to recognise that people have been pulled up short by Jo Cox’s death and it is now time to make a very positive case for why we want to be in the European Union… to call out the other side for what they have done to stir division and resentment in the UK. That is something we must all do… This is what we think is the closing argument of the campaign, reflecting all the arguments that we have been setting out for many months but also the new context that we’re in. What we want to say is people should vote Remain on Thursday for more jobs, lower prices, workers’ rights, stronger public services and a decent, tolerant United Kingdom.”

Fair to say campaigning is well and truly back under way…

 

Courtesy of Guido Fawkes. Proof- if it was needed-that the Remain side will happily use Joe Cox's death to further their political aims. They have no scruples what so ever. Disgusting scumbags.

[Apech]

I'm clueless about betting odds _ can someone explain this to me:

 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/20/eu-referendum-biggest-political-betting-event-in-british-history

[Karl]

I think I have found what DB needs to help make the decision. This is the liberal case for leave in which shouty 'immigrant' and 'we are all doomed' economics gives way to the liberal case for why exit is the best option. Complete with graphs.

 

 

http://www.adamsmith.org/the-liberal-case-for-leave/

 

 

Sent from my iPad

[Miffymog]

I'm clueless about betting odds _ can someone explain this to me:

 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/20/eu-referendum-biggest-political-betting-event-in-british-history

 

With the current odds at

 

remain 1.25

leave 4.00

 

this represents roughly a 20% chance of leaving and 80% chance of staying, which means if we had five referendums, only one would be leave.

 

The thing is, this absolutely does not represent the proportion of people who will vote each way.

 

Also, the odds offered are really just a function of what money is being placed at the time.

 

Basically, no one really knows what will happen, which is half the fun of gambling ...

[Apech]

I think I have found what DB needs to help make the decision. This is the liberal case for leave in which shouty 'immigrant' and 'we are all doomed' economics gives way to the liberal case for why exit is the best option. Complete with graphs.

 

 

http://www.adamsmith.org/the-liberal-case-for-leave/

 

 

Sent from my iPad

 

Good read thanks.  Although I am still at odds with the conclusion.  

[Karl]

With the current odds at

 

remain 1.25

leave 4.00

 

this represents roughly a 20% chance of leaving and 80% chance of staying, which means if we had five referendums, only one would be leave.

 

The thing is, this absolutely does not represent the proportion of people who will vote each way.

 

Also, the odds offered are really just a function of what money is being placed at the time.

 

Basically, no one really knows what will happen, which is half the fun of gambling ...

I guess the bookmakers want to get all the big money on the wrong side of the equation, so, good odds are attractive to those who feel confident of a large win. If the leave side win, then you want fewer bets to pay out bigger money. Indeed this might well mean a load of fools who will soon be parted from their cash.

 

Addendum: oh I see now. The light bulb glows faintly. The market can use bets to skew the odds and influence the markets. The stock market increase and the pound were the result of one single 25K bet. This meant the markets could shift some stocks and money with minimal leverage. A tiny 25K made them millions. The bookmakers odds are very skewed by market bets compared to the polls, so they should not be regarded as an accurate forecast either.

Edited June 20, 2016 by Karl

[Apech]

With the current odds at

 

remain 1.25

leave 4.00

 

this represents roughly a 20% chance of leaving and 80% chance of staying, which means if we had five referendums, only one would be leave.

 

The thing is, this absolutely does not represent the proportion of people who will vote each way.

 

Also, the odds offered are really just a function of what money is being placed at the time.

 

Basically, no one really knows what will happen, which is half the fun of gambling ...

 

I have complete distrust of the polls - which showed a 7 point lead for leave not so long ago which has suddenly evaporated - in other words the poll results are being used to manipulate the referendum result.  From what I have been reliably told the use of sound statistical principles in polling finished some years ago.  If they sampled enough people selected randomly  face to face with a direct and un-nuanced question they would already know the result (but they tend to use phone and online polling and try to sort the responses by all kinds of criteria.)

[Karl]

Good read thanks.  Although I am still at odds with the conclusion.

 

At least it's a different take on the mud slinging. I had to wind my neck in like a tortoise to even consider some of the conclusions. For me it is far more passionate, like a war.

[Karl]

I have complete distrust of the polls - which showed a 7 point lead for leave not so long ago which has suddenly evaporated - in other words the poll results are being used to manipulate the referendum result.  From what I have been reliably told the use of sound statistical principles in polling finished some years ago.  If they sampled enough people selected randomly  face to face with a direct and un-nuanced question they would already know the result (but they tend to use phone and online polling and try to sort the responses by all kinds of criteria.)

I have a great book on this called mobocracy. Sometimes these polls are subtly influencing the results by the questions asked and the conclusions in the poll narrative. It's difficult to catch. In the book I had to read over a proce of propaganda several times before I saw how clever it was. Democracy runs on polls and is influenced by them.

 

Kate Hoey was asked today about the increase in remain voters, she was very relaxed and told the two reporters being interviewed that they were living in a bubble and should get out more. I have heard several times that Labour IN campaigners have been shocked by the responses on the doorstep-they said it is exactly like the election where the polls were saying one thing and the canpaigners were finding something different. I notice that Peter Hitchens believes the vote will be to leave and he isn't known for his optimism.

[joeblast]

I have complete distrust of the polls - which showed a 7 point lead for leave not so long ago which has suddenly evaporated - in other words the poll results are being used to manipulate the referendum result.  From what I have been reliably told the use of sound statistical principles in polling finished some years ago.  If they sampled enough people selected randomly  face to face with a direct and un-nuanced question they would already know the result (but they tend to use phone and online polling and try to sort the responses by all kinds of criteria.)

Tavistock said thanks for this

[Karl]

 

 

 

About the size of it.