Care to qualify that statement?
Care to qualify that statement?
Which part?
Voted "I'm from the EU: In"
Mostly as for political reasons and all its possible implications.
And to this, everybody who knows something about real businesses/transactions (and costs of leaving) should know, that the consequences of leaving are negative. Vice versa, the UK should seek for further integration where it is still due.
#Anthropocene #not just Global Warming but Global Disaster, NASA #Deforestation #Plastic Emission #The Blob #Uninhabitable Earth #Savest Place On Earth #AMOC #ICAN #MIT study "Falsehoods Win" #Engineers of Chaos
#"there can be no doubt about it: the enemy stands on the Right!" 1922, by Joseph Wirth.
Rightwingers, like in the past the epitome of incompetence, except for evilness where they own the mastership.
Iirc., already 2013 i spoke of "Renaissance of Fascism", it was accurate.
#"Humanity is in ‘final exam’ as to whether or not it qualifies for continuance in universe." Buckminster Fuller
Any chance for this exam? Very low, the established Anthropocentrism destroys the basis of existence.
#My Modding #The Witcher 3: Lore Friendly Tweaks (LFT)
#End, A diary of the Third World War (A.-A. Guha, 1983) - now, it started on 24th February 2022.
From the UK and want to stay in.
It's weird to speak praise of politicians, but it's taken character from those who have took a lot of flak to keep up is in while being in a profoundly eurosceptic nation whilst acting anti-EU would make them more popular.
The grassroots of the conservative and labour parties have nothing but ill to speak of the EU, but when their leadership actually get in to power they naturally become more pragmatic and it speaks mountains that we've stayed in the EU for so long.
Even the Daily Mail/Com Res poll is showing a strong lead for the In campaign:
http://www.comres.co.uk/polls/daily-...june-8th-2015/
The pollsters at least have the decency to mention that when they asked the actual referendum question then the In answer was even stronger. Ha, you, Daily Mail.
Well, this referendum is more about blackmailing EU in the negotiations.
Politicians never start a referendum unless they absolutely know the outcome, and they can gain something from it.
That's true, but it's not blackmail. The Conservatives had it as a manifesto pledge, UKIP has been the largest UK party in the European Parliament for ages, and they got 10%+ of the vote in the Parliamentary elections despite being a single issue party, realistically. There's a clear democratic mandate to hold the referendum, even if support is clearly in favour of staying.
And although polls are nice - it's at the start of the campaign. Well, the campaign hasn't even started. And UK politicians simply cannot rely on polls right now. They couldn't have been much more wrong for the parliamentary election and the UK Government came dangerously close to losing the Scottish Independence referendum.
Last edited by removeduser_487563287433; June 09, 2015 at 01:19 AM.
This is not always true, in Luxembourg there was a referendum this weekend, about three questions regarding changes for the constitution.
The coalition parties, the press and the unions were all in favour, yet the referendum ended with 80% no.
Sometimes politicians are out of touch with what the voters actually want.
Hope this won't be the case with the UK.
Under the patronage of Rhah and brother of eventhorizen.
The EU referendum bill has passed its second reading today with 544 to 53 in favour.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33067157
As the article says this is by no means the end of the process with several more stages to go before it is made into law(there's a helpful link in the article but I'll put it here anyway). It's likely to be challenged on the timing of a potential referendum being in May 2016, which the electoral commission disapproves of, and the removal of limitations on campaign financing during the final weeks of the debate that would "load the dice" in favour of the In campaign. I'm less concerned about the former but the latter is something I disapprove of entirely, simply because it will give ammunition to Out voters if they lose the referendum. There might also be some complaints about denying 16/17 year olds a say in the referendum which a large amount of peers will probably try to challenge but I fear this will simply open up bartering over the referendum franchise in an attempt to grant more weight to one side or the other. An earlier attempt to kill the bill by the SNP, due to the exclusion of EU nationals and 16/17 year olds, was slapped aside with 338 to 59 votes against.
I think this is all too likely to be the case with this referendum as well because the In campaign is not basing their argument on staying in the current EU but in a potential one, in the same way that the No campaign appealed to voters based upon a more devolved UK government. This then leaves the door open for complaints of foul play from disgruntled voters if the reforms they were promised are not achieved or didn't go far enough, something I'm sure we'll see when more powers are devolved to Scotland.
Essentially this EU referendum is between walking out the door or shuffling slightly further out, in actual fact there is no actual pro-EU campaign which espouses greater participation in the project. If the debate happens on this basis, it might become more polarised later on, then we certainly won't see this settled simply because people won't be convinced to believe in the idea of the EU.
EDIT: This poll from last month indicates how much is to play for with many people not convinced supporters of either In or Out with a large amount waiting for more details before they make up their minds:
http://news.sky.com/story/1496703/eu...pen-poll-shows
Any harsh rejections from other European leaders or a few stupid words from EU leaders, looking at you Juncker, could have quite drastic effects.
Last edited by 6th Vigil; June 09, 2015 at 05:24 PM.
"If I have done any noble action, that is a sufficient memorial; if I have done nothing noble, all the statues in the world will not preserve my memory."
- Agesilaus II of Sparta
"Tact is the knack of making a point without making an enemy."
- Isaac Newton
Well to contribute to the discussion about the motivations behind holding the EU referendum, I have a small extract from revision notes by my politics teacher, the weight of all the factors I'll let you guys be the judge of:
- Cameron’s promise of referendum in 2017 designed to keep euro-sceptics in party happy
- Assuage public opinion and maybe win votes at 2015 election
- Tactical move to put Labour and Liberal Democrats in a difficult position at that election and deal with threat of UKIP
- Useful ploy to renegotiate better terms within EU
- Not a serious intention to actually leave as even Cameron lead Tory Party knows there is nor real alternative to EU Membership
- Would the people even vote to leave anyway, its one thing to say to a pollster, its quite another to do so in a referendum when a million of jobs might be at stake
- Opinion poll evidence shows that if asked to vote in a referendum following a successful renegotiation and recommended to vote “YES” by the government the outcome would be differen
UK will be kicked out of a federal EU anyway.
The Eurozone will form the core of the new federal EU and since UK is not part of the Eurozone they will become a economic dependency just like Switzerland and Norway.
Actually it might be a good idea for the EU as a whole to allow several strong economies and several weak economies to remain outside the Eurozone (if those economies can afford it). Those economies would operate as labs, where things can be tested before being copied by the Eurozone.
For instance, the negative interest rate has been tried in Denmark before being adopted by the ECB.
IN PATROCINIVM SVB MareNostrum
This makes no sense at all! When has a country been kicked out of the EU? The trend has always been to get more countries in to the Union, not out.
There are many member states in the EU without having the Euro. Those countries are doing quite well indeed. It would therefore be very harmfull for the EU to kick countries out of the union. Also not many countries would agree to be kicked out but still have to implement European Directives and legislation in order to remain in the common-market.
I presume that you are in favour of a federal Europe. Personally I think that is an unreachable ideal and wouldn't be ideal at all.
I am all in favour of working together economically, but I am against having/creating a political union. I incidentily klicked on"I'm from the EU: out", but I meant "I'm from the EU: in". The UK, just like the Netherlands, has always been more focussed on the economic potential of the European Common Market to create wealth and jobs. The UK has been a strong advocate of less politics and less Brussels. Without the UK countries that are more in favour of a federal union will be more dominant.
Countries like the Netherlands need the UK to have a strong voice in Europe to prevent this federal union (wherein the Netherlands would be nothing) from happening.