Should We Leave the EU?

[Howardh]

We went to cast our votes in our very nice part of Cheshire East earlier this morning and we were bathed in warm sunshine with the merest hint of a warm summer breeze...

Shhh...we'll be getting all those who currently live in the Sawf East coming up, buying our cheap housing, taking over our hospitals and taking all our jobs/women....
Vote Chexit!!

*Looks at exchange markets* The Lanky's fallen three points against Stirling on the mere thought!

 

[Antman]

The betting has dramatically moved towards a Remain vote. Until yesterday, Remain was about 1/3 or 1/4, compared to about 1/5 a few months ago, but now we are looking at 1/8 or 1/9.

I'd take it all with a pinch of salt quite honestly just as I did when Brexit were apparently favourites

 

[northwichcat]

But in parliament there is scope to re-examine as you put it. In the EU, with people like Juncker running the show I think you will be sadly disappointed if you think a Remain vote will lead to any re-examining

There's been renegotiation talks already but Cameron wasted it on making a big fuss about stopping migrants claiming benefits due to divisions within the Conservative party instead of the bigger issues.

Also, do you Farage and UKIP will shut up shop after the referendum if Remain wins or do they think they will try and push for reforms within the EU and/or a second referendum? I wouldn't bet on them shutting up shop.

 

[Antman]

You mean like the rest of us did about Jo Cox. Self-awareness level: 0.

You really have surpassed even yourself this time

 

[Howardh]

I'd take it all with a pinch of salt quite honestly just as I did when Brexit were apparently favourites

I've never bet im my life, but if Brexit reaches 10/1 I might stuff £40 on it and buy that 4k camcorder I've had my eyes on with the winnings, and a nice consolation if Remain lose
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

a second referendum? .

If we (remain!) win, and Turkey are set to join in the short-medium term, I would love another referendum and vote to leave - if either UK didn't veto or Turkey joins the 21st century regarding human rights, gets out of Cyprus and is economically suitable for the EU.

 

[TheKnightWho]

You really have surpassed even yourself this time

Not really - most of us don't act like we're 10 when exposed for hypocrisy though.

 

[miami]

But in parliament there is scope to re-examine as you put it. In the EU, with people like Juncker running the show I think you will be sadly disappointed if you think a Remain vote will lead to any re-examining

Juncker will be out in 2019, and it will be up to our EU MEPs to decide who to replace him. You did vote for your MEPs didn't you?

Cameron may be out by Monday, who gets to decide who replaces him?

 

[TheKnightWho]

Juncker will be out in 2019, and it will be up to our EU MEPs to decide who to replace him. You did vote for your MEPs didn't you?

Cameron may be out by Monday, who gets to decide who replaces him?

Not only that, but who we send to the Commission is directly decided by our government that we vote for ourselves. I certainly wouldn't want to directly elect who we send, since I want someone who knows what they're doing, not someone like Boris.

 

[Geezertronic]

There's been renegotiation talks already but Cameron wasted it on making a big fuss about stopping migrants claiming benefits due to divisions within the Conservative party instead of the bigger issues.

Also, do you Farage and UKIP will shut up shop after the referendum if Remain wins or do they think they will try and push for reforms within the EU and/or a second referendum? I wouldn't bet on them shutting up shop.

Juncker said this about a UK Leave vote:

Asked about the consequences of a Brexit vote, Mr Juncker made it clear there would be no scope for further negotiations over better terms to try to keep the UK on board.

"I have to add that the British policymakers and the British voters have to know there will be no kind of any renegotiation," he told reporters after talks with new Austrian Chancellor Christian Kern.

"We have concluded a deal with the prime minister, he got the maximum he could receive, we gave the maximum we could give.

"So there will be no kind of renegotiation, nor on the agreement we found in February, nor as far as any kind of treaty negotiations are concerned. Out is out.

So if there is no chance of renegotiation to keep the UK in the EU in the event of a Leave result, what chance is there of renegotiation if the UK vote to Remain? There would be even less incentive to renegotiate in the event of a Remain vote

 

[miami]

I've never bet im my life, but if Brexit reaches 10/1 I might stuff £40 on it and buy that 4k camcorder I've had my eyes on with the winnings, and a nice consolation if Remain lose

I looked at betfair and couldn't make head or tail of it.

If we (remain!) win, and Turkey are set to join in the short-medium term, I would love another referendum and vote to leave - if either UK didn't veto or Turkey joins the 21st century regarding human rights, gets out of Cyprus and is economically suitable for the EU.

Turkey can't even get visa free travel to Schengen due to it's treatment of the Kurds. Even assuming there's a Cyprus reunification which may mean Cyprus and possibly even Greece would vote for assention, it still comes down to our parliament. As long as UKIP or Boris Johnson aren't involved.

100% of UKIP's parliamentary contingency are big fans of Turkey
http://www.cfot.org.uk/founder-members/

Founder Members of Conservative Friends of Turkey include:
* Boris Johnson MP,
* Douglas Carswell MP
* Daniel Kawczynski MP
* Graham Brady MP
* Richard Bacon MP

All who claim to be "leave", there may be others.

It would suck if we leave though, sign up to the EEA with the same deal as Switzerland and Norway, and Turkey joins the EU. We'll have thrown away our veto.

 

[northwichcat]

Juncker said this about a UK Leave vote:

So if there is no chance of renegotiation to keep the UK in the EU in the event of a Leave result, what chance is there of renegotiation if the UK vote to Remain? There would be even less incentive to renegotiate in the event of a Remain vote

So he won't come begging to the UK to remain if we vote leave, would anyone have expected otherwise?

 

[Geezertronic]

Juncker will be out in 2019, and it will be up to our EU MEPs to decide who to replace him. You did vote for your MEPs didn't you?

Yes but we have no direct say in who they choose to vote for do we?

Cameron may be out by Monday, who gets to decide who replaces him?

That would depend on how the Conservatives choose their next leader I presume. Would they go for a similar process that saw Corbyn voted the Labour leader?

 

[miami]

So if there is no chance of renegotiation to keep the UK in the EU in the event of a Leave result, what chance is there of renegotiation if the UK vote to Remain? There would be even less incentive to renegotiate in the event of a Remain vote

Sorry, why do we want to renegotiate our terms of being in the EU?

He's not referring to making change happen inside the EU - getting rid of the Strassbourg Shuffle every month for example, or working towards a directly elected commission president, or transferring more powers to the EU parliament.

 

[Geezertronic]

So he won't come begging to the UK to remain if we vote leave, would anyone have expected otherwise?

And there is even less likelihood of renegotiation if the UK vote to Remain

 

[Antman]

Not really - most of us don't act like we're 10 when exposed for hypocrisy though.

The only person exposed for hypocrisy on here is you, time and time again

 

[TheKnightWho]

The only person exposed for hypocrisy on here is you, time and time again

Yet you never actually do it. You're literally resorting to "no you!". Christ - I think I'll ignore you from now you - it's like talking to one of my primary school students.

 

[Domh245]

Yes but we have no direct say in who they choose to vote for do we?

I equally don't recall the country voting for David Cameron as leader of the conservatives? We voted for the conservative party to be the largest in parliament, but we didn't have a choice in who was going to be prime minister, nor in how the cabinet was made up...

 

[TheKnightWho]

And there is even less likelihood of renegotiation if the UK vote to Remain

Renegotiation of what? A special status for the UK inside the EU? Why should we have that?

 

[yorksrob]

Yes indeed, and given that a substantial change to the nature of EU membership is effectively a change to the national constitution, I think it's a very good idea. But our politicians never wanted a system like that, so nothing similar was ever set up and the right to approve changes, small or substantial, remained solely with parliament .....

If we'd adopted this policy forty years ago, instead of clinging to a wholly inadequate notion of 'representative' democracy for deciding constitutional matters, we might not have arrived at this sorry juncture.

 

[Antman]

Yet you never actually do it. You're literally resorting to "no you!". Christ - I think I'll ignore you from now you - it's like talking to one of my primary school students.

What.......you're a teacher? OMG surely not?

Anyway if you'll excuse me, it's stopped raining now so I'm going to sit out the garden and watch the grass grow!

 

[TheKnightWho]

What.......you're a teacher? OMG surely not?

Anyway if you'll excuse me, it's stopped raining now so I'm going to sit out the garden and watch the grass grow!

Some of us actually care about the future of this country and our children.

 

[northwichcat]

I equally don't recall the country voting for David Cameron as leader of the conservatives? We voted for the conservative party to be the largest in parliament, but we didn't have a choice in who was going to be prime minister, nor in how the cabinet was made up...

Back in 2010 it was really the elected Lib Dem MPs who decided Cameron should be PM. Cameron (as leader of the Conservative Party) was willing to negotiate with them and the Lib Dems realised the number of Lib Dem + Conservative MPs was over 325 so enough to make a majority coalition government, while Gordon Brown wasn't willing to negotiate with the Lib Dems (or the Conservatives for that matter) and the number of Lib Dem + Labour MPs was under 325.

 

[Gutfright]

Renegotiation of what? A special status for the UK inside the EU? Why should we have that?

Because our politicians should be looking out for our interests.

Why should France keep the Strasbourg shuffle, an insane policy which benefits only France to the detriment of the rest of the EU?

Britain is in a strong position to bargain with the rest of the EU, which is about to be effed over by the Italian banking crisis. It would be madness not to use our leverage to gain as favourable a status as we can get.

 

[miami]

Yes but we have no direct say in who they choose to vote for do we?

That would depend on how the Conservatives choose their next leader I presume. Would they go for a similar process that saw Corbyn voted the Labour leader?

So we have no say in who our representatives choose to vote for to run the EU government (which has little actual power, and that power that can be removed by a majority vote in the UK parliament)

And we have no say in who our representatives choose to vote for to run the UK government (which has all the actual power despite the representatives choosing the leader only getting 37% of the vote)

Are you proposing a direct election for the European commission president? Ala the US president? (s)he'd then have the power to appoint the right people to run the government departments (just like the US president does), and would be beholden to the EU parliament, albeit with a few executive powers (just as the commission is now)

I'd be all for voting for an EU commission president, although I'm not sure how well it would work in practice given the woeful coverage on europe from the media.

 

[northwichcat]

And there is even less likelihood of renegotiation if the UK vote to Remain

That's a bit like saying the Conservative Party cannot change UK law, given that UK MEPs contribute towards forming EU legislation.

 

[miami]

Shhh...we'll be getting all those who currently live in the Sawf East coming up, buying our cheap housing, taking over our hospitals and taking all our jobs/women....
Vote Chexit!!

*Looks at exchange markets* The Lanky's fallen three points against Stirling on the mere thought!

I'm sure Paul will be along soon to explain how his mansion is reassuringly expensive, and the renevation on the east wing alone cost more than a 4 bed detached house in wimbledon

 

[TheKnightWho]

Because our politicians should be looking out for our interests.

Why should France keep the Strasbourg shuffle, an insane policy which benefits only France to the detriment of the rest of the EU?

Britain is in a strong position to bargain with the rest of the EU, which is about to be effed over by the Italian banking crisis. It would be madness not to use our leverage to gain as favourable a status as we can get.

But I don't think they should have the Strasbourg shuffle. The point I'm making is that assuming we are special, and going in with an adversarial attitude, both misses the point of the EU and also damages it. Neither power nor wealth are zero-sum, which has been the key mistaken assumption of many in the Brexit camp.

Also, this idea that Britain is in a particularly strong position with regards to the rest of the EU is simply not true - unless you think we'd also be in a strong position compared to the US, which is of a similar size.

 

[Gutfright]

But I don't think they should have the Strasbourg shuffle. The point I'm making is that assuming we are special, and going in with an adversarial attitude, both misses the point of the EU and also damages it.

It's basically like a giant, real-life version of the prisoner's dilemma.

If all countries decide to put their own interests aside and concentrate on the greater good, then everybody wins.

However if everybody decides to put their own interests to one side, apart from one country (which for the sake of argument we'll call "France") which decides to be a selfish asshole, then the selfish asshole country wins.

Seeing as we know that France is going to act like a selfish asshole, there is no logical reason for us to be self-sacrificing.

Also, this idea that Britain is in a particularly strong position with regards to the rest of the EU is simply not true - unless you think we'd also be in a strong position compared to the US, which is of a similar size.

There is a lot more than just population size to consider.

 

[TheKnightWho]

It's basically like a giant, real-life version of the prisoner's dilemma.

If all countries decide to put their own interests aside and concentrate on the greater good, then everybody wins.

However if everybody decides to put their own interests to one side, apart from one country (which for the sake of argument we'll call "France") which decides to be a selfish asshole, then the selfish asshole country wins.

Seeing as we know that France is going to act like a selfish asshole, there is no logical reason for us to be self-sacrificing.

Yet it's not just a PD, it's an iterative PD because it's ongoing through time. Such problems have been solved, through reciprocity. There's an interesting book on these very problems by Axelrod, that explains that punishing non-cooperators once (immediately after previous defections) in iterative PDs and cooperating if they cooperate leads to the greatest cooperation overall. People instinctively know this, and world leaders certainly do (with few exceptions, like the near-permanent embargo on Cuba).

In other words, throwing our hands in the air and going "it's a prisoner's dilemma - we can't do anything!" doesn't mean that the problem is insoluble. We can and must cooperate with Europe, and they know that too.

Your logic is completely self-defeating, because it applies equally to the development of societies - clearly it didn't stop people though. Assuming that the member states of the EU are out to screw each other over at the expense of others is exactly what the EU is designed to stop, and is exactly what I meant when I said that you were missing the point of the EU. Every leader knows that, in cooperation, the result is greater than the sum of its parts: it's not rational at all to defect from that, because of the possibility of reciprocated punishment in the future, which will happen for the express purpose of ensuring mutual cooperation and therefore mutual prosperity.

There is a lot more than just population size to consider.

Like the economy, which it was I was referring to.

 

[Harbornite]

What.......you're a teacher? OMG surely not?

Anyway if you'll excuse me, it's stopped raining now so I'm going to sit out the garden and watch the grass grow!

Go and do that, and don't bother voting. You can't seem to understand what the EU actually does and why we should stay. Your earlier points about plumbers and train guards were absolutely crap.