Welcome to Newburytoday.co.uk’s message boards where you can have your say and share your views on any number of issues.
Anyone can read messages, but only registered users can post messages, reply to messages or create new topics. As part of the free and simple registration, you will be asked to read and conform to the house rules.
To register, click here ……Enjoy the debate. Newbury Today Forum > Categories > Newbury News
|
|
Europe - In or Out, Straw Poll for Forumisters |
|
|
|
Feb 24 2016, 04:54 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011
|
QUOTE (Andy1 @ Feb 24 2016, 08:05 AM) I think I covered a few but the freedom negotiate anything is very important. We simply do not have this now. If we do please correct me. You're not going to be able to negotiate a better trade deal with Europe after leaving as preferential trade terms is precisely the thing that membership of the EU brings, and you're not going to have a better bargaining position with non EU countries because at best nothing has changed for them, though we could be much worse off as Blighty will no longer have the collective bargaining position that we get by virtue of EU membersip. We will however be free to import bendy bananas, liberated as we will soon be from the un-bending tyrany of EU regulation, so happy days.
--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 24 2016, 07:05 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98
|
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Feb 24 2016, 06:51 PM) So far the 'Out-ists' seem to struggle to come up with a sensible reason(s) for exit, other than seemingly saying, 'cause we want to'. Mine is irrational in that I simply don't like the way the EU is run and I think it needs a kick up the democracy buum. Umm, in that case we ought to campaign for a referendum to leave Newbury Town Council
--------------------
Know your place!
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 24 2016, 07:32 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 2,597
Joined: 10-January 15
Member No.: 10,530
|
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Feb 24 2016, 06:51 PM) So far the 'Out-ists' seem to struggle to come up with a sensible reason(s) for exit, other than seemingly saying, 'cause we want to'. Mine is irrational in that I simply don't like the way the EU is run and I think it needs a kick up the democracy buum. I'd quite like to live in a democracy again. Oh, and a border, with search lights and guards armed with laser guided nuclear bullets n barbed wire. Well, maybe not the searchlights, or the bullets, but you get the broad idea I'm sure. Bendy bananas and curly cucumbers would be a nice side benefit though! oh can can we get the Daily Mail in broadsheet as well? Classy!
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 24 2016, 09:28 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 4,025
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 50
|
QUOTE (Andy1 @ Feb 24 2016, 08:05 AM) I think I covered a few but the freedom negotiate anything is very important. We simply do not have this now. If we do please correct me. One of the first things we'd have to do is negotiate various things with our EU neighbours. Of course they'd be in no rush to do this, the UK probably more so, which puts us at a bit of a disadvantage.
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 24 2016, 09:31 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98
|
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Feb 24 2016, 07:40 PM) The problem with democracy is scale. Moreover, democracy means your vote and influence declines as the pool of voters increase. The EU is less democratic for UK citizens, but is more democratic for the EU as a whole. Except of course, there is weighted power to the benefit of places like Germany.
I still take Blackdogs point that do I really want to see years of the Monster Raving Tories doing things their way for years on end, or would it be better to concede some power for a more inclusive EU governance. I think you've described exactly how the Indian people felt when we offered them government - 'we' still had control. What we really have on offer, isn't yes or no to Europe. It's actually vote for a half membership of Europe or out. The other irrational want the Tory in's seem to have is still wanting Scotland to stay in the United Kingdom. If Europe takes no notice of us now it sure won't if we vote for half measures.
--------------------
Know your place!
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 24 2016, 09:32 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317
|
QUOTE (je suis Charlie @ Feb 24 2016, 08:21 PM) Don't worry, soon be living in Corbynagrad. I doubt it; unless the Tories F-up.
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 25 2016, 06:00 AM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 5,064
Joined: 26-May 09
Member No.: 103
|
QUOTE (blackdog @ Feb 25 2016, 12:49 AM) One question I would like answered is that of immigration. We are in economic terms doing better than our fellow EU states creating new jobs (there are more jobs in the UK than ever before) - and will need continued high immigration to maintain our relative economic success. Without the immigration our economy will slow. So you are saying that uncontrolled immigration is good for the UK and should continue? Does this take into account our overcrowded roads, railways, schools, hospitals, doctor's surgeries and the housing shortage?
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 25 2016, 08:58 AM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98
|
If we look at immigration at its widest, there are some very interesting considerations - worthy of note, in or out of Europe, but as a people on these islands.
I'd argue, right now, our biggest issue is actually emigration; virtual and actual, in respect of those doing 'top end' jobs. In other words, the clever stuff, the head office roles, writing computer code, coming up with the next generation of things we need. Equally, there is a large population that have chosen to take their pensions and capital and spend it where it's hot and sunny. Their choice of course, but its still a loss to our economy. In both cases, its damaging the foundation for future or continued success as a nation state.
Then, there is immigration. It we are really honest, most immigrants don't actually want benefits. Sure, a bit of help to start, but not a life on benefits. They want work, and that's what our residual industry and service sector firms give them. However, its the 'work' we British won't or don't want to do; hence the very real problem we have trying to get people off a life time of benefits. If we didn't have these jobs, we wouldn't be such a magnet, so there are some real attitude changes needed from us.
It's an interesting twist, but asking to stop immigration is also saying get far more off benefits and working. And sorry, its only the low grade jobs we have, remember we've lost the high grade ones.
In fact, it's this latter point that seriously worries me about a no vote; which right now is my preference. I'm not actually convinced that we have the skills or abilities necessary to make it on our own anymore. Once this generation has spent our national inheritance, there's nothing more.
--------------------
Know your place!
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 25 2016, 10:02 AM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011
|
QUOTE (blackdog @ Feb 24 2016, 10:49 PM) One question I would like answered is that of immigration. We are in economic terms doing better than our fellow EU states creating new jobs (there are more jobs in the UK than ever before) - and will need continued high immigration to maintain our relative economic success. Without the immigration our economy will slow. I believe both your premise and you argument are flawed. We're spun this line about growth without challenge but it's nothing but a Ponsi scheme. We don't need growth, we need stability and sustainability. And the notion that immigration satisfies an escalating need for manpower is wrong because immigrants (or more properly ecconomic migrants) are also consumers.
--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 25 2016, 11:31 AM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 2,945
Joined: 5-June 09
Member No.: 130
|
QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Feb 25 2016, 10:02 AM) I believe both your premise and you argument are flawed. We're spun this line about growth without challenge but it's nothing but a Ponsi scheme. We don't need growth, we need stability and sustainability. And the notion that immigration satisfies an escalating need for manpower is wrong because immigrants (or more properly ecconomic migrants) are also consumers. The whole capitalist economic scheme is a Ponsi scheme, but it's the one we currently live by. Growth (increased GDP) can come about in two ways - the easy one being more people working - reliant on increased population. The difficult one is increased efficiency - people working smarter to improve their individual outputs - this was easier in the past, and we will continue along the path, but it's getting more and more difficult - for instance we no longer have as many millions of manufacturing jobs that can be replaced by machines or far Eastern sweat shop workers. In reality we are using the simple solution to keep us out of recession - while this is the case we need immigrant workers. As for immigrants also being consumers - whoopee! More consumers = more growth too. But, by all means come up with an alternative to capitalism and sell it to the world, the world needs it (and a lot more birth control).
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 25 2016, 01:36 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98
|
QUOTE (blackdog @ Feb 25 2016, 11:31 AM) The whole capitalist economic scheme is a Ponsi scheme, but it's the one we currently live by.
Growth (increased GDP) can come about in two ways - the easy one being more people working - reliant on increased population. The difficult one is increased efficiency - people working smarter to improve their individual outputs - this was easier in the past, and we will continue along the path, but it's getting more and more difficult - for instance we no longer have as many millions of manufacturing jobs that can be replaced by machines or far Eastern sweat shop workers.
In reality we are using the simple solution to keep us out of recession - while this is the case we need immigrant workers.
As for immigrants also being consumers - whoopee! More consumers = more growth too.
Where are all these jobs? Just one illustration, nearby at that. Swindon is about to celebrate 175 years since the defunct railway works started. It closed down back in the Thatcher years. Does it not strike one as odd that all the very expensive shiny new trains we need are made abroad and shipped over here. And we are apparently going to go on wanting new trains. The works closed some say down to inefficiency and trades unions, but if you think about it incredibly poor investment and incompetent direction and..the avarice of the money men. Still, I suspect they'll need a few immigrants in base pay to dosh out the coffee and rolls in the Museum shop.
It's not condoms we need, more a remedy for avarice.
But, by all means come up with an alternative to capitalism and sell it to the world, the world needs it (and a lot more birth control). Not much hope then have we, Blackdog! What a dismal future our children face; especially now we aren't allowed the Empire. Is there any real reason why the Duke of Westminster should own most of the Country?
--------------------
Know your place!
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 25 2016, 01:51 PM
|
Advanced Member
Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011
|
QUOTE (blackdog @ Feb 25 2016, 11:31 AM) The whole capitalist economic scheme is a Ponsi scheme, but it's the one we currently live by.
Growth (increased GDP) can come about in two ways - the easy one being more people working - reliant on increased population. The difficult one is increased efficiency - people working smarter to improve their individual outputs - this was easier in the past, and we will continue along the path, but it's getting more and more difficult - for instance we no longer have as many millions of manufacturing jobs that can be replaced by machines or far Eastern sweat shop workers.
In reality we are using the simple solution to keep us out of recession - while this is the case we need immigrant workers.
As for immigrants also being consumers - whoopee! More consumers = more growth too.
But, by all means come up with an alternative to capitalism and sell it to the world, the world needs it (and a lot more birth control). A ponsi scheme is hardly a sound basis for a sustainable ecconomy, and while your ecconomic migrants increase GDP with the consumption and production that's not creating per-capita growth which is what your ecconomic model requires, so both the basis of your argument and its reasoning are flawed - and no, it's not my job to fix it, I'm an impartial observer here and undecided either way whether in or out is best, I just want to see someone put together a solid argument either way that isn't founded on prejudice, nostalgia, or fallacy, and I'm yet to hear that, and that's pretty poor when so much is likely to ride on the decision.
--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
|
|