Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Andy Capp Jun 13 2012, 08:02 PM

I'm anti EU in so far as it seems rubbish at what we need it to be best at, but on the same note, individual countries couldn't contend with the emerging powers from the East and Far East.

My feelings are that things wouldn't be as bad as pro-EU commentators say, but things would be as good as anti-EU commentators say - if we were to leave the EU.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Jun 13 2012, 08:40 PM

What would happen if we left the EU?:

1. We'd be free to abolish VAT. This is a Good Thing. It costs shed loads to collect and the government could just as easily collect the equivelent revenue through income tax and save that expense.

2. We'd be free to leave the Council of Europe and reimpose the death penalty. This is a Good Thing because 10 years in jail for stabbing someone to death is not a just punishment.

3. We'd be free to leave the Council of Europe and repeal Article 8 of the Human Rights Act. This is a Good Thing because there's no obvious reason why giving people a right to a family life is naturally an inalienable human right and it's created some incongruous and stupid consequences.

4. We would have control over our borders and wouldn't be obliged to admit eccomonic migrants. This is probably a Good Thing because we're a small island and we're getting rather over crowded, but it's not without its problems because ecconomic migrants tend to work very much harder than us and their industry helps our ecconomy, but then there'd be nothing stopping us allowing ecconomic migration if it was to our benefit.

5. We would risk becoming isolated from powerful and potentially dangerous neighbours. This is probably a Bad Thing. We've been more or less continuously at war with Germany and France sonce the Romans bugged out and left us to it and while NATO has kept us sweet for a couple of generations it's only worked because we had a common enemy in the Warsaw Pact, but as Europe starts to crumble ecconomically its constituent nations are likely to start squabbling and without the threat of the common enemy to occupy us our isolation may make us vulnerable to hostility, particularly as no one on the continent likes us very much anyways.

6. Our industry may find it harder to trade with Europe. This isn't necessarily true as we might be able to join the European Free Trade Association, and we might also choose to trade with our old empire buddies in the Commonwealth and thumb our noses at Europe, and it would also create new opportunities for British industry which can't currently compete with Europe, particularly in agriculture. This might be a Good Thing.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jun 13 2012, 09:16 PM

I see that the opposite way round, although VAT is unfair on the low paid.


I'm not sure the reintroduction of the DP would be a given. I'd say the country is split on the idea.


Just a tweak needed here. Other people's right to a family life could, or should, take precedence. A number of high profile consequences have been due to a failure of the authorities to act swiftly.


The current social orthodoxy requires a certain ratio of old and young. As we are ageing, we require younger people. We have to wait 16 or more years for people to grow, where as foreigners are ready to go.


This is partly true, but the States would see us as an easily accessible stage from which to operate defence systems.


Few European countries will have the wealth to buy our stuff at a sustainable rate I suspect.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Jun 13 2012, 09:48 PM

Very true, and Article 8 is one of the few things that discourages local authorities from separating old couples in need of care - you'd think basic humanity would be enough without the HRA, but history shows that it isn't. Even so, Article 8 does seem anomalous.

There'd be no obligation to reimpose the DP of course, but while we're in the EU it isn't even a possibility. Not enough justification for leaving, but were we to leave I would like to see a referendum on it for violent offences.

I think we have way too many public servants of all kinds, and multiple kinds of taxation just seems like idiocy to me with the replication of staff to collect and administer it, and I just don't see the point of VAT when the equivelent nett revenue could be collected through income tax without any difficulty. It's also another administrative burden on businesses which does nothing to help our productivity and efficiency other than creating busy-work for accountants.

Posted by: Timbo Jun 13 2012, 11:14 PM

Yes



I don't think the death penalty works... crime rates in America are higher than here even per 1000 people and their punishments are far stricter.. Perhaps introduce stricter jail sentences..



I'm liking this.



Liking this more. I think we could help sort the employment problem by sourcing talent within our own borders, training people if necessary. Workers can enter under a Work Visa and have to return to their country of origin when/if their employment ends.



I won't lie, war isn't my strong point. I see it as a bunch of fat controllers sitting around in secret rooms having dodgy meetings, over oil or money, not about rights and wrongs like it was in WW1/WW2. Treaties and pacts can still remain in place, they don't need to be members of a common "grouping" to have them apply.



Trade would continue as normal as I see it, countries aren't going to stop selling or buying.

I've felt that we should leave the EU for a long time. But unfortunately I don't believe anyone in this government or any governments in the foreseeable future will have the meat and two veg for the task. Or the tuna.

Posted by: Bloggo Jun 14 2012, 08:22 AM

I believe that we should be allowed to have the referendum on that we were promised by Cameron before the tories were elected.
It is for the people of this country to decide if we stay in or leave or adopt any position in between.
The EU is a mess both financially and organisationally.
When we voted to join the EU we voted for a free market relationship not to have our sovereignty eroded. It's time to vote again.
For the record I voted against membership all those years ago and still believe I was right.

Posted by: andy1979uk Jun 14 2012, 08:28 AM

I see that the opposite way round, although VAT is unfair on the low paid. - Disagree VAT is a tax that everyone can pay, if you only tax income only the working contribute.

Posted by: lordtup Jun 14 2012, 08:31 AM

I tend to liken it to being a member of some exclusive club . Membership subs are high ( "reassuring expensive"),you get to wear a posh tie and dine at the trough of plenty if the god of privilege has smiled upon you.

If we unilaterally upped and left the Germans would be cross , the French delighted and the Greeks would still be in turmoil. In other words life goes on but as with all parallel universes you don't know till you go there.

ps. Being a member of the EU doesn't prevent us from hanging criminals any more than leaving would allow.

Posted by: andy1979uk Jun 14 2012, 08:37 AM

We need to abolish this human rights crap, and stop the amount of immigration.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Jun 14 2012, 08:41 AM

What "crap" is that then?

Posted by: Biker1 Jun 14 2012, 08:44 AM

Otherwise we'll run out of water!

Posted by: andy1979uk Jun 14 2012, 08:58 AM

The fact that criminals can't have any form of punishment as it is against their human rights, people claim benefits as it against their human rights not to have a council house etc etc. All out of control.

Posted by: Bloggo Jun 14 2012, 09:08 AM

Although not strictly acurate I sympathise with your observations.

Posted by: andy1979uk Jun 14 2012, 09:16 AM

It's causing alot the 'nappy state' we now live in. That and a welfare system that is a complete joke.

Posted by: Roger T Jun 14 2012, 09:16 AM

Same.

Posted by: Biker1 Jun 14 2012, 09:38 AM

Unfortunately, in my opinion, while agreeing with this sentiment we are up against powerful lobbying organisations such as http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/index.php so your views will more or less go unheard.

Posted by: Bloggo Jun 14 2012, 09:53 AM

So no change there then. I don't think that there has ever been a government that represented me and for that matter many othere people I know.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jun 14 2012, 09:54 AM

VAT is harder on the low paid because they pay the same as the wealthy. Only the very wealthy can mitigate their income tax.

Posted by: andy1979uk Jun 14 2012, 10:00 AM

Yes true, but the low paid get it back in the form of working tax credits.

Posted by: Bloggo Jun 14 2012, 10:01 AM

But that's life isn't it. There are always going to be people more wealthy than others and there is nothing wrong with that as the desire to make money and aspire to a better lifestyle is what drives industry, technology and commerce.
People have to recognise that they can't have everything they see and live within their means.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Jun 14 2012, 10:05 AM

Are you thinking of irrigation or immigration?

Posted by: Simon Kirby Jun 14 2012, 10:06 AM

But you've just made that stuff up, the Human Rights Act doesn't cause any of those things.

Posted by: andy1979uk Jun 14 2012, 10:07 AM

That's where labour went wrong, they gave everyone tax credits to make up for crap income, so people did start living a lifesyle they really did'nt earn.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Jun 14 2012, 10:11 AM

And that's the danger. There are those who would repeal the Human Rights Act in order to oppress us and they seek to undermine the Human Rights Act by discrediting it. It's a valuable piece of legislation and deserves to be better understood before we lose valuable rights and liberties to tyrants.

Posted by: Bloggo Jun 14 2012, 10:11 AM

You're right, of course it doesn't.
What Andy is demonstrating is his frustration with the EU meddling in Britsh politics and law.

Posted by: Bloggo Jun 14 2012, 10:14 AM

The human rights act is being abused now in my opinion and yes it has very valuable atributes but it needs to be overhauled in favour of individual countries and not Europe, or the world for that matter, as a whole.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jun 14 2012, 10:23 AM

The only power they have is their argument, which can't necessarily be a bad thing.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jun 14 2012, 10:30 AM

I don't think it needs an overhaul; just tweaking. If governments think that if they don't act swiftly to deport someone, then that person will become empowered by the HRA, then perhaps they will be more proactive in dealing with cases. A win/win situation.

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Jun 14 2012, 10:31 AM

We'll never have a rererendum as they know the outcome. Its a bit like the none referendum we had on joining the Euro. And that Projects going sooooo well....
What really grates me is the argument some give that we have already had a referendum. Yes we did 40 years ago! Its time for another. New generation. New Europe.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jun 14 2012, 10:33 AM

On this issue I wouldn't trust the electorate. Not when you take in to account people like you who will vote a certain way regardless of the merits of the argument. Sometimes mummy does know best.

Posted by: Bloggo Jun 14 2012, 10:35 AM

Understand, however depotation should not be dependent on the speed of the authorities to act but on the crime commited. One of the reasons why the HRA needs "tweaking"

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Jun 14 2012, 10:36 AM

People like 'you' - Nice phrase that accounts for the majority of the Uk population. People like 'you' obviously believe in dictatorship and not democracy. I'd rather be in the latter than in some form of despotic governance.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jun 14 2012, 10:37 AM

Only the very low income families.


I know it is life, but if every one had a flat income tax, then it could be argued that the less wealthy would pay less. VAT is a fixed cost regardless of ability to pay. This is the same argument as fixed penalties. Some will find it an inconvenience, others will have to go without something to pay it. It discriminates against low income.

Posted by: Bloggo Jun 14 2012, 10:38 AM

Actually we voted in favour of a common market, a trading agreement, not to be ruled by a European quango overiding our laws and satutes

Posted by: andy1979uk Jun 14 2012, 10:39 AM

It does not at all, I think it's a very fair tax. Low income people need to contribute something they pay next to nothing in income tax if on min wage. If they don't like it maybe they should have tried harder in school.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jun 14 2012, 10:39 AM

Which is what you would have us have. It is people like you that make the country the mess that it is because they vote in ignorance: voting regardless of the merits of an argument - as you admitted yesterday. I'd rather people like that were blocked from being able to vote.

Posted by: Bloggo Jun 14 2012, 10:41 AM

I look at vat as being part of the price I have to pay for an item. If I can't afford that price then I can't have it.
It's not reasonable to stop those who can afford it from having it.

Posted by: Bloggo Jun 14 2012, 10:42 AM

Sounds very dictatorial to me. If you don't vote the way I want you to then you wont be able to vote.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jun 14 2012, 10:43 AM

Who said it should?

Posted by: Bloggo Jun 14 2012, 10:45 AM

Sorry, may be I misunderstood you?

Posted by: Andy Capp Jun 14 2012, 10:45 AM

You didn't read it properly.

I don't care what you vote, only that you understand the argument and you vote on the merits of the argument. In practical terms, some people vote without even knowing what they are voting for. The recent voting referendum was an example of that.

Posted by: Bloggo Jun 14 2012, 10:53 AM

And who is the judge of who understands the arguments and merits of an argument. Everyone is entitled to an opinion even if it is flawed. That's democracy.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Jun 14 2012, 10:53 AM

It's a bit more involved than that. If a foreigner is in the country legitimately then it's reasonable that she'll establish some kind of family life while she's here, and to act to prevent that would be abhorent, but if she subsequently commits a serious crime is it then proportionate to deport her and deprive her children of their mother? Theresa May said recently that it would be proportionate, but proportionality is decided by the courts on the facts and can't be dictated by a Minister's executive authority.

The problem is solved by tweeking our immigration policy so that we either don't let anyone in for long enough to establish a family life, or else we give them British citizenship so that deportation isn't an option, in my view those are the only humane options.

The easier problem, and the one that have exercised the tabloids' jerky knees, is the very few individuals who abuse Article 8 by establishing a family in order to avoid deportation, and that is solved by deciding their cases in a couple of days rather than a couple of years, and it ought to be like that in any case, so it was never really a problem with Article 8, but it made useful amunition for anti-human rights activists.

Posted by: Penelope Jun 14 2012, 10:55 AM

agree (in principle)

Posted by: andy1979uk Jun 14 2012, 11:04 AM

The welfare state is to blaim for alot of the problems in this country, a few being

Teen pregnancies
Immigration
Anit Social behaviour
economically inactive families

Fix that, fix them all

Posted by: Timbo Jun 14 2012, 11:08 AM

Fixed for you... but yes will eventually sort things out. But it's more than that anyway.

Posted by: andy1979uk Jun 14 2012, 11:15 AM

It's labour, thank god they are gone.

Posted by: Timbo Jun 14 2012, 11:39 AM

Just as it was going well you bring that chestnut up. lol.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jun 14 2012, 11:44 AM

Exactly, and that is why our democracy is flawed. Of course everyone is entitled to an opinion, even if it is no opinion, but it is when those people are empowered to make 'decisions' on our way of life that I start to worry.

Posted by: andy1979uk Jun 14 2012, 11:48 AM

Even poor people ?

Posted by: Andy Capp Jun 14 2012, 11:50 AM

That is exactly what I am on about.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jun 14 2012, 11:51 AM

I see that as largely irreverent.

Posted by: Bloggo Jun 14 2012, 11:51 AM

Yep, I think I undertand what you are saying and I agree. But how do you fix that?

Posted by: Andy Capp Jun 14 2012, 11:54 AM

It is also why there are far fewer genuine slums in the country and why people live longer and in better comfort than before. You would deny people that just because you were lucky enough to be born in this country and are intelligent and resourceful enough to exploit that fact?

Posted by: andy1979uk Jun 14 2012, 11:55 AM

Partly, there will always be poor poeple and it's not always the responsiblity of other tax payers to make up their income.

Posted by: Biker1 Jun 14 2012, 11:57 AM

Ah yes but you, TDH and I who have these views vote in ignorance. (Apparently.)

Posted by: Andy Capp Jun 14 2012, 11:57 AM

Ah! I'm better at picking holes than coming up with a solution! I suppose having an egalitarian society might help, and striving for a better form of education. This obsession with university is not the best use of resources I feel.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jun 14 2012, 11:59 AM

I can't speak for you, but I would always be uncomfortable with my wealth if I thought that it was at the expense of someone else and that it condemned them to poverty.

In a nutshell: I have a job, because someone else doesn't.

Posted by: Bloggo Jun 14 2012, 12:02 PM

I mainly vote in desparation and disappointment knowing that I won't be represented and my pockets will be rifled.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jun 14 2012, 12:02 PM

We all vote in ignorance to varying degrees, don't we?

My point was that TDH said yesterday that his mind on the EU was made up, and therefor it was closed to further debate. I don't think that is a rational way to decide things.

I was distinctly anti-EU, but I have mellowed to some of the arguments, not least because I have discovered that the media, the press, are full of lies and distortion.

Posted by: Bloggo Jun 14 2012, 12:05 PM

You probably have a job because you are willing to get out of bed and do something with your life. I think the problem is supporting the parasites, not the genuine needy, who live off of our backs and contribute nothing.

Posted by: Bloggo Jun 14 2012, 12:09 PM

Well it is if you are convinced you are right. What other way is there.
We decide that maybe we made a wrong decision when things don't turn out as we imagined and learn by the experience.

Posted by: Simon Kirby Jun 14 2012, 12:13 PM

Sure, but that's the easy one to solve. The genuine dilemma for me is whether it can be proportionate to deport someone who has established a family and then subsequently committed a crime.

While Theresa May might flap her cardigan I don't see that there's actually a problem with how Article 8 should operate here if the proportionality test is applied sensibly, and I think we'd need to see some actual cases to make an informed judgement on whether it is being applied sensibly or not. If someone is sent down for over a year then their family is already deprived of them, albeit with limited rights to visit, so deporting them at the end of their sentence is not so obviously a disproportionate interference with either their or their family's right to a family life, given that they are a serious foreign criminal.

I rather think I've started arguing in favour of Article 8. I think the problem is that different people make a different judgement on what is proportionate, with some judges maybe giving too much weight to the rights of the perp and her family, and some individuals not giving those rights very much weight at all.

Posted by: Jayjay Jun 14 2012, 12:26 PM

So everyone 'tries harder in school' and leaves with good grades and all have high paying jobs. Who would stock the supermarkets, who would sweep the streets, how would hospitals be cleaned?

Posted by: Bloggo Jun 14 2012, 12:31 PM

EU immigrants do that while our home grown under achievers draw their benefits.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jun 14 2012, 12:45 PM

If you observe the argument, even in prejudice, then fair enough, but people will block their ears, which is just absurd, and while we have an electorate that behaves like that, then we will continue to have a problem with democracy.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jun 14 2012, 12:47 PM

That is something that needs addressing too and is an example of short-termism by the Labour government. Having said that, few people are wealthy from benefits, despite what the papers say. It is also dangerous to design policy around extreme anecdotal examples.

Posted by: Bloggo Jun 14 2012, 12:52 PM

I'm not convinced that the electorate does behave like that. The last election showed how polarised the electorate are with no clear winner.
I believe that those who don't understand the arguments or cannot be bothered to listen will not vote anyway. Those that vote believe that they have a voice and it will be listened to. Niave I know.

Posted by: Bloggo Jun 14 2012, 12:59 PM

I agree that no one is wealthy from drawing benefits however I believe that many are wealthier drawing benefits than going to work which needs to be addressed.
I also believe that they receive more money than the actually need and as an incentive for them to become contributers to society they should find life difficult on benefits.
Saying that I know there are those that deserve appropriate support and should receive it.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jun 14 2012, 01:23 PM

I base my idea on the principle that most voters will always vote for one party regardless and it comes down to the 'swinging' vote for who decides things.

Posted by: Bloggo Jun 14 2012, 01:33 PM

Well, that's a generalisation which may or may not be correct but does explain why so many voted labour in spite of theie poor record rather than give the tories a clear mandate to govern.

Posted by: andy1979uk Jun 14 2012, 02:11 PM

Tax credits wind me up. you can claim more in tax credits than you contribute tax? Madness.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jun 14 2012, 06:34 PM

I would rather fail to meet the criteria to be entitled to tax credits, than be in a position where I qualified.

Posted by: andy1979uk Jun 14 2012, 07:10 PM

Yes I agree

Posted by: dannyboy Jun 15 2012, 12:14 AM

Form your own party then.........

Posted by: Andy Capp Jun 15 2012, 12:55 AM

More incredibly helpful posts from the 'new user23'.

Posted by: dannyboy Jun 15 2012, 10:39 AM

About as helpful as bloggo......

Posted by: Andy Capp Jun 15 2012, 11:15 AM

Except one is a genuine point of view that many people share and yours is a flippant suggestion that is simply unrealistic for the vast majority of people. The sort of thing user23 is 'famed' for.

Posted by: blackdog Jun 15 2012, 10:30 PM

Now there's an idea - deport benefit scoungers and keep the hard working immigrants.

Posted by: Penelope Jun 15 2012, 10:33 PM

The new raj.

Posted by: Timbo Jun 16 2012, 08:17 PM

Raj??
What about Mo?