Politics, politics, politics

[the dza]

Have you spoken to Borris to ask him if he really believes Europe Parliament is OK.

Yes.

 

[AuroRaman]

There's been talk about this on the work email today. I posted the below which has been going around social media, to stimulate discussion. Would be great to hear people's thoughts on it. Which I can then copy and paste as my own and end up looking well clever. The whole article isn't posted below as it wouldn't fit.

https://www.facebook.com/georgeyb91/posts/10156954125750504

Alright, you filthy animals. I don't normally do this, because I believe that everyone should have the right to vote how they want at elections, but a) this ain't an election, it's a referendum so go brick yourself, and b) I honestly believe that the stakes are too high for me not to get involved here. If I can influence even one person with this post, then I'll feel like I've done something important. As a result, feel free to share this far and wide as I've done a veritable fudgeload of research and I don't want all my hard work going to waste.

So, I'll put my cards on the table: I believe, very very strongly, that we need to stay in the EU. I never thought I'd find myself agreeing with David 'PigFellatio' Cameron, but in this unfortunate case I am, and here's why.

We stand to gain SO MUCH from staying in the EU. "How much", you're (probably not) asking? Well, I made a convenient list for your perusal, WITH sources, so you can't be a taco and say 'you're making that up!' and froth at the mouth like a rabid clam.

I know people on the internet like listicles with clickbait titles, so here are "14 Reasons Why We Shouldn't Leave The EU That Everyone Should Know! You Won't Believe #8!":
1) The EU provides easy access to 1/3 of the world's markets by value (in other words, the EU's combined market value is 1/3 of the entire world's, and we can tap into it whenever the fudge we want). [1] It also gives UK businesses preferential market access to over 50 countries OUTSIDE the EU, including some of the fastest-growing economies in the world like South Korea and South Africa. [2]
2) The EU gives us better product safety. You know, so your toddler doesn't impale him/herself on a bricktily designed toy, or swallow a load of poisonous plastic. [3]
3) The EU gives structural funding to areas hit by industrial decline (hello, Cornwall). [4]
4) The EU gave us lead-free petrol. [5]
5) The EU gives us cheaper mobile charges. [6] It also gives us cheaper air travel. [7] fudge yeah, cheap things!
6) The EU gives us cleaner beaches, rivers and air (hello again, Cornwall). [8]
7) The EU gives us improved consumer protection and food labelling, so you actually know what it's in your Chicken McNuggets (hint: it's chicken. It wasn't always chicken, though). [9]
8) The EU has helped break up monopolies. [10] If you don't know why monopolies are a Very Bad Thing, try playing the popular board game 'Monopoly' and see how many friends you have left when you win.
9) The EU gives us cross-border policing to combat human trafficking, arms and drug smuggling, and terrorism. [11]
10) Being a member of the EU means no paperwork or customs for exports throughout the single market, as well as the freedom to travel, live and work across Europe. [12] This one is particularly important for me as someone who likes to live, work and travel abroad. Do you have ANY IDEA how fudging great it is to be able to travel and work visa-free?! Having to a get a visa for every single country you enter is a nightmare, believe me. If you've ever tried to travel around Asia, Africa or South America, you'll understand what I'm saying.
11) The EU creates and helps uphold all kinds of awesome human rights, such as equal pay legislation, holiday entitlement, and the right not to work more than a 48-hour week without overtime. [13] I'd also like to point out that it's some of these same human rights that David 'Porktacoter' Cameron tried to erode back in 2014, with the EU playing a major role in stopping him. [14]
12) The EU creates and upholds all kinds of great animal welfare legislation; it has the strongest wildlife protection laws in the world and contributes to improved animal welfare in food production. [15]
13) The EU funds incredible scientific research and industrial collaboration (including, most recently, a project that may be the catalyst for a cure for breast cancer being found in the next few years, I brick you not). [16]
14) Finally, and arguably most importantly, the EU has for 60 years been the foundation of peace between European neighbours after many years of bloodshed. [17] It has also assisted in the extraordinary social, political and economic transformation of 13 former dictatorships, now EU members, since 1980. [18]

And now, let's take a moment to address some of the arguments for leaving the EU. Apart from the fact that I can't find a single reputable study that suggests we'd be any better off outside of the EU (and believe me, I've looked; I want to research my counterarguments as thoroughly as my arguments), the most persuasive arguments I've found are what I'm going to term 'the trade argument' and 'the immigration argument'.

The trade argument goes as follows: if we left the EU, we could negotiate a sort of 'amicable divorce' where we somehow retain strong trading links with the EU while not being subject to its laws. Many people point to Canada as a good example of this model, which recently negotiated a CETA (Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement- do I have to google EVERYTHING for you?) with the EU. I have two retorts to this argument. My first retort: Canada was never a part of the EU in the first place. To return to the divorce analogy outlined above- whereby the EU and the U.K. are a sort of 'married couple' and trade is their kids- the U.K. seeking a CETA after leaving the EU would be like a nasty, messy divorce where one parent uses the kids as a weapon against the other, threatening to take them away whenever their demands aren't met. Canada's CETA, meanwhile, is like a married couple approaching someone else to have a threesome at a swinger's party, which sounds a lot more fun and exciting, I'm sure you'll agree. My second retort to the above argument is simple: why even take the risk? If we stay in the EU, our trade with them will continue to be prosperous and full of great sex while the kids are asleep (okay, I've taken the analogy too far now). If we leave, however, there's a chance any trade agreement could fail catastrophically and leave our economy in a brickstorm. In fact, I would argue the likes of Germany, France and other leading EU nations would not simply let us pick and choose what rules and trade agreements we adhere to, so the likelihood of us being absolutely fine, trade-wise, after leaving the EU seems overly optimistic. Plus negotiating a CETA of any kind could take years and have a completely uncertain outcome. Again, why take the risk? An additional point: arguments no. 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 11, and 12 above are examples of really great laws and regulations the EU has introduced. If you say you want to leave the EU so we have autonomy over our own laws, you know that you're effectively handing control of our country over to David 'HideTheSausageLiterally' Cameron, don't you? In terms of making laws that benefit all of us, I trust the EU way more than that guy.

The immigration argument tends to centre around the whole 'visa-free work and travel' thing, and is generally espoused by people terrified of dem immigantz stealin are jobz. Alternatively it's espoused by people afraid of terrorists being able to come here more easily, but for that I'd refer you to point no. 9 above; we're safer from terrorism in the EU because we can share intelligence and resources with other countries more easily. But back to the 'stealing our jobs' fear; while it's true that technically speaking there could be an influx of foreigners coming to claim your particular job at any moment, just remember, we've been part of the EU for 43 years now and it hasn't happened yet, despite what the mainstream media may tell you (and you DEFINITELY shouldn't trust those guys; more on that later). Seriously, do you know ANYONE, personally, that has had their job stolen by a foreigner? Be honest now. I'd be willing to wager that you don't, and I'll explain why that is too: the immigrants that are coming here are not stealing YOUR jobs, specifically. They're either starting their own businesses (in which case they're actually creating jobs), or they're skilled labourers taking jobs there just aren't enough trained British people to take (such as doctors or surgeons), or they're unskilled labourers taking the jobs that you don't want (like toilet cleaning or washing dishes). Incidentally, about a year ago I taught English to some Eastern European immigrants who worked in a salad-packing factory in Lichfield. One Latvian girl was actually a teacher back home, but she was making more money as a salad-packer here than she was as a teacher in Latvia(!)- the point being that unskilled immigrant workers are generally happy to work bricky menial jobs that no British person wants, and your cushy 9-to-5 office job is not under threat. Not even a little bit- so don't worry your xenophobic little head about it. Oh, and one last thing on this subject, to paraphrase Louis CK: maybe, if an immigrant with no contacts, no skills and no local knowledge of the language and/or culture can steal your job, maybe, just maybe, you're brick at your job.

 

[scaramanga]

Yes.

I suspect his response was something like "fudge off you fudging peasant"...

 

[scaramanga]

See this is the problem with the comparison: you cannot compare several years of judging whether a child's education is 'good', 'value for money' etc with a flight on Easjet/BA etc.
When you fly it is a finite experience that can be judged within a few hours or a day at most. An education cannot.
The flying experience can be changed, 'upgraded' straight away based on feedback: better seats, nicer food, better landing, better terminal etc.

The quality of a child's education takes far longer to judge; yes, GCSE and other exams at the end of fixed education periods are usually the most consistent barometer but even they takes years to come to fruition and how do you judge an education experience up to that point? How do you especially judge the quality of education at primary school level? Plus the teachers and headteachers that run them? Are they automatically better if 'market forces' takes over? Will that effect their intake and if in one or two particlar years a whole load of 'bad pupil's are admitted who prove a challenge and perhap take some resources away from actual teaching?

You would obviously judge the way you do currently - by current results and by visiting the school and meeting senior staff.

There's a lot of data published on schools - plenty to decide which you want to send your kid to. You rate the earlier schools by their VA rather than pure results - in fact, it's generally better to judge all schools on VA for the bracket in which your kid lies.

In the independent sector, the 'riff-raff' factor is usually taken away and that obviously helps things (especially for those who don't like mixing with the 'hoi-polloi' or the 'great unwashed', probably the main reason for going to such schools for a sizable chunk). But even in the Independent schooling sector: does higher fee automatically equal 'better quality' of education? I mean if one private school charges double another does that automatically mean the school that charges double provides twice the quality?

Far from it - higher fees almost never mean a better education and nobody running an independent school claims so. Fees are merely a product of demand/supply and the general running costs of the school. There are some excellent independent schools at only £4-5K per term and some average ones that cost a lot more than that. In fact there's a good (not great) school near me in Chichester where the fees are well over £6K but people pay it because they want their kids in a small school that's 30 seconds walk from the town centre. Often they're just paying for the freedom from the standard curriculum offered - most people I know who attended fee paying schools had as much or more knowledge about non-curriculum subjects at 16 as most adults. That's on top of a vastly increased chance of exam success and university acceptance.

Your point about the "riff raff" is close but not quite there. Usually, by sending a kid to a fee paying school, you're ensuring that the parents of nearly all the kids there are invested in their achievements - most teachers will tell you that it's very easy to push a class with interested parents a long way but you only need a few kids with brick parents to ruin it for everyone.

This is the crux of defining 'better service' in terms of the education system at large: it is difficult to marry it up totally with 'cost' and the experience has so many factors outside of cost (such as location, demographics/culture of intake, nursery schooling beforehand, the school leadership, the motivation/commitment of staff etc) that almost make 'cost' over the lifetime of the education process irrelevant. Also, most people would rather choose an education institution once or twice in a lifetime at most. Choosing one every year (unlike changing your airline) is not ideal (or even feasible for most really).

Why would the costs change? If anything, the freedom to pay teachers what they deserve rather than having to pay the brick ones as much as the good ones could be seen as a chance to reduce costs.

I'm not suggesting that people change school every year (although they've paid their taxes and should be free to do so if they wish), just that they can choose whichever school they wish and that those schools should not be restrained by incompetent and wasteful local authorities.

Creating a system that is 'good' for most children (whilst also allowing the independent sector to co-exist peacefully for those who want or need that option) is the ideal and a good strong network forged between Government, Academics and National/International Corporate/Industrial leaders is more likely to deliver that than just one of those groups working in isolation.
Academies in the long run put mainly the third group in that list in sole command and for me that will lead to a major inbalance long-term.

Not if all schools are academies and people have choice. The choice is what will force the quality.

Currently because our state education system is such a mess, simply being OK is enough to not be bothered by inspectors for a few years. Just getting by is the norm. Under a market system, just getting by will not be enough - a school would have to be better than those around it to succeed.

 

[the dza]

I suspect his response was something like "fudge off you fudgeing peasant"...

He was surprisingly pleasant, considering I called him a qunt.

 

[Grays_1890]

I hear that should we leave the EU, the remainers warn us that our country will be strewn into 24 months of austerity.

I'll take that!

Seems to me to be an Excellent Deal. Only 24 months in exchange for reinstated democracy, saving of £10billion a year, securing our borders, subdued pressure on all our services (housing, NHS, schools, prisons, roads etc.), Law making back in the hands of our elected leaders and finally free to trade with the rest of the world (especially our commonwealth countries who we cruelly turned our back on when we joined the common market). All that and more for Independence; Deal of the century!

 

[parklane1]

I hear that should we leave the EU, the remainers warn us that our country will be strewn into 24 months of austerity.

I'll take that!

Seems to me to be an Excellent Deal. Only 24 months in exchange for reinstated democracy, saving of £10billion a year, securing our borders, subdued pressure on all our services (housing, NHS, schools, prisons, roads etc.), Law making back in the hands of our elected leaders and finally free to trade with the rest of the world (especially our commonwealth countries who we cruelly turned our back on when we joined the common market). All that and more for Independence; Deal of the century!

Have to agree with all of that especially the bit in bold, that is why I will be voting out.

 

[Bullet]

Have to agree with all of that especially the bit in bold, that is why I will be voting out.

I just voted to stay in, postally. Didn't even get off my arse, the wife brought it in during the football and I signed it. Hopefully it wasn't divorce proceedings.

 

[Gilzeantoscore]

Securing the longest phase of peace in western Europe should be enough on its own for people to vote to stay in.

 

[scaramanga]

Securing the longest phase of peace in western Europe should be enough on its own for people to vote to stay in.

Yep. Their anti-tiger rocks have been pretty effective too.

 

[monkeybarry]

I hear that should we leave the EU, the remainers warn us that our country will be strewn into 24 months of austerity.

I'll take that!

Seems to me to be an Excellent Deal. Only 24 months in exchange for reinstated democracy, saving of £10billion a year, securing our borders, subdued pressure on all our services (housing, NHS, schools, prisons, roads etc.), Law making back in the hands of our elected leaders and finally free to trade with the rest of the world (especially our commonwealth countries who we cruelly turned our back on when we joined the common market). All that and more for Independence; Deal of the century!

Democracy?
Do you mean the aristocratic monopoly on political positions in the "commons"?
Or the unelected house of lords?

 

[the dza]

Does anybody think the EU Ref may result in a split of the Tory Party, akin to that of Labour in the 80's splitting into the SDP? Perhaps then merging with UKIP in the way the SDP merged with the Liberal Party (forming the Liberal Democrats)? When the campaign started, it seemed they would try and keep in mind the unity required after the referendum. That all seems out of the window now, particularly on the Brexit side of the Tory Party, many of whom have always disliked Cameron and want to take this opportunity to give him a good kicking.

 

[scaramanga]

Does anybody think the EU Ref may result in a split of the Tory Party, akin to that of Labour in the 80's splitting into the SDP? Perhaps then merging with UKIP in the way the SDP merged with the Liberal Party (forming the Liberal Democrats)? When the campaign started, it seemed they would try and keep in mind the unity required after the referendum. That all seems out of the window now, particularly on the Brexit side of the Tory Party, many of whom have always disliked Cameron and want to take this opportunity to give him a good kicking.

Cameron's covered that off by already planning to leave.

If we vote out it'll split the party but I think that's an unlikely result. Vote in and it'll be business as usual.

 

[milo]

I hear that should we leave the EU, the remainers warn us that our country will be strewn into 24 months of austerity.

I'll take that!

Seems to me to be an Excellent Deal. Only 24 months in exchange for

Plus slower growth in the medium and long term and the likelihood that foreign companies who base themselves in the UK to get access to the EU would scale back investment or pull out.

reinstated democracy,

Like the House of Lords?

saving of £10billion a year,

The cost of our contribution towards the EU budget is half of this and we get far more back in trade and tax contributions from EU citizens living and working in the UK.

securing our borders,

Debatable when you consider that we would have one (very probably soon to be two) land boarders with the EU and would lose the right to send back people seeking asylum back to the first EU country that they passed through. This also ignores the fact that non-EU immigration is currently higher than EU immigration. It also ignores the fact that any future trade deal with the EU would very likely be dependent on freedom of movement.

subdued pressure on all our services (housing, NHS, schools, prisons, roads etc.),

The primary causes of pressure on our public services are our ageing population and austerity. Leaving the EU would do nothing to alleviate either. We would also potentially lose the 10% of NHS staff who are from other EU countries. It also ignores the fact that EU nationals pay £25bn more in tax annually than they take out in benefits or use of public services.

Law moving back in the hands of our elected leaders

We would still have an unelected upper chamber, we would still be covered by the European Court of Human Rights, UK judges would still set case law. This also completely ignores the numerous times that the ECJ has decided in our favour or that the UK government has got a better deal for us by pushing for new, or changes to, EU rules.

and finally free to trade with the rest of the world (especially our commonwealth countries who we cruelly turned our back on when we joined the common market).

I am not clear how our membership of the EU meant that we turned our back on the Commonwealth. I think that it is also rather naive to believe that the Commonwealth could make up for the lost trade to the EU that exit would result in. Isn't it also telling that the governments of India, Australia and Canada have all come out in support of our continued membership of the EU?

There is nothing stopping us trading with the rest of the world now and in fact we do. What exit would do is make trade harder with our nearest and biggest market.

All that and more for Independence; Deal of the century!

The arguments in favour of exit do not stack up. Does it not worry you that not a single independent body of note has come out in support of leaving the EU?

 

[milo]

https://twitter.com/x/status/737215233836634112

 

[Kenyan Spur]

@ AuroRaman. Post 2762.
Hi Pajhi. Kamal di gal ha.
Chuck de Sardar ji.

 

[We are Tottenham]

Yes.

Mind games ...
Well not according to his father recently ...
I.m not 100% certain..about how to vote..how can you predict the future?
It would be great to have a Europe that worked together without a millionaire gravy train and a Democracy.

We are living in dangerous times more than
I have known at anytime in my life...and people have patio ate views..

Anyway they, us, have to remember it's their future and I fear overpopulation will strangle the countries resources
..it already is!
Anyway...who am I . Does my opinion really matter..just another pleb especially from those who will disagree with my views... Just another ignorant no nothing person!

 

[the dza]

Mind games ...
Well not according to his father recently ...
I.m not 100% certain..about how to vote..how can you predict the future?
It would be great to have a Europe that worked together without a millionaire gravy train and a Democracy.

We are living in dangerous times more than
I have known at anytime in my life...and people have patio ate views..

Anyway they, us, have to remember it's their future and I fear overpopulation will strangle the countries resources
..it already is!
Anyway...who am I . Does my opinion really matter..just another pleb especially from those who will disagree with my views... Just another ignorant no nothing person!

Not sure why you'd describe yourself as an 'ignorant no nothing.' We're all just people on a forum, none of us can predict the future.

For me, I don't feel the status quo is particularly dangerous. Changing it and being led by the likes of Johnson and Duncan Smith seems like a more dangerous future.

 

[We are Tottenham]

Not sure why you'd describe yourself as an 'ignorant no nothing.' We're all just people on a forum, none of us can predict the future.

For me, I don't feel the status quo is particularly dangerous. Changing it and being led by the likes of Johnson and Duncan Smith seems like a more dangerous future.

The EU apart from other things is an enormous Gravy Train. Why should a load of nobodies be paid enormous wages out of Tax money . Money that people have worked for ..not sit around!

 

[milo]

The EU apart from other things is an enormous Gravy Train. Why should a load of nobodies be paid enormous wages out of Tax money . Money that people have worked for ..not sit around!

The European Commission employs about 33,000 people, the UK civil service employs 400,000.