BREXIT Discussion, v4.0: The Back-Pedaling

[whougonnacall]

It's also been an old-school Labour dream for ages.

Just ask Corby



The 'serfs' have the ability to vote against people who would go down that route though.
Much moreso than they would in the EU superstate where their voices would be much smaller and much more easily ignored (hey, ask a Greek...)

U mean about to lose his job over his failed stay campugn corby?

Possibly in years to come..for now the hard right has been empowered and the last solid workers rights guarantee since thatcher broke the unions coukd be negotiated away

 

[Supereem]

What an incredibly idiotic statement you just made.

Why so? Are you even European? Or are you full of shit?

 

[Supereem]

I didn't know giving up your independence as a nation, your BOE holdings, and control of your military constituted friendship these days.

A systemic takeover is taking place, and you erroneously believe that it is in your favor.

Because that's what had happened right? Oh wait it didn't...

 

[BruceLeeOnTRT]

Because that's what had happened right? Oh wait it didn't...

Yes, and you can thank the 52% for it.

Your outlook on the EU is parallel to the British outlook on Germany prior to WW2. You want to believe it's something that it's not, even though you have visual evidence stating otherwise.

You need to stop getting your education from tumblr, and pick up a history book.

 

[IDL]

 

[bmasters1993]

EU made it clear today that they're going to make this as painful as possible.

From their perspective I can see why. If they made it easy for the UK then everyone else would start seceding. They gotta make it as hard as possible for the UK if they want to survive as an entity.

All that being said, fuck the EU

 

[vcmmafan]

Just Days After Brexit, EU Releases Plan For Further Expansion, An EU Army, AND Turkish Membership


http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/06/29/european-leaders-release-plan-eu-army-turkish-membership/

What is the point of that if they are all in NATO?

 

[Awesomesauce]

What is the point of that if they are all in NATO?

Yup, they are going to try to rush this integration before movements from other nations to disolve the union can gain traction. Should be an interesting race. The EU turned totoletarion far more quickly then I would have imagined.

You also have to laugh at the notion of including Turkey, I swear these fucking morons exist in a completely different reality. They are going to have freedom of movement with an integrated Islamic state? Are they fucking insane?

 

[Gervinho]

EU made it clear today that they're going to make this as painful as possible.

From their perspective I can see why. If they made it easy for the UK then everyone else would start seceding. They gotta make it as hard as possible for the UK if they want to survive as an entity.

All that being said, fuck the EU

Thats why I said its gonna be rocky time for UK and with Boris taking over, things will get worse as the man is utter clown

 

[Bald1]

The push for Turkish membership is truly disturbing, and I believe will cause more problems than the rule makers realize. Like MicroBrew said, they'd be an Islamic Trojan Horse. At the same time they're playing hardball with Scotland getting membership if they separate from England. Sounds like going for broke with a globalist agenda.

 

[Awesomesauce]

The push for Turkish membership is truly disturbing, and I believe will cause more problems than the rule makers realize. Like MicroBrew said, they'd be an Islamic Trojan Horse. At the same time they're playing hardball with Scotland getting membership if they separate from England. Sounds like going for broke with a globalist agenda.

I think the hard balling of Scotland is simply to try to make it more uncomfortable for the UK as a whole. If the UK actually gets to the point where it leaves the EU (which is far from a sure thing) then the EU will be happy to talk to Scotland at that point I am sure.

 

[Bald1]

I think the hard balling of Scotland is simply to try to make it more uncomfortable for the UK as a whole. If the UK actually gets to the point where it leaves the EU (which is far from a sure thing) then the EU will be happy to talk to Scotland at that point I am sure.

Agreed. They're not looking for an amicable divorce, and aren't above using the kids for leverage.

 

[Awesomesauce]

Agreed. They're not looking for an amicable divorce, and aren't above using the kids for leverage.

Ya, thats a pretty good analogy. Its childish and I suspect in a few months things will be easier and more smooth but man the EU is being poorly run. Just like every other western state I suppose.

 

[Arkain2K]

Reality Check: Have Leave campaigners changed their tune?
28 June 2016

The Reality Check team looks at some of the claims and promises made during the campaign by Leave campaigners who now appear to have modified their positions.

​

Immigration

The campaign claim: Immigration levels could be controlled if the UK left the EU. This would relieve pressure on public services.

The current claim: Immigration levels can't be radically reduced by leaving the EU. Fears about immigration did not influence the way people voted.

Reality Check verdict: During the campaign, some Leave campaigners sent a clear message that the referendum was about controlling immigration. Some are now being more nuanced, saying the UK's decision to leave the EU would not guarantee a significant decrease in immigration levels.

Immigration was the key issue of the EU referendum campaign, and Vote Leave's focus on it was a key part of their strategy.

One of the main claims of the campaign centred around control of immigration levels.

Responding to the latest Office for National Statistics (ONS) figures, which showed that overall net migration stands at 333,000, MEP Nigel Farage said: "Mass immigration is still hopelessly out of control and set to get worse if we remain inside the EU."

Though Mr Farage was not part of the official Vote Leave campaign but campaigned in favour of leaving the EU, similar claims were later echoed by Vote Leave campaigner Gisela Stuart.

She said voting to remain meant there would be "no control" over migration from the EU, "no matter how great the pressure on schools, hospitals and housing becomes or how much wages in our poorest communities are pushed down".

Similarly, leading pro-Leave campaigner and Tory leader front runner Boris Johnson said that the only solution to the scale of immigration which the UK was facing, was to leave the EU.

He claimed a vote to stay in the union would mean people "kissing goodbye permanently to control of immigration".

The Leave campaign also repeatedly linked EU migration with pressure on public services.

On the 20 May, Vote Leave produced a document which it claimed outlined the pressure that migration from the European Union would put on the NHS - a 28% to 57% increase in demand for accident and emergency services.

As we discovered, an increasing population would put additional demand on A&E but the extent of that increase had not been demonstrated.

But in an article published in the Daily Telegraph on Monday, Mr Johnson denied a victory for leaving the EU could be linked to immigration.

He wrote: "It is said that those who voted Leave were mainly driven by anxieties about immigration. I do not believe that is so."

And speaking to the BBC's Newsnight programme on Saturday, MEP Daniel Hannan insisted the public had not been misled over how much control the country would have over immigration post-Brexit.

In a heated exchange with Evan Davis, he said: "We never said there was going to be some radical decline ... we want a measure of control".

"Frankly, if people watching think that they have voted and there is now going to be zero immigration from the EU, they are going to be disappointed."

Contributions to the EU budget

The campaign claim: We send £350m a week to Brussels, which could be spent on the NHS instead.

The current claim: The claim was a mistake, and we will not be able to spend that much extra on the NHS.

Reality Check verdict: Some of those who campaigned for Leave are now distancing themselves from this claim. Some have gone as far as admitting that it had been a mistake.

One of the most controversial claims of the campaign was that the UK sends £350m a week (or £50m a day) to Brussels, which could be spent on the NHS instead.

Vote Leave's Gisela Stuart was among those to make the claim, saying "Every week we send £350m to Brussels. I'd rather that we control how to spend that money, and if I had that control I would spend it on the NHS."

Many bodies including the UK Statistics Authority pointed out that we do not send that much a week because the rebate is deducted before any money is spent.

Over the weekend, Nigel Farage said making the claim had been "a mistake".

On Sunday's Andrew Marr Show, Iain Duncan Smith was shown a Vote Leave poster saying: "Let's give our NHS the £350m the EU takes every week," but he denied that promise had been made and said instead that the NHS would receive "the lion's share" of money that would no longer be spent on the EU.

The actual amount sent to Brussels each week in 2014 was £276m, a little over £100m of which is spent on things in the UK such as subsidising farmers and funding research, which the Leave campaign also promised to continue funding until 2020.

The single market

The campaign claim: Some on the Leave side suggested the UK does not need preferential access to the single market.

The current claim: The UK should get preferential access to the single market but will not have to accept freedom of movement to get it.

Reality Check verdict: The position has shifted from claims the UK could trade under World Trade Organisation rules to one which suggests the UK will continue to have preferential access to the single market, but at the same time having some control over immigration levels.

During the campaign, some Leave campaigners said that the UK outside of the EU would not need preferential access to the single market and would just trade under World Trade Organization rules.

This was the basis of research by Economists for Brexit, who said the UK should unilaterally remove all tariffs on imports.

But writing in the Telegraph on Monday, Boris Johnson quoted German employers' organisation the BDI as saying there would continue to be free trade and access to the single market.

The BDI later denied this.

If the UK wanted to retain preferential access to the single market, many European politicians say it would have to continue to accept freedom of movement.

Boris Johnson said that British people would continue to be able to live, work and study in the EU, while at the same time the UK would be able to introduce a points-based system to control migration.

Leader of the House of Commons Chris Grayling said that we would be able to have a free trade agreement with the EU while at the same time controlling the flow of people coming into the country.

The UK can certainly aim to secure such a deal.

But no country so far has managed a deal that allows full preferential access to the single market without having to accept freedom of movement.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36641390

 

[SouthoftheAndes]

Turkey should be brought in as soon as possible to strengthen the union. And a common military should occur, and all nations in the EU should have to get on board with the Euro. The EU cannot remain strong and united if it isn't given the powers by its member states to properly lead. The elected officials in the EU and various checks and balances all work together however when it comes to leadership they lack. Less bureaucracy.

I also think they must stop forcing open borders of refugees and other unwanted invaders. Nations should have control over those things. However, free movement of goods, and workers (who are EU citizens via being citizens of the countries they reside in which are in the EU). Should be allowed.

The EU must listen to the people.

A unified monetary policy however is a must.

 

[SouthoftheAndes]

Reality Check: Have Leave campaigners changed their tune?
28 June 2016

The Reality Check team looks at some of the claims and promises made during the campaign by Leave campaigners who now appear to have modified their positions.

​

Immigration

The campaign claim: Immigration levels could be controlled if the UK left the EU. This would relieve pressure on public services.

The current claim: Immigration levels can't be radically reduced by leaving the EU. Fears about immigration did not influence the way people voted.

Contributions to the EU budget

The campaign claim: We send £350m a week to Brussels, which could be spent on the NHS instead.

The current claim: The claim was a mistake, and we will not be able to spend that much extra on the NHS.

The single market

The campaign claim: Some on the Leave side suggested the UK does not need preferential access to the single market.

The current claim: The UK should get preferential access to the single market but will not have to accept freedom of movement to get it.




http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36641390

What a lie. "Immigration can't stop". Britain independently brought tons of immigrants and Muslims over without the EUs help.

 

[matburn H]

Strong arming policy onto member states is fucking lunacy. The UK was smart to leave. Hope the EU completely collapses.

 

[Bald1]

Turkey should be brought in as soon as possible to strengthen the union. And a common military should occur, and all nations in the EU should have to get on board with the Euro. The EU cannot remain strong and united if it isn't given the powers by its member states to properly lead. The elected officials in the EU and various checks and balances all work together however when it comes to leadership they lack. Less bureaucracy.

I also think they must stop forcing open borders of refugees and other unwanted invaders. Nations should have control over those things. However, free movement of goods, and workers (who are EU citizens via being citizens of the countries they reside in which are in the EU). Should be allowed.

The EU must listen to the people.

A unified monetary policy however is a must.

Once again, what's the deal with you wanting Turkey in the EU so bad?

 

[IDL]

What a lie. "Immigration can't stop". Britain independently brought tons of immigrants and Muslims over without the EUs help.

There is a big difference between regaining control over migration, and actually making changes to the current flows.

 

[SouthoftheAndes]

Once again, what's the deal with you wanting Turkey in the EU so bad?

It makes sense. And makes a lot more sense then Georgia in the EU. I'd also, like to see Turkey in the EEU but that isn't likely so Turkey needs to get involved with some union. I also, think Turkey a Muslim country entering the EU would only push the states that are on the fringe about joining the EU away from joining the EU and instead join the EEU. Plus the Turks are exactly what the EU needs in order to change the EU for the better.

I favor a stronger EU with Turkey included but don't think the EU should grow anymore. If any other nation should leave the EU it should be those which don't pull their weight and are an economic drain *cough cough* Greece. I also, favor a stronger EEU, why? Because I believe in a multipolar world and think the EU needs a stronger counterweight as our world becomes more inteconnected and we move towards new governance. An empowered and enlarged EEU including new states like Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova, (ideally Ukraine), Tajikistan would be a great thing. If Iran wasn't such a theocratic dictatorship Iran in the EEU could be a great thing.