The now-enacted will of (some of) the people

[blandy]

7 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

I still think Project Fear will prevail

This is a canny, but false and hypocritical label that the out people have used.

Both sides have deployed all kinds of negative "fear" crap. So for the out people to claim the other lot are just saying "fear" stuff is massively hypocritical. I suppose negative campaigning is the nature of politics sadly.

I've seen more positive (non-fear) stuff from the in people than from the out people. I think if anything it's the negative stuff from the outers that is prevailing.

[tonyh29]

2 hours ago, blandy said:

This is a canny, but false and hypocritical label that the out people have used.

Both sides have deployed all kinds of negative "fear" crap. So for the out people to claim the other lot are just saying "fear" stuff is massively hypocritical. I suppose negative campaigning is the nature of politics sadly.

I've seen more positive (non-fear) stuff from the in people than from the out people. I think if anything it's the negative stuff from the outers that is prevailing.

I disagree ... The in campaign / Project fear is all about if we leave we will all lose our jobs and everything will turn to rat shit .. Even in here we've had posters talking about passports to cross from Ireland into Britain , mobile phone calls going up , workers rights eroding overnight and The cost of a Beamer going up overnight   

the out campaign can't really spread that fear , they can speculate that things will get better / remain unchanged even ...but that isn't spreading fear .

So the negative stuff is more from the In campaign than the out 

[Chindie]

There's absolutely scaremongering on the Leave end.

The stuff about a United States of Europe, pretty much everything about immigration is fear ultimately, the 'ruled by Brussels' stuff is all fear at its heart.

Negative campaigning is the heart of everything in this.

[OutByEaster?]

The Daily Mail has been preparing its own project fear for about five years. Immigrants are coming from Europe and they'll make everything horrible and not like it was in the imaginary lovely 50's where Mail readers live!

It's been really interesting seeing them throw golden boy Cameron under a bus since he decided to stay in.

[HanoiVillan]

2 hours ago, tonyh29 said:

I disagree ... The in campaign / Project fear is all about if we leave we will all lose our jobs and everything will turn to rat shit .. Even in here we've had posters talking about passports to cross from Ireland into Britain , mobile phone calls going up , workers rights eroding overnight and The cost of a Beamer going up overnight   

the out campaign can't really spread that fear , they can speculate that things will get better / remain unchanged even ...but that isn't spreading fear .

So the negative stuff is more from the In campaign than the out 

The out campaign talks about terrorism constantly, there's plenty of fear-mongering there. 

I guess where I disagree with other VT'ers is that I don't necessarily think fear-mongering is a Bad Thing. Everybody always wants referenda to be decided according to who has the most plausibly sunny outlook, but they never are. There are real dangers in the world, it's worth addressing them. I happen to believe - and I believe the evidence suggests - that leaving the EU has many more dangers than staying. I don't feel bad or embarrassed pointing them out; people should be aware of them. 

[blandy]

2 hours ago, tonyh29 said:

I disagree .....the out campaign can't really spread that fear , they can speculate that things will get better / remain unchanged even ...but that isn't spreading fear .

http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/campaign_news_vote_leave_to_make_the_uk_safer)

Quote

EU free movement of criminals makes us less safe

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35624409

Quote

Staying in EU 'exposes UK to terror risk', says Iain Duncan Smith

http://www.itv.com/news/2016-04-15/finding-the-facts-the-truth-behind-referendum-claims-on-eu-borders-and-security/

Quote

"The Schengen system forbids countries from carrying out systematic checks on anyone with an EU passport from entering the EU. This makes it much easier for jihadists to enter from the Middle East… outside the EU, we will continue to co-operate with our European partners to fight terrorism and organised crime."

http://infacts.org/sin-bin/

Quote

Liam Fox’s superstate : Tory MP suggests staying in will see us “submerged into a new political entity”. He’s wrong. Giving more powers to the EU would trigger a referendum, and we are exempted from ever closer union.

And so on and so forth. And not only are those all examples of scaremongering, they're also all lies or deceptions.

[Awol]

I think (sadly) remain will win it, mostly on the fear factor and the social conditioning that UK is incapable of standing on its own two feet - despite Cameron saying a few months ago that the UK can prosper outside the EU, something he seems to have forgotten now.. 

If we do leave and cut loose from a project that is dying on its arse I suspect we'll all be breathing a sigh of relief 5 years from now, but that doesn't really help to convince people when the entire weight of government is being thrown at the remain campaign. 

 

[sharkyvilla]

As much as I love Ian Botham, the fact that he is in favour of leaving makes me feel a bit better about voting to stay in.  As for the fear thing, I'm getting fed up of hearing about it.  I'm not scared either way, we will find a way of coping whichever way the vote goes.  If they spend the time they give to accusing the other side of fear tactics on providing decent facts then I'd be a lot happier.

[Genie]

35 minutes ago, sharkyvilla said:

As much as I love Ian Botham, the fact that he is in favour of leaving makes me feel a bit better about voting to stay in.  As for the fear thing, I'm getting fed up of hearing about it.  I'm not scared either way, we will find a way of coping whichever way the vote goes.  If they spend the time they give to accusing the other side of fear tactics on providing decent facts then I'd be a lot happier.

I fully agree on this. We've managed to this point quite fine with a different currency to the rest of Europe, its an excellent example of coping with change.

[Rodders]

7 hours ago, Chindie said:

I think Remain will win, but it will be close.

The result either way will be farcical. The campaigns on both sides are based on half truths, lies and empty slogans.

like pretty much every election campaign ever to be fair. 

[tonyh29]

38 minutes ago, Rodders said:

like pretty much every election campaign ever to be fair. 

I won't have a bad word said against Ed's stone .. You take that back.

 

[tonyh29]

16 hours ago, blandy said:

http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/campaign_news_vote_leave_to_make_the_uk_safer)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35624409

http://www.itv.com/news/2016-04-15/finding-the-facts-the-truth-behind-referendum-claims-on-eu-borders-and-security/

http://infacts.org/sin-bin/

And so on and so forth. And not only are those all examples of scaremongering, they're also all lies or deceptions.

and those "same "issues all in my government tax payer funded leaflet that I'm looking through  ...  staying provides security apparently , keeps us safer and secures our borders and so on so even if you don't agree with my calling the stay campaign project fear , you have at least confirmed that the In campaign are using lies and deceptions (as well )

 

and as others have said  , herein lies the problem

[blandy]

 

30 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

you have at least confirmed that the In campaign are using lies and deceptions (as well )

May I direct you to what I wrote above

19 hours ago, blandy said:

Both sides have deployed all kinds of negative "fear" crap.

[omariqy]

I honestly don't know which way to vote. I have normally been pro EU mainly because my A Level economics teacher convinced me it was the right thing. However, I wouldn't be too averse to seeing us leave and seeing how we fare. I am sure we would cope albeit there would be a period of uncertainty at the beginning. Either way our politics and policies will always be influenced by massive corporations.

[lapal_fan]

I'm voting to stay in - my career, thus my families immediate future depend on it.

That said, if you ask anyone how they think being in or out of the E.U intrinsically affects them and their lifestyle, no one can really give you any answers.

As has been mentioned before - this is a very huge issue, and laymen like me (and I actively search for material in order to give myself a better understanding) should not be able to decide on this matter.

And don't forget, whatever party/side you listen to, those people are the ones with vested interests, the people who shouldn't be listened to anyway.

Whatever way it goes, some people will lose a lot of money, whilst others make a lot of money out of it.  "Us" in the middle will be very much less affected by the overall decision.

[chrisp65]

As an example of this excellent debate, we've had everyone's favourite alien, John Redwood on the radio this morning. He went the full conspiracy theory this morning on Radio 4. There is a government and EU wide conspiracy and all of George Osbourne's figures are fake.

So, we have two sides of the current conservative party, both currently sitting MP's squabbling over fake figures and conspiracy theories.

That should help me decide rationally how I'm going to vote. Do I believe John Redwood or George Osbourne.

 

[blandy]

And just to add to that. What I really really dislike is when one side or the other deliberately and knowingly repeats a lie. When they know something is untrue, yet they still claim it. I think it should be a criminal offence to do that.

So when one side or the other says staying/leaving will make us safer or richer or poorer, I can live with it, because it's speculation.

But when one side says we spend 350 million pounds a week (£18.2 billion a year) on the EU, that is a lie. They know it's a lie. To then equate this to X number of hospitals, the school budget and so on in their adverts is to take a known lie and further embellish it.

Sometimes they slightly change the wording, because they actually know it's a lie. Sometimes they say "we pass 350 million a week to the EU"

They do that because they know that their figures have been looked at by the IFS and others and been shown to be wrong. So they change the language. They know that the IFS said 350 million excludes the rebate and it excludes the money going to the UK from the EU in grants and so on. So the give away is when one of the out people uses "we pass 350 million...", but again, that's also a lie. The rebate isn't something where we give them 350 million, and then they give us (say) 100 million. It doesn't work like that. The rebate is deducted before we ever pass any money.

It's the principle of the lying that offends me, not the detail of the figures. People unscrupulous enough to use numbers they know to be untrue, to then represent that as "so many hospitals" to explain it to people without the time or inclination to find out for themselves is just wrong. If you're making a case as part of a campaign team then you are obliged to firstly find out the truth and then to tell the truth. It's fine to propose interpretations of the consequences, good or bad. But it's not fine to lie.

The figures, if anyone's interested can be found here

Quote

In a new report and accompanying interactive online tool out today IFS researchers provide an explanation of how the EU budget works, its size, where revenues come from and what the main areas of spending are. They also provide an estimate of the UK’s net contributions to the EU. The overall net contribution will be a little over £8 billion a year going forward, though it fluctuates from year to year and was £7.5 billion in 2012, £9.1 billion in 2013 and £5.7 billion in 2014.

and here

Quote

The UK doesn’t pay or "send to Brussels" this higher figure of £18 billion, or anything equivalent per week or per day. The rebate is applied straight away, so the UK never contributes this much.

 

[blandy]

1 hour ago, chrisp65 said:

Do I believe John Redwood or George Osbourne

I think the answer to that question is "No". Glad to be of service.

[tonyh29]

1 hour ago, blandy said:

But when one side says we spend 350 million pounds a week (£18.2 billion a year) on the EU, that is a lie. They know it's a lie.

it's isn't a lie  , it's just economical with the truth

we do spend £350m a week  .. it's based on our total contribution and dividing it by 52  ...

However , what they aren't saying is that we then get lots of it back through a rebate  .. £9bn of which Thatcher negotiated (I bet that pains you Pete  )

 

we pay £9bn best I can tell , so £175m a week  .. but that doesn't grab the same headline as £350m

 

Edited April 18, 2016 by tonyh29

[blandy]

2 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

it's isn't a lie  , it's just economical with the truth

we do spend £350m a week  .. it's based on our total contribution and dividing it by 52  ...

However , what they aren't saying is that we then get lots of it back through a rebate  .. £9bn of which Thatcher negotiated (I bet that pains you Pete  )

we pay £9bn best I can tell , so £175m a week  .. but that doesn't grab the same headline as £350m

 

It's a blatant lie. We don't " pay the full amount, then get back" - we never hand it over. It's like a discount - you don't pay the full price, then they give you back 50% - you just pay the 50% straight off. They know that. We do not spend 350 million a week. It's a lie. Clear lie.