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

[Davkaus]

20 hours ago, Demitri_C said:

Alot of people are worried it will be fixed to stay in as the ministers will never allow this to happen. not sure seems very far fetched

It doesn't seem far fetched that the ministers are going to fix the results of a referendum? I have an incredibly low opinion of this government, but that's just silly. They've displayed nowhere near the competence that'd be required to cover up wide scale voting fraud.

[wazzap24]

22 hours ago, lapal_fan said:

I watched 45 mins of the Brexit movie yesterday.

9.5/10?

[blandy]

Here's an are you in or out survey (interactive content)

https://speakout.38degrees.org.uk/campaigns/eu-quiz?utm_medium=email&utm_source=generic&utm_campaign=blast_2016-06-09

Quote

• There are 24 questions in total. It's not a test - the answers are about your own views and opinions. Answer as many questions as possible for the best results
• If you are unsure or don't know what you think, you can answer 'neutral'
• You can find more information by clicking on 'Arguments for and against' underneath each question
• If you feel very strongly, or not very strongly about a question, you can adjust the importance of your answer by clicking the up or down arrows. The options are 'quite important' (this is the default setting), 'very important' or 'not so important'

 

[PaulC]

6 hours ago, Davkaus said:

It doesn't seem far fetched that the ministers are going to fix the results of a referendum? I have an incredibly low opinion of this government, but that's just silly. They've displayed nowhere near the competence that'd be required to cover up wide scale voting fraud.

Surely its down to the integrity of the counting officers and not any govt minister.

[HanoiVillan]

That is one thing that certainly isn't going to happen. 

[sharkyvilla]

According to that survey I'm 60% in, which sounds about right.  About a year ago I'd have been the other way but the lack of a concrete plan as to what would happen when we leave has decided it for me.

[Chindie]

Quote

The British public have it wrong on immigrants and wrong on the EU.

According to their research by Ipsos MORI, British people think far more EU citizens live in the UK than actually do, that we pay far more money to the EU budget than is the case, and that we significantly overestimate the amount of benefits paid to EU migrants.

The Indie

We're having a referendum on an issue that the country is ludicrously misinformed about. In some cases, the populations impressions of EU figures are so far out as to be absurd.

Farcical.

[MakemineVanilla]

 

51 minutes ago, Chindie said:

The Indie

We're having a referendum on an issue that the country is ludicrously misinformed about. In some cases, the populations impressions of EU figures are so far out as to be absurd.

Farcical.

But maybe, even if their guesses are way out, that they think that whatever it is, it is too many and that the increase of 333k a year, when projected forward, year upon year, is unsustainable, especially when there is no way to do anything about it?

[chrisp65]

4 hours ago, MakemineVanilla said:

 

But maybe, even if their guesses are way out, that they think that whatever it is, it is too many and that the increase of 333k a year, when projected forward, year upon year, is unsustainable, especially when there is no way to do anything about it?

Sorry, when did the USA, Canada, India, Bangladesh, New Zealand, South Africa, Pakistan and Nigeria join the EU?

 

[tonyh29]

9 hours ago, blandy said:

Here's an are you in or out survey (interactive content)

https://speakout.38degrees.org.uk/campaigns/eu-quiz?utm_medium=email&utm_source=generic&utm_campaign=blast_2016-06-09

 

I got 50/50 undecided 

 

which is probably about where I am in terms of voting although I would say I'm more towards exit then remain on the whole 

[MakemineVanilla]

10 hours ago, chrisp65 said:

Sorry, when did the USA, Canada, India, Bangladesh, New Zealand, South Africa, Pakistan and Nigeria join the EU?

 

Are you telling me they are not?

I must have been misinformed,

But it has to be said that my atlas is a so out of date the cover has a map of Pangaea on it. 

[tonyh29]

If in doubt scare the pensioners

sounds like Cameron is going into full panic mode , the next 12 days or so are going to be eventful 

[lapal_fan]

Makes me laugh driving around all the nice areas with multi million pound houses with "vote out" signs on the front gardens.

It appears these people have really struggled being a part of the E.U.

[Xela]

2 hours ago, lapal_fan said:

Makes me laugh driving around all the nice areas with multi million pound houses with "vote out" signs on the front gardens.

It appears these people have really struggled being a part of the E.U.

Its the same as multi millionaires backing the Leave vote as well like Dyson and others. In or out, it won't have any impact on him.

I'm still undecided. If I had to vote one way or another at this exact moment I would probably vote to Stay but I'm annoyed by both camps for the scaremongering

Edited June 12, 2016 by Xela

[MakemineVanilla]

The thing which provides the most protection for low-skilled workers from the downward pressure on wages from immigration is the minimum wage.

Although many EU countries passed minimum wage legislation, as did New Labour in 1998, some countries, the most notable being Germany, did not have a minimum wage until very recently (Jan '15).

It seems likely that the Germans were prompted to introduce the minimum wage in acknowledgement that an influx of immigrants from the so-called A8 countries was pushing down low-skilled German workers' wages.

The German minimum wage (€8.51) is lower than the UK minimum wage of (€9.5). 

It offers evidence that the EU does not promote the interests of low paid workers or protect them from exploitation, national governments do.

 

[blandy]

1 hour ago, MakemineVanilla said:

It offers evidence that the EU does not promote the interests of low paid workers or protect them from exploitation, national governments do.

I don't agree with the angle being taken. Minimum wage, like tax levels or National Insurance contributions is and should be a thing for national government. It absolutely should not be set at a pan european level, for obvious reasons.

The introduction in some nations of minimum wage by left of centre Governments has been a good thing for lower paid workers. To equate the setting of wage levels with the role of the EU seems to be to be the false angle I mentioned.

In the UK the tories, for (I suspect) party political election reasons have announced that (despite their previous vehement opposition to a minimum wage) they will increase the level at some point in the future (they've said when, I just can't remember the date). Other tories have then said "oh, that'll drag more immigrants here" so I imagine it's going to get quietly forgotten a while down the line, like many of Osborne's "clever" wheezes.

The EU has legislated for a Social chapter which set a number of employment rights for all workers. Again, I think the tories opted out and (I think) Labour later opted in, when they became Gov't. SO the EU has implemented some protections for workers, which the tories opposed and Labour supported. Now the out people talk about abolishing EU red tape, but will not identify a single "red tape" item in any detail. I suspect that employment rights would be one of the areas they want to attack. So personally I think on the issue of workers rights Out = worse.

 

[wazzap24]

4 hours ago, lapal_fan said:

Makes me laugh driving around all the nice areas with multi million pound houses with "vote out" signs on the front gardens.

It appears these people have really struggled being a part of the E.U.

I've got mates/aquainteces who vary widly in terms of personal circumstance and I work with a broad spectrum of people from all walks. 

The only working class/lower middle people I've heard say 'out' are borderline card carrying members of the EDL. 

Quite a lot of the well to do fancy it though and its all down to 'immigration'. Some of them wouldn't know an immigrant if one ran up and chinned them. if we got rid of them all they would soon notice though. They'd be ****. 

[MakemineVanilla]

2 hours ago, blandy said:

I don't agree with the angle being taken. Minimum wage, like tax levels or National Insurance contributions is and should be a thing for national government. It absolutely should not be set at a pan european level, for obvious reasons.

The introduction in some nations of minimum wage by left of centre Governments has been a good thing for lower paid workers. To equate the setting of wage levels with the role of the EU seems to be to be the false angle I mentioned.

In the UK the tories, for (I suspect) party political election reasons have announced that (despite their previous vehement opposition to a minimum wage) they will increase the level at some point in the future (they've said when, I just can't remember the date). Other tories have then said "oh, that'll drag more immigrants here" so I imagine it's going to get quietly forgotten a while down the line, like many of Osborne's "clever" wheezes.

The EU has legislated for a Social chapter which set a number of employment rights for all workers. Again, I think the tories opted out and (I think) Labour later opted in, when they became Gov't. SO the EU has implemented some protections for workers, which the tories opposed and Labour supported. Now the out people talk about abolishing EU red tape, but will not identify a single "red tape" item in any detail. I suspect that employment rights would be one of the areas they want to attack. So personally I think on the issue of workers rights Out = worse.

 

Nice.

Theoretically raising the minimum wage could be used to control immigration because minimum wage jobs are supposed to be very price elastic and a rise would damp down demand at some point.

Twinned with the government's proposal to limit benefits for some qualifying period it would be theoretically effective.

I suspect that that might even have been the plan.

If workable it certainly would have been a less extreme solution than Brexit and would have avoided the stink of xenophobia which hangs round the issue of immigration.

Presumably this was the concession Cameron wanted but was denied.

[blandy]

38 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said:

Presumably this was the concession Cameron wanted but was denied.

No, I don't think so. He was clear what he wanted:-

2010 Tory Manifesto: "Net migration will be in the 10's of thousands, no ifs, no buts...that's a promise" and he said it on the telly debates as well.

Cameron 2014 Tory Party Conference: "Numbers have increased faster than we wanted...too much for communities and job market...has to change...in my renegotiation I will not take no for an answer...I will get what Britain needs on freedom of movement"

2016 negotiation and he didn't even ask for it after being told by Merkel that as a founding principle it was non-negotiable. And so they did this possible qualifying period for 4 year benefits thing. Not planned, just a fig leaf for impossible domestic claims.

Like with many of his and Osborne's schemes, plans and promises - they tried to be clever but are essentially incompetent and reality soon gets them found out. A pair of clever fools, basically.

Cameron repeatedly promised something that was not possible.

The out people are also promising something on immigration which is not possible, in or out of Europe. They (either side) absolutely will fail to get immigration to the level they say they want. It's completely gone unrealistic the whole in/out thing. Just more and more extreme and non-credible claims and promises being made. Utter bonkers.

[MakemineVanilla]

29 minutes ago, blandy said:

No, I don't think so. He was clear what he wanted:-

2010 Tory Manifesto: "Net migration will be in the 10's of thousands, no ifs, no buts...that's a promise" and he said it on the telly debates as well.

Cameron 2014 Tory Party Conference: "Numbers have increased faster than we wanted...too much for communities and job market...has to change...in my renegotiation I will not take no for an answer...I will get what Britain needs on freedom of movement"

2016 negotiation and he didn't even ask for it after being told by Merkel that as a founding principle it was non-negotiable. And so they did this possible qualifying period for 4 year benefits thing. Not planned, just a fig leaf for impossible domestic claims.

Like with many of his and Osborne's schemes, plans and promises - they tried to be clever but are essentially incompetent and reality soon gets them found out. A pair of clever fools, basically.

Cameron repeatedly promised something that was not possible.

The out people are also promising something on immigration which is not possible, in or out of Europe. They (either side) absolutely will fail to get immigration to the level they say they want. It's completely gone unrealistic the whole in/out thing. Just more and more extreme and non-credible claims and promises being made. Utter bonkers.

So Merkel said Nein!

Was freedom of movement a founding principle in the Treaty of Rome.

 

 

Edited June 12, 2016 by MakemineVanilla