PTE94: Are 'EU' In or Out?

[Neon Ignition]

The dust is settling after the general election, with the surprise win the Tories managed allowing them to move forward with their plans mostly uncontested. With Labour trying to drag itself up off the floor, the Conservatives seem to be rushing through as much as they can whilst little opposition exists and as part of that the big EU Referendum question has quickly reemerged.

It wasn't long ago it seemed unlikely we'd see a vote take place and now there's speculation it could be as soon as next year.

So, if a vote takes place, would you prefer to see the UK in or out of the EU?

[charlesr]

In makes the most sense, but some of the costs seem just like funding jobs for the boys.
Quite why Farage is allowed to be an EU MP when he is basically opposed to everything about it is beyond me. Although he did say he was kick back and do no work for a few months after the election (but is still happy to take the vast salary - wtf).

[EJG1980]

In. I agree with the basic principals of freedom of movement, working together with others in common cause, etc.. I think that in general, the more the people of the world come together to work with each other, the better.

I also think we can get better trade deals, make better plans for tackling climate change, and so on, as part of a larger bloc of nations.

Also, if you want to reform something, you can only really do that from the inside. Nobody will listen to your point of view if you're on the outside looking in.

[nakamura]

I don't know. I don't agree with free movements because it unbalances immigration. You end up with a load of useless people mixed in with loads of great ones and limited immigration from the rest of the world because of the points scoring system. I believe in even immigration for everyone but not on a points based or free movement system.

Business wise I'm not sure at all.

[BaronSqwelch]

In. I work in manufacturing and being in the EU is vital to that.
Leaving would just mean abiding by EU rules without having any say in creating them. Switzerland's attempts to curb immigration show that.

In an ideal world we could run immigration on a points system, we really don't need to import people to sell the big issue for instance...but the positives to the system greatly outweigh the negatives imo

[Lebowski]

I don't agree with the free movement within the Europe as a whole, immigration is massive problem for the UK as all its member states are not equal, we have a better welfare systems, and a better economy than some member states and free healthcare too.

We have shortages in skills in lots of areas this is why I much prefer the way Canada and Australia handle immigration, if you can provide support to the economy via your skills and you are needed, you can apply to work and live there.

The need to help legitimate asylum seekers also comes up a lot in immigration discussions, but as someone who's parents where almost killed by joyriding asylum seekers when they hit and flipped their car you have to wonder how we are handling asylum seekers. When they get to the UK at present we seem to stick them on wellfair provide somewhere for them to sleep, and bar them from working no wonder they get bored.

[noobish hat]

Who cares? The country is ****ed now the muppets have voted the tories back in, whether they pull out of Europe or not.

[nakamura]

I don't agree with points based systems. They are too exclusive and deny many good people. The issue is benefits and state welfare access. No benefits for people until they have paid into the system for a set time is how I would do it. Will stop instant claimers.

[Mayhem]

Since last year, you can't claim Jobseekers here unless you've been in the country three months, you can't claim housing benefit if you claim Jobseekers, and I think the Conservatives were looking at restricting NHS access to foreigners to stop that sort of migrant health aid (although I don't know how that would work for people who've lived and worked here for years but still have a non-UK passport. Like the woman who sat behind me at my previous job, still had a Zimbabwe passport, but had lived and worked here for 20 years. She'd probably have to get a UK passport, you can if you've lived and worked here for 6 years.)

[nakamura]

Three months isn't exactly long enough. It's not discouraging.

[The Moleman]

Out.

The spirit of the EU, countries working together, to be stronger and more powerful as a unified region is something I’m very much in favour of. But that ‘vision’ and what the EU now is couldn’t be further apart.

‘Freedom of Movement for Workers’ is a sound concept, Brits used it a lot in the 70s and 80s and a lot of our labourers worked all across the continent, particularly in Germany and Spain. But what this has become is now simply a right for any EU passport holder to go to any other EU country regardless of their personal circumstances or intentions on arrival. The predictable result is that nations with good public/social services are now suffering from mass unsustainable migration. Don’t get me wrong, I believe that migration when controlled is a good thing, but nothing about what is happening to the UK is in any way controlled. It also discriminates against all non EU residents, I’m married to a Brazilian and the entire visa process including the time it took, work restrictions, social funding restrictions and ?5k+ in costs is a total farce when someone who has won the birth lottery can use their EU right to come here, sign on and then enter social housing, by definition it discriminates against the rest of the world.

The movement of people is a fundamental part of the EU and as long as we’re part of it we will have no say in who can come in. Oh, and the numbers of EU workers claiming benefits is highly doctored by them claiming to be self-employed (such as a big issue ‘salesman’) and therefore claim in work benefits.

Business wise it’ll benefit some to leave but not others. As it stands the EU IS NOT a free market and heavily restricts what businesses can do outside of it. The easiest way to show this is the story of garlic smuggling:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/manhunt-on-for-8m-garlic-smugglers-but-whod-want-to-share-their-cell-8444893.html

The basics of the story is that the EU forces food wholesalers to buy a set percent of products from (insert failing EU economy here) before they can buy from the rest of the world, these countries then charge completely unfair prices knowing that the wholesaler HAS to buy at that price. It harks back to this EU objective of stronger countries propping up weaker ones but is then totally taken advantage of by corrupt governments. The businesses that have strong connections to the EU obviously benefit with stronger trade deals but we really should be looking more to the rest of the world, particularly BRIC economies which EU rules heavily restrict. We should at least make the effort to learn their language and culture before the Chinese overlords rule us all…

I’m not a fan of UKIP, but Farage made a very significant point about the entry of Romania into the EU, which was then totally taken out of context by every news outlet. Romania has a proven corrupt government with links to organized crime that have effected law making in their country. When Romania is voting on EU laws just who is voting? Their government? Or the crime lords by corrupt official proxy? As it stands the corrupt governments of Eastern Europe are voting on laws that effect the UK, how has the EU evolved into this?

http://www.euractiv.com/future-eu/bulgaria-romania-denied-schengen-news-505471

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-18889374

The entire EU rule book should be ripped up and started again, the EU should be based on trade only and nothing else. Why should a politician on the other side of the English Channel be able to tell our government that we cannot export criminals like Qatada and Hamza rendering our own Queen even more useless.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-19716941

I’d genuinely like to be part of an EU, but one that is based on trade only, until then I will be voting to leave.

[nakamura]

Farage has made several good points but they are often surrounded by ridiculously ignorant ones. And he only has one drum to bang.

[EDDIE M0NS00N]

Gotta agree with Moleman on this. Out for me.
We used to trade fine with the EU back in the days of the Common Market & that's as far as it should've gone.

Migration is indeed a big problem that needs sorting asap. We cant keep taking the numbers that we do. It needs a sensible cap & we're only a small island.
We are not treated fairly on many decisions made due to other EU countries having their own agenda (so much for being a unified Europe!).
Bailing out countries for a 2nd time for their failure to manage their finances is unfair to those who manage them well, & seems to be something that we have no control over even now.

Farage did,indeed make some good points aswell as ridiculous ones as do many politicians from the main parties.
I think that the Aids comment was taken out of context too. He was just trying to show that yet again some migrants were taking advantage by gaining expensive treatment on the nhs.

I agree with Nakamura that 3 months isn't gonna deter migrants to wait for benefits. They could easily be working illegally for that time. I think they should be paying in for at least 5 yrs before getting ANY form of benefit, including child benefit. If they are eligible for child benefit then those children should be living here in the UK. If they aren't then no child benefit. Its a UK benefit after all.

[Solar]

Out.
I care about sovereignty and heritage more than any EU trade and politicians salary.

['Press Start']

Out.
I care about sovereignty and heritage more than any EU trade and politicians salary.

What heritage out of interest?