Europe: In or Out

[cunning fergus]

EU space agency? That's a new one.

If the EU commission and EU taxpayers have nothing to do with the ESA then I am wrong and you are right?

Let me know.........

 

[brighton fella]

It



Points systems and work-permits are fine and dandy to a point, but I assume all these people will get them, and many more. But they do create red-tape that is discouraging for businesses wanting to move or expand to the UK. One thing any large business wants is a large supply of good cheap labour, and Britain without immigration doesn't have that. We have a good supply of educated, quality labour, but not so much spare at the minimum-wage end of the market. One of my best friends works in management for a large waste management company in Peterborough. He manages a couple of dozen people who work conveyor belts of waste from people's bins, sorting it and separating out recycleables, organics and so on. Sounds like a god-damn awful job, boring and disgusting in equal measure, minimum wage, and everyone working there is eastern european. According to him thats just the way it is, and apparently Brits don't want it - nor do they need to do that job, there's more rewarding, interesting and better-paid jobs out there for hard-working non-skilled british people. Now I assume all these people fail your points test and don't get in, but what does that mean for this company, or others like it?



.

you assume wrong if you think by opting out will lead to this, no one is suggesting that they would all have to pack their bags and leave, the idea is to restrict the amounts coming in and whilst we are tied to the EU we have absolutely no measures of controlling the numbers.

 

[5ways]

Facinating stuff here, so a few points, there could have been many more................interested in your views.

What is the "political authority of the EU"?
How was it derived?
Who has been democratically elected to execute this "political authority"?
Who has voted for Serbia and Moldova to be accepted in the EU?
Why is the accession of even more poorer countries in the interests of the UK?

The above answers should all include somewhere a part about democracy.

One last one............as you have concerns with Russo-Western relationships.

Why do you think, despite frozen relationships with Russia, the EU's space agency is happy to cozy up to Russia so that astronauts (like Tim Peake) can get up to space via Russian spacecraft?

Feel like I'm back in sixth form

The political authority of the EU rests fundamentally upon the democratic mandate of its member states, who through referendum or through their democratically elected representatives agree to pool sovereignty on certain issues to the wider benefit of all members.

It is derived through the the European Parliament, and the Council of Ministers. The Parliament is directly elected to represent EU citizens, while the Council of Ministers has a government minister from each country to establish EU law. They derive legitimacy from national elections. This is how it claims democratic legitimacy.

No one has yet voted for Serbian or Moldovan accession. Serbia is an official candidate for membership. This is a good thing, less corrupt, more efficient political systems are good for the people of Moldova and ultimately good for the EU. It has hit a rocky road however. The EU keeps an eye on it though: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2016/02/15-fac-moldova-conclusions/. It does this as part of the European Neighbourhood and Eastern Partnership programme which helps post-Soviet countries undertake political reform and become fully functioning free-market democratic countries.

Forgive my copy paste but on Serbia: "Serbia officially applied for European Union membership on 22 December 2009,[6] and the European Commission recommended making it an official candidate on 12 October 2011. After the vote of the 27 EU foreign ministers on 28 February 2012, where with 26 votes for and 1 vote against, a candidate status recommendation was issued, and Serbia received full candidate status on 1 March. On 28 June 2013 the European Council endorsed the Council of Ministers conclusions and recommendations to open accession negotiations with Serbia.[7][8] In December 2013 the Council of the European Union approved opening negotiations on Serbia's accession in January 2014,[9] and the first Intergovernmental Conference was held on 21 January at the European Council in Brussels.[10]

So everyone supported opening the process with Serbia bar Romania.

You might be surprised to hear that the UK has traditionally supported the expansion of the EU eastwards

"In 2002, Tory MEP Roger Helmer, who went on to defect to Ukip, put it like this: "Tory policy on enlargement is clear. We are in favour of it, for three reasons. First, we owe a moral debt to the countries of central and eastern Europe, which were allowed to fall under the pall of communism after the second world war. Second, by entrenching democracy and the rule of law in eastern Europe, we ensure stability and security for the future. Third, an extra hundred million people in our single market may be a short-term liability, but long term will contribute to growth and prosperity."" http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/21/tories-conservatives-eu-enlargement-bulgaria

This argument has fallen out of favour with some Tories, and a large part of the country (though I don't think DC or GO) but it does answer why the accession of poor countries is in our interest. Entrenching democracy and the rule of law in the Balkans or Eastern Europe is a good thing - stability and security. Bigger single market = bigger economy, this hopefully generates growth. So there is political and economic reasons to support accession. Here is answer that involves democracy!

Russia has a proud and noble tradition of space exploration and has a lot of expertise, collaboration is great.

 

[GT49er]

What nonsense. Look up the word duress. It's quite close to desperate and disadvantaged in the dictionary.

You must have a very very small dictionary. And, as we're discussing the EU, it's much closer to 'dud', 'duplicitous' and 'dodgy'.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

you assume wrong if you think by opting out will lead to this, no one is suggesting that they would all have to pack their bags and leave, the idea is to restrict the amounts coming in and whilst we are tied to the EU we have absolutely no measures of controlling the numbers.

No one is suggesting they would all have to pack their bags and leave - forgive me but the primary reason that people want to leave the EU is too much immigration, therefore many will have to pack their bags and leave if you follow this desire through. Otherwise what was the point of voting to leave the EU if there is no change in the numbers and we allow as many in as are here already?

 

[pastafarian]

The political authority of the EU rests fundamentally upon the democratic mandate of its member states, who through referendum or through their democratically elected representatives agree to pool sovereignty on certain issues to the wider benefit of all members.

.

You say "pool" sovereignty as though it’s a good idea,you are entitled to believe this,its your opinion after all.

I would call it shamelessly abandoning sovereign control and capitulating our democracy.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

It sort of makes sense what you're saying, but it also kind of undermines your argument. When you start presenting individual cases of EU residents in the UK they all start becoming useful, and before you know it all 100,000+ are worthwhile and needed. The footballers might seem a silly case, but of all the people here from the EU they are arguably the least needed and the most replaceable. But if they're OK then you're not making a good argument to exclude others.

EU people I know include an Italian guy who has opened up a hairdresser's down here in Cornwall, invested in a business and employs a few young british people, I assume he's welcome. There's a French student at the uni in penryn who does some babysitting for me. My cousin's girlfriend is Polish, she's here with her daughter, she works as a nurse in the NHS, the job was advertised back in Poland so she came. We don't see that much of her because she does all the shifts that British nurses don't want, Christmas Day, friday nights and so on. She's obviously welcome.

Points systems and work-permits are fine and dandy to a point, but I assume all these people will get them, and many more. But they do create red-tape that is discouraging for businesses wanting to move or expand to the UK. One thing any large business wants is a large supply of good cheap labour, and Britain without immigration doesn't have that. We have a good supply of educated, quality labour, but not so much spare at the minimum-wage end of the market. One of my best friends works in management for a large waste management company in Peterborough. He manages a couple of dozen people who work conveyor belts of waste from people's bins, sorting it and separating out recycleables, organics and so on. Sounds like a god-damn awful job, boring and disgusting in equal measure, minimum wage, and everyone working there is eastern european. According to him thats just the way it is, and apparently Brits don't want it - nor do they need to do that job, there's more rewarding, interesting and better-paid jobs out there for hard-working non-skilled british people. Now I assume all these people fail your points test and don't get in, but what does that mean for this company, or others like it?

Simple truth is, as the British population ages, our workforce is becoming stretched. If there is zero immigration to the UK we're going to be unable to fill jobs and generate the tax income we need to pay pensions and fund an NHS with more demands on it. Retirement age is going up but this won't be enough, we need blue-collar immigration and our government has to wrestle the demands of an encomy that needs immigration, with the desires of a populace that rejects immigration. [actually, from an environmental standpoint I would be delighted with a zero or negative-growth country, and would support this if I thought the anti-EU people were serious about closing borders]

Theoretically the EU expansion should have been the perfect solution - in the past we've encouraged people from the Carribbean, Africa and south Asia to come with resultant strains on communities from incompatible cultures, religion and so on. An influx of white, Christian people should have been easier to swallow, but it hasn't worked. So if the EU migrants are stopped, I guess we're back to more people from Pakistan, Syria and so on. Or, more likely, the immigration from eastern europe continues but is just illegal, it was a pretty open secret that all the vegetable farms and flower farms in East Anglia, prior to the expanded EU, were staffed by cash-in-hand eastern europeans. At least now they're legal they're contributing to the economy.

The only viable solution to keep our healthy economy and have no immigration of low-skilled people is to dramatically raise our birth-rate, from the current 1.83 infants per woman up to around 2.1 - which the rate at which the British population replaces itself - and above. In fact birth rates are only as high as this because the migrant birth rate is much higher than the indigenous birth rate - which is about 1.75 - a quarter of all babies born last year were to mothers born outside the UK. Huge numbers of indigenous British women are not having children at all any more.

I understand what you are saying, but in all honesty I don't feel we have a very good economy really. Shame our jobs are not being created in things like manufacturing instead of more service industry jobs, I would probably be a lot more positive about things, I mean how many more supermarkets do we need in this country. For me it's also about quality of life, I would take less people so I don't get the feeling everyone is starting to live on top of each other, even if that meant we where a lot poorer because of it. Just look at how busy the South East has been getting over the last 10 years or so, this is enough for me.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

If the EU commission and EU taxpayers have nothing to do with the ESA then I am wrong and you are right?

Let me know.........

They don't have anything to do with an EU Space Agency as it doesn't exist, never has done. It's just more nonsense you've probably picked from the Internet to go with the ever growing list of rubbish you spout on here. From memory your arguments about Ford Motors, Pharmacoeconomics, budget deficits (or do you mean supplus ) VAT have all crumbled quite quickly. I do have a different tale about Silvertown sugar refinery to the one you told/cut-and-pasted-from-the-net as well....but I'll keep that for another evening.

 

[London Irish]

Stay and fight for a real reformed social Europe alongside the likes of Syriza and Podemos

 

[Soulman]

I understand what you are saying, but in all honesty I don't feel we have a very good economy really. Shame our jobs are not being created in things like manufacturing instead of more service industry jobs, I would probably be a lot more positive about things, I mean how many more supermarkets do we need in this country.

Well the German firm Aldi are putting up 80 new stores in 2016. Surely if the UK votes out they will not build them, close others and get on the Eurostar with Lidl eh.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/bea00186-d403-11e5-8887-98e7feb46f27.html#axzz40MmRvjub

 

[pastafarian]

No one is suggesting they would all have to pack their bags and leave - forgive me but the primary reason that people want to leave the EU is too much immigration, therefore many will have to pack their bags and leave if you follow this desire through. Otherwise what was the point of voting to leave the EU if there is no change in the numbers and we allow as many in as are here already?

Not my primary reason at all.
Immigration is certainly an important factor but the right to determine our own future by returning our democratic rights with sovereign control trumps everything else with ease

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Well yes if you take into account X(price) can be variable and Y (tariffs etc) must be on an equal footing
And if The UK then agreed a deal with the EU to buy A for X without Y then EU would not be able to discriminate against China in the market concerning product A and would have to drop Y as well. China could still come up trumps by dumping shed loads of A at rock bottom prices which no one can compete with whether Y is there or not

If, could.....okay.

 

[GT49er]

Not my primary reason at all.
Immigration is certainly an important factor but the right to determine our own future by returning our democratic rights with sovereign control trumps everything else with ease

100% this for me too.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

Well the German firm Aldi are putting up 80 new stores in 2016. Surely if the UK votes out they will not build them, close others and get on the Eurostar with Lidl eh.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/bea00186-d403-11e5-8887-98e7feb46f27.html#axzz40MmRvjub

It's the sort of bullshit we will hear up until this referendum lol. We might get cheaper food but really in the end other jobs will go from other supermarkets due to increased competition, then there is the prospect of more building works encroaching on towns, more traffic on the roads and more people.

 

[pastafarian]

If, could.....okay.

You never did respond to my question (twice) HerrT,ill try again

would you reform any parts of the EU (if yes which bits)

or is it perfect?

 

[The Rivet]

They don't have anything to do with an EU Space Agency as it doesn't exist, never has done. It's just more nonsense you've probably picked from the Internet to go with the ever growing list of rubbish you spout on here. From memory your arguments about Ford Motors, Pharmacoeconomics, budget deficits (or do you mean supplus ) VAT have all crumbled quite quickly. I do have a different tale about Silvertown sugar refinery to the one you told/cut-and-pasted-from-the-net as well....but I'll keep that for another evening.

That's funny they have an official website and also a list of founding members from 1975. Germany largest contributor (after the collective EU) at 24.6%, France 22.2%, Italy 10.2% and UK 9.9% at the time of the report I read.
22 European 'states'/nations are members as well as their combined entity the EU.
What the hell are you talking about? If I am wrong tell me.

 

[The Rivet]

If, could.....okay.

You called me out for that response yesterday, 'If' 'Could'!

 

[The Rivet]

You never did respond to my question (twice) HerrT,ill try again

would you reform any parts of the EU (if yes which bits)

or is it perfect?

Europe is not perfect, neither is HT

 

[pastafarian]

That's funny they have an official website and also a list of founding members from 1975. Germany largest contributor (after the collective EU) at 24.6%, France 22.2%, Italy 10.2% and UK 9.9% at the time of the report I read.
22 European 'states'/nations are members as well as their combined entity the EU.
What the hell are you talking about? If I am wrong tell me.

You can take a virtual tour of the non existent European Space Agency here

http://www.eyerevolution.co.uk/tours/european-space-agency/

quite interesting all be it totally imaginary.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

You called me out for that response yesterday, 'If' 'Could'!