super city & UKIP.

[Finnegan]

Whether or not you're a Euro-Cynic (and I appreciate this thread will probably turn into another political argument) am I the only one that would really love to read an in-depth essay of his about why we shouldn't be in the EU and why he favours UKIP?

[davieG]

Having been witness to our gradual integration and listening to / reading all the arguments for and against I still don't know, on balance whether it's a good or not good alliance.

Every point in favour/against produces an equally compelling opposite response.

This is one thing I'm happy to leave to those with access to the real facts, hopefully those that get to decide, not that my faith in them is that great.

i'm not sure whether that's a yes or a no to your question.

[Benji]

Can't imagine many people not in "the know"/a privileged position could make substantial fact-based arguments for or against to be honest. God only knows how much we put in and what we get from it no doubt random billion figures are thrown around but I doubt people actually know.

All I know is that it has resulted in me having to learn for a year a subject I hated, which for that I vote UKIP. not really

[Fosse Boy]

Whether or not you're a Euro-Cynic (and I appreciate this thread will probably turn into another political argument) am I the only one that would really love to read an in-depth essay of his about why we shouldn't be in the EU and why he favours UKIP?

:laugh:

I think the compelling points made in his signature say more than any fact based argument ever could...

[Zingari]

i think Roman Herzog hits it on the head , and i think his reasoning applies to most, if not all member states .

http://euobserver.com/9/23250

[MC Prussian]

We're not part of the EU. So you're gladly welcome to join the cherry-picker club.

It works, even without a direct involvement of the Euro. Liberties are about the same, but we're not forced to adhere to all EU standards.

Standards which are most of the time a little bit looney.

[breadandcheese]

The problem with any debate on Europe is it becomes ridiculously polarised. It's a discussion on whether we should be in or out, which relegates a complex question into a myopic debate, all because the question is asked incorrectly.

The question that is more pertinent and should be asked, is has European integration gone as far as it needs?

I think the majority believe it has, seeing the benefits of free trade, yet failing to see how greater political integration and the resulting loss of sovereignty will help our everyday lives. We as taxpayers pay a lot into the European Union, so is the benefit there? A happy medium is probably the best solution, remaining in Europe, but working out a new position or model for how Europe can work to the benefit of all its members.

[Edmund]

UKIP give some good arguments, im seriously considering them but I would like to assess them all first. They shit all over labour in terms of policies.

[Lillehamring]

We're not part of the EU. So you're gladly welcome to join the cherry-picker club.

It works, even without a direct involvement of the Euro. Liberties are about the same, but we're not forced to adhere to all EU standards.

Standards which are most of the time a little bit looney.

same here, norway is only in the EØS (EEA), so we can move freely and get many of the benefits, without having whored ourselves to brussels...

shit duty free quotas tho

[Guest]

The problem with any debate on Europe is it becomes ridiculously polarised. It's a discussion on whether we should be in or out, which relegates a complex question into a myopic debate, all because the question is asked incorrectly.

The question that is more pertinent and should be asked, is has European integration gone as far as it needs?

I think the majority believe it has, seeing the benefits of free trade, yet failing to see how greater political integration and the resulting loss of sovereignty will help our everyday lives. We as taxpayers pay a lot into the European Union, so is the benefit there? A happy medium is probably the best solution, remaining in Europe, but working out a new position or model for how Europe can work to the benefit of all its members.

To a large extent I agree with your post. I think a lot of people are not aware of what being in the EU actually entails.

And Benji, I would agree with you, but got one of my highest exam marks on EU law!!

[Ultra]

Whether or not you're a Euro-Cynic (and I appreciate this thread will probably turn into another political argument) am I the only one that would really love to read an in-depth essay of his about why we shouldn't be in the EU and why he favours UKIP?

What I want to know is why, if he really does support UKIP, he uses the Flag of St George instead of the Union Jack. I doubt they'd be impressed.

[C-man]

What I want to know is why, if he really does support UKIP, he uses the Flag of St George instead of the Union Jack. I doubt they'd be impressed.

Because UKIP fits better onto the English flag, probably.

Come on then super city, explain why we should 'Fuck the EU.'

[Webbo]

I don't see why anyone should have to justify their views but while we're at it can somebody explain what the EU does for us that we couldn't do for ourselves?

[Jon the Hat]

We should definitely be in the EU. But we need to stop the move towards it becoming a super state. We need to be aligned with our EU brethren because in 50 or 100 years when the the world is no longer under the huge influence of a single global superpower we will need friends. This does not require that we give up our sovereignty to some EU bureaucracy.

[Zingari]

We should definitely be in the EU. But we need to stop the move towards it becoming a super state. We need to be aligned with our EU brethren because in 50 or 100 years when the the world is no longer under the huge influence of a single global superpower we will need friends. This does not require that we give up our sovereignty to some EU bureaucracy.

This is true but it now seems that the gradual shift toward super state is becoming unstoppable ,

it seems the original supposed intent of the " common market " is no longer the real ultimate intention

but maybe I'm just an old conspiracy nutcase

[coale39]

http://www.berr.gov.uk/whatwedo/europeandt.../page27550.html

[davieG]

This is true but it now seems that the gradual shift toward super state is becoming unstoppable ,

it seems the original supposed intent of the " common market " is no longer the real ultimate intention

but maybe I'm just an old conspiracy nutcase

The problem is that nothing is allowed to stay the same; change, change, change seems to be the byword for the modern world, with the EU the only way they seem to want to change it is to keep adding to it rather than improving the weak parts and maintaining the strong parts. When you add you inevitable change much that has gone before losing the good parts as well as making more bad parts. We need a moratorium on expansion for 5 years so that the existing parts can be improved/tweaked to make them more relevant and more accountable.

It wont happen though because every new GS wants to make their presence felt so we get expansion and change instead of improvement and accountability.

[Webbo]

http://www.berr.gov.uk/whatwedo/europeandt.../page27550.html

Not exactly an unbiased source.

[coale39]

Not exactly an unbiased source.

True, but what is an unbiased source?

I especially like the last point;

10. If we wished to continue trading with the EU – for example as a member of European Free Trade Area (EFTA ) (like Switzerland) or the European Economic Area (EEA) (like Norway) - we would still have to comply with EU laws, while having no say in negotiating them. We might even have to keep up contributions to the EU budget as the price of continued access to the Single Market, but get nothing in return.

[Webbo]

True, but what is an unbiased source?

I especially like the last point;

10. If we wished to continue trading with the EU – for example as a member of European Free Trade Area (EFTA ) (like Switzerland) or the European Economic Area (EEA) (like Norway) - we would still have to comply with EU laws, while having no say in negotiating them. We might even have to keep up contributions to the EU budget as the price of continued access to the Single Market, but get nothing in return.

It doesn't mention our £57 billion net contribution though does it?

I'm not totally anti the EU but I get a bit sceptical when I read biased propaganda like the above. It seems to a lot of us that it's just a gravy train for failed politicians and bureaucrats alike. And the worse thing is we have no opportunity to vote them out.

[coale39]

It doesn't mention our £57 billion net contribution though does it?

I'm not totally anti the EU but I get a bit sceptical when I read biased propaganda like the above. It seems to a lot of us that it's just a gravy train for failed politicians and bureaucrats alike. And the worse thing is we have no opportunity to vote them out.

Im sure businesses would lose out by more then £57 billion in our country if we came out of it.

[Webbo]

Im sure businesses would lose out by more then £57 billion in our country if we came out of it.

So we keep getting told. Like I said I'm sceptical.

[coale39]

So we keep getting told. Like I said I'm sceptical.

Scepticism is good. We should question everything especially when it comes to important areas as this.

[Maybes]

Why should he have to justify himself to anyone?

[dandannieldanok]

Personally I think we'd be ****ed if we abstained from the EU, especially if it meant either the BNP or UKIP be wholly responsible for what goes on in this country. Thankfully the mainstream parties support the EU.