Yorkshire multi-millionaire businessman backs UKIP

[SevenRivers]

The most annoying aspect of this is that it is non-trade issues that push us ever closer to a EU exit e.g. immigration control, human rights and interference by the European Court of Justice.

 

Power hungry federalists are effectively blackmailing us to cede power to them in return for trade rights. But I think there must be something about the British that means we do not respond well to bullying because I find myself more and more wanting to tell the EU they can shove it!

 

We know there will be a price to pay if we pull out of the EU but there is a price for staying in too. I'm not sure we will be that much worse of financially but I think we will be a lot better of socially. I've shifted position over the years from being a europhile to being a eurosceptic, who is really fed up, and probably going to vote UKIP.

 

I think this is the elephant in the room Zamo, we're a trading nation and we've always traded with the continent, the EU in it's original format was to liberalise trade across the continent, but there is a layer of political influence within the EU that has morphed it into something else, and are continueing to thsi day to try to pull member states ever closer (federalisation) and like you say it is other issues that these politicians are pushing us further away with. They are the divisive ones, not UKIP who sensibly want to maintain some control over their own national affairs.

 

In any event, I cannot see that 5 decades of economic and trade advancement will be rolled back with a democratic vote to leave the political union.

 

---------- Post added 22-11-2013 at 10:19 ----------

 

See L00b's post above to nail that lie

 

That's on the assumption that those levies would be applied, which is yet to be established.

[tzijlstra]

I was getting furious listening to 5live today, they were reporting on the Greenpeace activists being released in Russia. Not ONCE was it mentioned that the collective pressure of EU states was responsible. It hasn't been reported anywhere in the English media (as far as I currently know) that the various EU member-states have applied strong political pressure on Russia, including taking them to the International Tribunal for Law of the Sea in Hamburg to get the charges dropped.

 

It is no wonder that people here don't know what the EU does for them if the press keep reporting things in the way they are doing.

[L00b]

That's on the assumption that those levies would be applied, which is yet to be established.

Your contention is manifestly that the EU would let the UK exit (straightforward application of Art.50 of the Treaty, no probs) but would not apply the levies which it currently applies to most imports from outside the EU.

 

Please explain to me how and why the EU would not apply to the UK, the current levies which it applies to the US, China, Russia, Norway and all others outside the EU.

 

I'll ignore any reply based on a notional "free trade agreement", because there's no such thing, as already explained to retep in post#99. E.g. the EU has long applied import levies on Norway's exports (seafood, oil).

 

Whilst on about UKIP and EEA poster boy Norway, here's a factual example of what can soon happen once the nationalist-influenced coalition now in charge starts to implement protectionist measures. The politicians do the politicking...meanwhile the Norwegians, I quote, "already pay among the highest food prices in the world".

 

But hey, don't mind me. I'm only scaremongering (just like I and many others were, about the economy, including the property and finance markets, over the 2005-2007 period )

[altus]

Whilst on about UKIP and EEA poster boy Norway, here's a factual example of what can soon happen once the nationalist-influenced coalition now in charge starts to implement protectionist measures. The politicians do the politicking...meanwhile the Norwegians, I quote, "already pay among the highest food prices in the world".

 

Further on Norway in the EEA. That paper you linked to in post 143 mentions Norway's costs of being in the EEA - £106 per person. Our costs for full EU membership is £128 per person. Leaving the EU and joining the EEA to maintain relatively easy access to EU markets means we'd be paying almost as much but without the influence. Of course, we could choose to not join the EEA but then the tariffs when trading with the EU would be much greater.

 

This also links to the issue of "which companies have said they will definitely leave if we leave the EU". They can't decide until we decide what we are going to do. If we leave but join the EEA, with associated costs, they would avoid levies and leaving wouldn't be worthwhile. If we leave and don't join the EEA they'd have levies making them uncompetitive which makes leaving far more attractive.

[dosxuk]

And even further on Norway, they're a fully signed up member to the Schengen agreement, so open borders where it comes to immigration within the EU, and anyone from an EU or EEC country can visit/work/live there.

[L00b]

That paper you linked to in post 143 mentions Norway's costs of being in the EEA - £106 per person. Our costs for full EU membership is £128 per person.

But, and of course, those figures don't sound nowhere near as populist...sorry...newsbity as £500m versus £8 billions (based on these amounts timed by their respective populations, estimated at 5m for NO and 65m for UK).

 

Billions, Jim, billions!!! Won't someone think of the children, etc.

 

Then again, I'm forever amazed at how mathematically unaware your common-or-garden UK voter is. That's one of the more minor, scary aspects of the mooted referendum

[boyfriday]

And even further on Norway, they're a fully signed up member to the Schengen agreement, so open borders where it comes to immigration within the EU, and anyone from an EU or EEC country can visit/work/live there.

 

You'd think the disgruntled of Page Hall would welcome the opportunity to live and work in Norway

[chalga]

http://blogs.ft.com/westminster/2013/07/australia-warns-britain-do-not-leave-the-eu/

 

Australia,America and Japan

 

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/National/article1290626.ece

[LeMaquis]

They are the divisive ones, not UKIP who sensibly want to maintain some control over their own national affairs.

 

I love it when you post such over-the-top blatant lies like this one. So UKIP are the only party to maintain some control over their own national affairs, are they? UKIP is the party with fewest policies on national affairs other than the EU. The other parties have much more detailed policies on health, housing, transport, education, etc, etc. All UKIP says is see McMillan's 1959 manifesto.

[SevenRivers]

I love it when you post such over-the-top blatant lies like this one. So UKIP are the only party to maintain some control over their own national affairs, are they? UKIP is the party with fewest policies on national affairs other than the EU. The other parties have much more detailed policies on health, housing, transport, education, etc, etc. All UKIP says is see McMillan's 1959 manifesto.

 

I love it when you pick one sentence out of a reply I posted to somebody else (without including their post) in order to blatantly take it out of context.

 

Why would I look at a 1959 manifesto when I could look at UKIPs policies from say the 2010 general election?

 

You're spreading the lies when you say they have no domestic policies. UKIP are the only party solidly against HS2. They're the only party solidly against wind farms. They support shale gas fracking. They support Grammar schools. They want a flat rate of income tax. I'm not asking your opinion on these, just pointing out your regularly trotted out lie that they don't have anything to say other than on the EU and immigration.