The end of the world is nigh.

[sgtkate]

I think some unbiased contrast between in and out is probably too much to hope for.

 

My view is, are you happy with the EU as it stands, if the answer is yes vote stay, if the answer in no take the plunge and vote leave, its down to how risk averse you are, if you had £100 but needed £200, would you risk loosing the £100 to get the £200.

 

That's the thing isn't it...if someone put a gun to my head and said I had to get £200 then of course I'd take the punt as I have nothing to lose. The thing is that from my side I think the EU has given of plenty to be thankful for and has helped grow our economy. It's a long, long way from perfect though, so for me the risk is all in leaving and almost none in staying.

[Zamo]

it isn't irrelevant at all, the EU has repeatedly stated, in no uncertain terms, that part of being in the free market is the free movement of people. But that isn't the point, the point is that the out campaign KNOWS that it can't afford to not allow migration, the country needs it. This is what Voteleave (beginning to look like the leading campaign) has to say about migration, you tell me where it says migration is going to come down? It doesn't say so because they can't promise it. It would be tantamount to Cameron's moronic 100,000 pledge.

 

Who on the leave side has suggested stopping immigration? The ability to be selective is all people ask for, which is the moderate and sensible position. People like you that support 'all' immigration are no less extreme than those who support 'no' immigration.

 

The EU may have decided that in its' federal state there will be free movement of people as well as goods but most people in this country don't want that. The only reason the Stay campaign is even in the game is because people are being coerced. I can only hope the British find their spine.

 

---------- Post added 31-03-2016 at 15:57 ----------

 

"about EU immigrants" is the bit you missed.

 

Yes. But they also set policy on asylum from outside the EU.

 

Now, about that...where's your usual line about contributing and non-contributing immigrants?

 

Its omission couldn't possibly be due to the fact that than when you contrast the respective numbers and contribution of EU immigrants against those of non-EU immigrants in the UK, it moots the above point?

 

Firstly, even the non-EU figures have been skewed to make them look positive. But put that aside because it doesn't matter. Even if the EU immigrant cohort scrapes a positive contribution it doesn't mean selective immigration wouldn't improve it because it obviously would. Less poor immigrants offsetting the contribution of others makes us richer. Also, slowing the population explosion (fuelled almost entirely by immigration) would ease pressure on housing, schools and the NHS. There are lots of advantages of selective immigration... what are the negatives?

 

On points of compatibility between national law implementing EU law when so requested by UK Courts. See for yourself

The ECJ does not 'overrule' UK Courts. It clarifies EU law for them when asked. The UK Courts still issue judgement, based on the ECJ clarification.

 

Sorry Loob but it is a technicality that would only interest someone in the legal profession. When the ECJ 'clarifies', the UK courts change their judgements. We do as we are told.

[I1L2T3]

Nice soundbite, but completely non-committal. The sort of thing that sounds well in soundbites but falls by the wayside in the long term. I can already see Boris explain that they never said they wouldn't agree to free movement of persons.

 

It falls apart if we leave then start negotiating with say the Chinese over a trade deal, and they slap down a demand for us to let in 100,000 graduates and 100,000 students every year. Same thing could happen with India. Both are producing millions of graduates every year and haven't got jobs for them all.

 

Currently this can't happen to us because we negotiate as a bloc in the EU. Outside the EU we are most likely going to get bullied.

 

---------- Post added 31-03-2016 at 16:27 ----------

 

I'm in the same boat, It might be that staying in is the right thing but I'm just waiting to hear something that is even semi-coherent about how it will improve over the next few years. Just about everyone even its supporters say it has fundamental problems but no one can say how it will change, labours position is that it needs fundamental change and I agree, but they can't say how, if, or when it will change, its clear that a vote to stay is a vote for the status quo.

 

Nothing yet but I am willing to listen to the arguments, if they ever arrive.

 

Greenlands successful negotiation left it significantly better off after leaving the EU.

 

Greenland? The largest island in the world with a smaller population than Chesterfield.

 

It's a worse example than Liechtenstein.

[Zamo]

It falls apart if we leave then start negotiating with say the Chinese over a trade deal, and they slap down a demand for us to let in 100,000 graduates and 100,000 students every year. Same thing could happen with India. Both are producing millions of graduates every year and haven't got jobs for them all.

 

Currently this can't happen to us because we negotiate as a bloc in the EU. Outside the EU we are most likely going to get bullied.

 

If we leave the EU then we will trade with China on exactly the same terms as now i.e. as per the terms of our joint membership of the WTO. The EU doesn't have a separate free trade agreement with China.

[apelike]

It falls apart if we leave then start negotiating with say the Chinese over a trade deal, and they slap down a demand for us to let in 100,000 graduates and 100,000 students every year.

 

You mean as opposed to the 89,540 + we already take in each year?

[I1L2T3]

If we leave the EU then we will trade with China on exactly the same terms as now i.e. as per the terms of our joint membership of the WTO.

 

Not that simple unfortunately. And I think you know it

 

This explains the trade relationship between the EU and China

http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/countries/china/index_en.htm

 

It wouldn't be the same. On our own we'd have much less chance of forcing China to fulfill its obligations under WTO when it trades with us.

 

---------- Post added 31-03-2016 at 16:45 ----------

 

You mean as opposed to the 89,540 + we already take in each year?

 

Give us the link for that apelike

 

I've only mentioned China so far. What if India wanted the same thing too? In fact any of the BRICS or any other rapidly expanding economy.

[sutty27]

Greenland? The largest island in the world with a smaller population than Chesterfield.

 

It's a worse example than Liechtenstein.

 

Both have small economies but both got the kind of deal you keep saying is impossible, Greenland trades with the EU without the free movement of people, and is doing better now than when it was in. Liechtenstein trades freely with the EU but EU citizens don't have the right to live and work there.

[apelike]

 

Give us the link for that apelike

 

I've only mentioned China so far. What if India wanted the same thing too? In fact any of the BRICS or any other rapidly expanding economy.

 

 

Sure, here you go. It also details other nationalities as well.

 

http://institutions.ukcisa.org.uk//info-for-universities-colleges--schools/policy-research--statistics/research--statistics/international-students-in-uk-he/

[I1L2T3]

Both have small economies but both got the kind of deal you keep saying is impossible, Greenland trades with the EU and is doing better now than when it was in. Liechtenstein trades freely with the EU but EU citizens don't have the right to live and work there.

 

Greenland has one major export basically - Fish. That's it. Fish. It's top four exports:

 

'The top exports of Greenland are Crustaceans ($249M), Non-fillet Frozen Fish ($218M), Processed Crustaceans ($137M), Fish Fillets ($70.6M) and Processed Fish ($24.4M)'

 

http://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/grl/

 

It is massively intertwined with the Danish economy, which isn't much of a surprise because it is still part of the Kingdom of Denmark.

 

It's as economically enmeshed with Denmark as Liechtenstein is with Austria and Switzerland.

 

It's a totally crap example, although I guess there is one thing that it gives us an idea about. Negotiations to leave the EU took 2 years and all they had to talk about was....yes you got it....fish

 

There is no way we could negotiate our exit in 2 years given that example. Longer negotiations mean a longer period of economic uncertainty.

 

---------- Post added 31-03-2016 at 16:59 ----------

 

Sure, here you go. It also details other nationalities as well.

 

http://institutions.ukcisa.org.uk//info-for-universities-colleges--schools/policy-research--statistics/research--statistics/international-students-in-uk-he/

 

Thanks for that. The risks look pretty obvious and that is just with student numbers.

 

Wait until they want to start sending their graduates across too.

[sutty27]

Greenland has one major export basically - Fish. That's it. Fish. It's top four exports:

 

'The top exports of Greenland are Crustaceans ($249M), Non-fillet Frozen Fish ($218M), Processed Crustaceans ($137M), Fish Fillets ($70.6M) and Processed Fish ($24.4M)'

 

http://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/grl/

 

It is massively intertwined with the Danish economy, which isn't much of a surprise because it is still part of the Kingdom of Denmark.

 

It's as economically enmeshed with Denmark as Liechtenstein is with Austria and Switzerland.

 

It's a totally crap example, although I guess there is one thing that it gives us an idea about. Negotiations to leave the EU took 2 years and all they had to talk about was....yes you got it....fish

 

There is no way we could negotiate our exit in 2 years given that example. Longer negotiations mean a longer period of economic uncertainty.

 

That's the point, all it could offer the EU was fish, but it still got access to the free trade area, sets its owns rules and doesn't allow the free movement of people.

 

The UK in contrast is the second largest economy in the EU, the fifth largest in the world, but you don't think we have enough clout to get a good deal.

 

I have a more long term view than 2 years so it doesn't matter if it takes longer.