Labour Leader - Who's your preference?

[SydneyRover]

SSF, I'm posting this cos it makes a better fist of it than I can.

''Three years on, we’ve still not answered the question: what has the EU done for us?''

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jul/10/question-eu-done-european-funding-britain-local-area

[selby]

  If our net contributions every year is more than the money returned for us to spend on investments, How are the EU doing anything for us? they are only returning some of our money for us to invest in ourselves.
  Most of the members get more back than they contribute,known in other circles as a ponzie  system.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Selby

No. It's not a Ponzi scheme. It's nothing remotely like a Ponzi scheme. That's based on the premise that you pay inflated returns to a small number of people by bringing in many more new investors. And the whole thing breaks down because the number of new investors you need to feed the earlier ones grows exponentially.

So that's possibly the worst analogy for the EU I've ever seen.

Onto the substantive point, the reason we get back FAR more than we put in is that the EU has done a superb job of bringing up basket case countries (Spain, Portugal, Ireland, the whole of Eastern Europe) to a much higher level of economic performance. That has led to the richest and most open market in human history. And we all benefit from being able to trade freely with that market. The benefits that we get from that massively outweigh the 0.4% of GDP that is our net contribution to the EU.

[Glyn_Wigley]

  If our net contributions every year is more than the money returned for us to spend on investments, How are the EU doing anything for us? they are only returning some of our money for us to invest in ourselves.
  Most of the members get more back than they contribute,known in other circles as a ponzie  system.

The UK earns far more money just from being in the Single Market than the cost of the subs to be in it.

[SouthStandFan]

Onto the substantive point, the reason we get back FAR more than we put in is that the EU has done a superb job of bringing up basket case countries (Spain, Portugal, Ireland, the whole of Eastern Europe) to a much higher level of economic performance. That has led to the richest and most open market in human history. And we all benefit from being able to trade freely with that market. The benefits that we get from that massively outweigh the 0.4% of GDP that is our net contribution to the EU.

Spain's debt to GDP ratio has doubled since the introduction of the Euro.

Romania's debt has doubled since joining the EU.

Ask a Greek what they think of the EU!

Unemployment rose drastically across the euro zone and is now only getting back to reasonable levels.

Non-EU member state migrants numbering almost half of Ireland's population settled in the EU in 2017 alone. That's not asylum seekers fleeing war, its economic migrants and their dependants. In fact 70 percent of those arriving are not refugees. Under what moral, ethical or humanitarian basis should my money be used to assist those people in any way? 

[SydneyRover]

Onto the substantive point, the reason we get back FAR more than we put in is that the EU has done a superb job of bringing up basket case countries (Spain, Portugal, Ireland, the whole of Eastern Europe) to a much higher level of economic performance. That has led to the richest and most open market in human history. And we all benefit from being able to trade freely with that market. The benefits that we get from that massively outweigh the 0.4% of GDP that is our net contribution to the EU.

Spain's debt to GDP ratio has doubled since the introduction of the Euro.

Romania's debt has doubled since joining the EU.

Ask a Greek what they think of the EU!

Unemployment rose drastically across the euro zone and is now only getting back to reasonable levels.

Non-EU member state migrants numbering almost half of Ireland's population settled in the EU in 2017 alone. That's not asylum seekers fleeing war, its economic migrants and their dependants. In fact 70 percent of those arriving are not refugees. Under what moral, ethical or humanitarian basis should my money be used to assist those people in any way?

The amount of money the UK saves by not being at war with any country within the boundaries and the cost saving of being part of this group which makes it a daunting option for any thinking of starting one inside or out is worthy of the membership fees alone. It's like being a member of a Super-Amazon-Prime with reduced delivery fees and charges and anyone that thinks we could possibly improve our fiscal position by leaving needs to invest in a good psychiatrist. So SSF it's your turn to tell us what any of those advantages will be, noone else has managed to do it so far on this forum or in the government, go ahead knock yourself out.

[SouthStandFan]

Ok.

I recommend a great book called Factfulness by Hans Rosling. The fastest developing economies and living standards across the world are in Africa and S America. The buying power of sub Saharan Africa is immense, noting they have also just signed a trade agreement across all African nations.

It is predicted by the UN that over the next 50 years these continents will become the new superpowers.

The EU trade bloc will continue to decline into irrelevance.

We should invest in Africa and S America and build trading relationships there as that's where the future is. In 50 years time we (Europeans) will be seen as the third world in comparison if current rates of change are maintained.

We've made our bed. We now need to get out of it and make one with a more attractive , younger partner. So to speak.

[SouthStandFan]

I also don't believe for a second we'd be at war with any European nation if we weren't in the EU. In fact, by their relentless eastward expansion you could argue they have only antogonised Russia (without major benefit to the EU). Trying to become the new NATO is pointless.

On the security side, militarily we exchange far more information with 5 eyes partners (UK US AUS CAN NZ) than we do with EU nations.

As for the police side. If we had proper border checks (which are currently a farce), we wouldn't be so reliant on information sharing on potential terror risks coming in.

So basically, withdraw from the EU, concentrate on a strategic (50 year) plan of investment in Africa and S America, bring our commonwealth partners along for the ride. Prosper.

Vote SSF!

[SydneyRover]

Africa and South America are perhaps some of the greatest areas for growth, but none would hold a candle to the EU. This of course doesn't answer the big question, what are the fiscal advantages of leaving the EU.

[SouthStandFan]

Not perhaps.

Africa alone has more than 3 times the amount of people in the EU.

The fiscal advantage is strategic, not short term. So I can't say, in 2023 each household will be XXX pounds better off. It doesnt work like that.

I'm talking about backing the right horses over the next century.

[SouthStandFan]

Additionally. We've tried the EU for 40 odd years, and it turns out the majority of people (who bothered to vote) dont like it.

Is it so unpalatable that we give it a go outside of the EU, for 40 odd years, and see how we get on?

[SydneyRover]

Additionally. We've tried the EU for 40 odd years, and it turns out the majority of people (who bothered to vote) dont like it.

Is it so unpalatable that we give it a go outside of the EU, for 40 odd years, and see how we get on?

Still not answering the question then? and the problem is that the public were sold a bunch of outright lies either directly by the likes of johnson or unknowingly via fb by farage and banks.

[SouthStandFan]

I've answered the question twice. Not sure what else you want? Maybe you're not listening, which seems to be an inherent Remain trait

[SouthStandFan]

I've never used FB so I wouldn't know about that

[SydneyRover]

I've answered the question twice. Not sure what else you want? Maybe you're not listening, which seems to be an inherent Remain trait

Have you considered a career in politics, a really simple question, what are the fiscal advantages of the UK leaving the EU? not what other countries are doing, not about recommended reading, not who voted what when or why, not about who made the bed, just plain and simple, what are the fiscal advantages of the UK leaving the EU? please.

[SouthStandFan]

The ability to legally seperate ourselves from a failing superstate project which has brought high GDP ratio debt across the bloc.

The ability to avoid being a net contributor to a group which benefits less developed countries and not our own citizens.

The ability to influence and harness new relationships with the rising economic powers of the world, avoiding the self interest protectionism of the EU bloc.

I of course can't give you figures as I've stated. If you're looking for me to say X billions to the NHS you won't get it, because it's incalculable.

I have actually tried to actively involve myself in local politics but found that the only input I was asked for was money! I was a Tory member for a while but again all they want is money not opinion or wider engagement.

[Glyn_Wigley]

Ok.

I recommend a great book called Factfulness by Hans Rosling. The fastest developing economies and living standards across the world are in Africa and S America. The buying power of sub Saharan Africa is immense, noting they have also just signed a trade agreement across all African nations.

It is predicted by the UN that over the next 50 years these continents will become the new superpowers.

The EU trade bloc will continue to decline into irrelevance.

We should invest in Africa and S America and build trading relationships there as that's where the future is. In 50 years time we (Europeans) will be seen as the third world in comparison if current rates of change are maintained.

We've made our bed. We now need to get out of it and make one with a more attractive , younger partner. So to speak.

Something rather like the EU, is that?

[SydneyRover]

The ability to legally seperate ourselves from a failing superstate project which has brought high GDP ratio debt across the bloc.

The ability to avoid being a net contributor to a group which benefits less developed countries and not our own citizens.

The ability to influence and harness new relationships with the rising economic powers of the world, avoiding the self interest protectionism of the EU bloc.

I of course can't give you figures as I've stated. If you're looking for me to say X billions to the NHS you won't get it, because it's incalculable.

I have actually tried to actively involve myself in local politics but found that the only input I was asked for was money! I was a Tory member for a while but again all they want is money not opinion or wider engagement.

Thanks for your reply SSF.

Does your assessment of being a net contributor take into consideration of what the new costs will be in tariffs and the added border & customs costs will be for us to trade with the EU and countries further afield should we leave.

Further to this helping these developing countries within the EU consolidates future stability of the region and shows the world that we care not just about ourselves but countries worse off than ourselves and that we have moved on from being a military empire. The EU is not limited to the countries that are members at present and the more countries that join the greater the benefits for all.

We can still trade with emerging nations via the EU and would have more bargaining power.

The figure may be incalculable but almost to a person economists across the world agree that the UK will be worse off financially.

I'm sorry you were treated so shabbily by the conservative party but at least you understand how they treat everyone else in the country not in their inner circle.

[BillyStubbsTears]

SSF
It's odd that you focus on Govt debt. That kind of reinforces the point I was making about how that one issue has dominated the discussion in the UK.

You could have noted that Spain's GDP has increased almost 10 fold since it joined the EU.

Or that Romania's GDP has more than doubled in a decade since it joined the EU.

You talk about trade with Africa.

1) Africa's current GDP is less than 1/9th that of the EU.
2) Yes they are growing more quickly than EU countries (or the USA or Japan or Canada etc...) but that's what less developed countries do. If they grew at 5% more than the EU per year for 50 years (they won't, growth rates drop as development increases) it would be 50 years before they had the same GDP as the EU. So why on earth make it significantly harder to trade with the EU now?

3) In any case, we CAN trade with Africa from inside the EU...

4) There is a massive positive point about the EU that no Leaver ever addresses. The way in which, by tying countries together, it reinforces democracy and peace in the most dangerous region on earth.

Within living memory, the following countries have been invaded, invaded others, had civil wars or lived under military dictatorships.

UK
France
Luxembourg.
Belgium
Netherlands
Spain
Portugal
Italy
Czechia
Slovakia
Austria
Denmark
Norway
Germany
Poland
Estonia
Lithuania
Latvia
Hungary
Slovenia
Croatia
Greece
Bulgaria
Romania
Hungary
Malta
Cyprus

That happened within living memory. Within. Living. Memory.

The EU is a major part in why it is currently inconceivable that could happen again in the mid-future.

And don't say..but NATO.

NATO didn't stop civil war in Northern Ireland, Slovenia, Croatia and Cyprus.

It didn't prevent fascist military dictatorships in Greece, Portugal and Spain.

But there has never been a civil war in an EU member state. Never been an overthrowing of democracy in an EU member state.

Just ponder that. And think whether you just take for granted a stability that our parents and grandparents dreamed of.

[wilts rover]

Non-EU member state migrants numbering almost half of Ireland's population settled in the EU in 2017 alone. That's not asylum seekers fleeing war, its economic migrants and their dependants. In fact 70 percent of those arriving are not refugees. Under what moral, ethical or humanitarian basis should my money be used to assist those people in any way? 

We should invest in Africa and S America and build trading relationships there as that's where the future is. In 50 years time we (Europeans) will be seen as the third world in comparison if current rates of change are maintained.

I am afraid SSF you may find those two points of view contradictory (or mutually incompatable).

What might the demands from the emerging markets be on their side of a trade deal? Talks between the UK & India have faltered because one of India's main demands is greater economic migration (more visas) for Indians to the UK.

https://www.ft.com/content/56074dda-95bd-11e9-8cfb-30c211dcd229

[SouthStandFan]

SSF
It's odd that you focus on Govt debt. That kind of reinforces the point I was making about how that one issue has dominated the discussion in the UK.

You could have noted that Spain's GDP has increased almost 10 fold since it joined the EU.

Or that Romania's GDP has more than doubled in a decade since it joined the EU.

You talk about trade with Africa.

1) Africa's current GDP is less than 1/9th that of the EU.
2) Yes they are growing more quickly than EU countries (or the USA or Japan or Canada etc...) but that's what less developed countries do. If they grew at 5% more than the EU per year for 50 years (they won't, growth rates drop as development increases) it would be 50 years before they had the same GDP as the EU. So why on earth make it significantly harder to trade with the EU now?

3) In any case, we CAN trade with Africa from inside the EU...

4) There is a massive positive point about the EU that no Leaver ever addresses. The way in which, by tying countries together, it reinforces democracy and peace in the most dangerous region on earth.

Within living memory, the following countries have been invaded, invaded others, had civil wars or lived under military dictatorships.

UK
France
Luxembourg.
Belgium
Netherlands
Spain
Portugal
Italy
Czechia
Slovakia
Austria
Denmark
Norway
Germany
Poland
Estonia
Lithuania
Latvia
Hungary
Slovenia
Croatia
Greece
Bulgaria
Romania
Hungary
Malta
Cyprus

That happened within living memory. Within. Living. Memory.

The EU is a major part in why it is currently inconceivable that could happen again in the mid-future.

And don't say..but NATO.

NATO didn't stop civil war in Northern Ireland, Slovenia, Croatia and Cyprus.

It didn't prevent fascist military dictatorships in Greece, Portugal and Spain.

But there has never been a civil war in an EU member state. Never been an overthrowing of democracy in an EU member state.

Just ponder that. And think whether you just take for granted a stability that our parents and grandparents dreamed of.

Having served the country in some genuinely unstable regions I can assure you I don't take stability for granted.

Can you honestly say the EU is the most dangerous region on earth? Really?

[SouthStandFan]

Non-EU member state migrants numbering almost half of Ireland's population settled in the EU in 2017 alone. That's not asylum seekers fleeing war, its economic migrants and their dependants. In fact 70 percent of those arriving are not refugees. Under what moral, ethical or humanitarian basis should my money be used to assist those people in any way? 

We should invest in Africa and S America and build trading relationships there as that's where the future is. In 50 years time we (Europeans) will be seen as the third world in comparison if current rates of change are maintained.

I am afraid SSF you may find those two points of view contradictory (or mutually incompatable).

What might the demands from the emerging markets be on their side of a trade deal? Talks between the UK & India have faltered because one of India's main demands is greater economic migration (more visas) for Indians to the UK.

https://www.ft.com/content/56074dda-95bd-11e9-8cfb-30c211dcd229

I can see the possible contradiction but I'm not suggesting we prop up African social structures and governments ,as we do with other EU countries. I'm suggesting at the current rate of change, that in 50+ years it will be Europeans desperately trying to migrate to Africa as the emerging economy of the world.

Why shouldn't Indians have more access to the UK? Why should Latvians be given precendence for example. Was India not part of the Empire?

All the remain arguments in this thread are valid and I'm not dismissing them. Both sides of the argument are highly unlikely to down tools and say "you're right, you've convinced me".

I appreciate I could be more educated about it, but I think I've done more research than your stereotypical Leave voter and remain steadfast that we should get out and seek our prosperity without the shackles of our continental neighbours.

We are being dragged down to the lowest common denominators of the EU when in fact we are operating as a country at a level above many of them. The EU is a system of averaging, when we should be taking advantage of our individual strengths. By Remaining I see it as indulging mediocrity.

[BillyStubbsTears]

SSF

Of course Europe is the most dangerous place on earth. Historically there is absolutely nowhere on earth that had unleashed and endured the carnage that has been self inflicted on Europe (UK very much included). That carnage has almost entirely been down to competing nationalisms. As I've said times many on here, between 100BC and 1945, a major army crossed the Rhine to do battle once every 37 years. Find another place on earth with a record like that.

The greatest wars in history have all been mainly or entirely fought in Europe.

WWI, WWII, the Thirty Years War, the Wars of the French Revolution/Napoleonic Wars and the War of Spanish Succession are unmatched anywhere in the world for the scale of devastation. Each of those killed 0.5-2.5% of the entire world population.

Europe increasingly HASN'T been the most dangerous place on earth for the past 60 years. If you think the basic rivalries that produced those carnage's have gone, you're in cloud cuckoo land. They haven't gone. They've been controlled. THAT was the founding purpose of the EEC/EC/EU. To force structures into being that made it bleeding obvious that you gained more by co-operating than by fighting.

Have a look at the list of conflicts in the territories of EU countries in the 100 years before they became EU countries. I posted this list a few months ago.

 Wars of Italian Unification
Wars of German Unification
Franco-Prussian War
1st, 2nd and 3rd Balkan Wars
WWI
Estonian War of Independence
Allies involvement in the Russian Civil War
Polish War of Independence
Lithuanian War of Independence
Latvia War of Independence
Polish-Lithuanian War
Polish-Soviet War
Hungarian-Romanian War
Greco-Turkish War
Czechoslovak-Hungarian War
Irish War of Independence
Spanish Civil War
WWII
Greek Civil War
Irish Troubles
Basque Troubles
Cypriot Civil War
Yugoslavian Civil War.

Notice a pattern?

Every single conflict commenced before the protagonists were members of the EU. Not one single conflict in Europe has ever been started by or in a country that is a member of the EU.

If you want to have a look, you'll find a similar story about revolutions and military coups.


I'll be blunt here because this is too important not to be. You have grown up in a very unusual period when Europe has had peace imposed on it, to a great extent by the success of the EU. You clearly assume it is inevitable that Europe should be peaceful. That is dangerously wrong. Europe is and always has been a powder keg.

That alone is reason enough for staying in and supporting the EU.

[SydneyRover]

Non-EU member state migrants numbering almost half of Ireland's population settled in the EU in 2017 alone. That's not asylum seekers fleeing war, its economic migrants and their dependants. In fact 70 percent of those arriving are not refugees. Under what moral, ethical or humanitarian basis should my money be used to assist those people in any way? 

We should invest in Africa and S America and build trading relationships there as that's where the future is. In 50 years time we (Europeans) will be seen as the third world in comparison if current rates of change are maintained.

I am afraid SSF you may find those two points of view contradictory (or mutually incompatable).

What might the demands from the emerging markets be on their side of a trade deal? Talks between the UK & India have faltered because one of India's main demands is greater economic migration (more visas) for Indians to the UK.

https://www.ft.com/content/56074dda-95bd-11e9-8cfb-30c211dcd229

I can see the possible contradiction but I'm not suggesting we prop up African social structures and governments ,as we do with other EU countries. I'm suggesting at the current rate of change, that in 50+ years it will be Europeans desperately trying to migrate to Africa as the emerging economy of the world.

Why shouldn't Indians have more access to the UK? Why should Latvians be given precendence for example. Was India not part of the Empire?

All the remain arguments in this thread are valid and I'm not dismissing them. Both sides of the argument are highly unlikely to down tools and say "you're right, you've convinced me".

I appreciate I could be more educated about it, but I think I've done more research than your stereotypical Leave voter and remain steadfast that we should get out and seek our prosperity without the shackles of our continental neighbours.

We are being dragged down to the lowest common denominators of the EU when in fact we are operating as a country at a level above many of them. The EU is a system of averaging, when we should be taking advantage of our individual strengths. By Remaining I see it as indulging mediocrity.

So lets be clear about this, apart from vague statements about emerging nations and how you were treated badly by your own party there has been nothing from you that states the case for a fiscal improvement for the UK if and when Brexit occurs, nothing.

There is nothing wrong with admitting you can't produce anything to support your argument we've had the same from brexiteers for three years and they can't either.

[SouthStandFan]

Sydney I'm not going to keep listing my reasons as you will clearly just keep retorting that they aren't precise enough for you.

BST with respect, and I acknowledge your impressive history knowledge... I think you're in danger of patronising me. That I assume continued peace is an untruth.

[SydneyRover]

Sydney I'm not going to keep listing my reasons as you will clearly just keep retorting that they aren't precise enough for you.

BST with respect, and I acknowledge your impressive history knowledge... I think you're in danger of patronising me. That I assume continued peace is an untruth.

Just not precise SSF non-existent you have not put together a coherent example of how the UK will be financially better off, plenty of arm waving and look over there but hard fact zero.

Lets just enjoy our moment on the sun with our new manager, I get fed up with asking brexiteers the same questions and getting the same non-answers. Lets face it if credible economists and parliamentarians with all their resources cannot answer the question then I'm afraid it must be beyond you also, mission impossible.

[SouthStandFan]

Sydney I'm not going to keep listing my reasons as you will clearly just keep retorting that they aren't precise enough for you.

BST with respect, and I acknowledge your impressive history knowledge... I think you're in danger of patronising me. That I assume continued peace is an untruth.

Just not precise SSF non-existent you have not put together a coherent example of how the UK will be financially better off, plenty of arm waving and look over there but hard fact zero.

Lets just enjoy our moment on the sun with our new manager, I get fed up with asking brexiteers the same questions and getting the same non-answers. Lets face it if credible economists and parliamentarians with all their resources cannot answer the question then I'm afraid it must be beyond you also, mission impossible.

But I've enjoyed the back and forth none the less. A bit less fanaticism on both sides of the debate (and I'm not referring to anyone here) might mean we all end up at a feasible solution but I dare say odds are people like you and I will be arguing over this for the next few decades. Thanks SR, and agree I'll go back to enjoying the DM news!

[wing commander]

   All the pages on Brexit and I bet not one of us have changed our original opinions on the subject..SouthStand for the record my opinions lean towards yours but they will be a minority on here and it can be a thankless task,as I'm sure it is for the other viewpoint too..

   Still I cant resist this gentle dig,One things for sure if that Panorama programme would have been about the Tories we would have had a thread about it and be on page 5 by now with endless cries of disgust..Yet strangely not a peep about it...lol

[Glyn_Wigley]

SSF
It's odd that you focus on Govt debt. That kind of reinforces the point I was making about how that one issue has dominated the discussion in the UK.

You could have noted that Spain's GDP has increased almost 10 fold since it joined the EU.

Or that Romania's GDP has more than doubled in a decade since it joined the EU.

You talk about trade with Africa.

1) Africa's current GDP is less than 1/9th that of the EU.
2) Yes they are growing more quickly than EU countries (or the USA or Japan or Canada etc...) but that's what less developed countries do. If they grew at 5% more than the EU per year for 50 years (they won't, growth rates drop as development increases) it would be 50 years before they had the same GDP as the EU. So why on earth make it significantly harder to trade with the EU now?

3) In any case, we CAN trade with Africa from inside the EU...

4) There is a massive positive point about the EU that no Leaver ever addresses. The way in which, by tying countries together, it reinforces democracy and peace in the most dangerous region on earth.

Within living memory, the following countries have been invaded, invaded others, had civil wars or lived under military dictatorships.

UK
France
Luxembourg.
Belgium
Netherlands
Spain
Portugal
Italy
Czechia
Slovakia
Austria
Denmark
Norway
Germany
Poland
Estonia
Lithuania
Latvia
Hungary
Slovenia
Croatia
Greece
Bulgaria
Romania
Hungary
Malta
Cyprus

That happened within living memory. Within. Living. Memory.

The EU is a major part in why it is currently inconceivable that could happen again in the mid-future.

And don't say..but NATO.

NATO didn't stop civil war in Northern Ireland, Slovenia, Croatia and Cyprus.

It didn't prevent fascist military dictatorships in Greece, Portugal and Spain.

But there has never been a civil war in an EU member state. Never been an overthrowing of democracy in an EU member state.

Just ponder that. And think whether you just take for granted a stability that our parents and grandparents dreamed of.

Having served the country in some genuinely unstable regions I can assure you I don't take stability for granted.

Can you honestly say the EU is the most dangerous region on earth? Really?

It was ten years before the EU was created.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Sydney I'm not going to keep listing my reasons as you will clearly just keep retorting that they aren't precise enough for you.

BST with respect, and I acknowledge your impressive history knowledge... I think you're in danger of patronising me. That I assume continued peace is an untruth.

I'm not patronising you at all. I'm hammering home THE most important point about the EU.

You responded incredulously when I said Europe was the most dangerous place on earth. I've set out the evidence that supports my assertion and pointed out the undeniable role that the EU has played in quelling the nationalistic passions that resulted in that carnage. .

The re-emergence of right-wing nationalism across Europe scares the living shite out of me. Because I don't want my kids to grow up in a Europe like the one that my grandparents grew up in. And that is a clear and obvious danger if the EU is undermined.