UK no longer apart of the EU

[Ozy]

I'll try to make a non-biased as possible pro/con sheet given the current vote (Leave):

 

PROS:

• Governmental accountability - Much of the EU legislative process is done by unelected bureaucrats whom you don't even know. MEP's have very limited power and can't even propose laws themselves. Most of the process is done by unelected officials including the "President's" - AKA the UK's citizenry will have a much more accountable system to their wishes.
• Immigration - By far the hot topic on this election, and Remain voters will argue this is negatively affected because of Calais - but Calais is no longer needed. The law saying you couldn't kick the refugees out when they're in your country is a EU Human Rights Law, AKA the UK will no longer have a obligation to follow it once it leaves. It can kick people who they view as 'illegal' right back to France the second they arrive in Dover once they leave.
• Ability to make its own trade deals -  The EU and U.S, for example, started negotiating a trade deal in 2011. Arguably because of the EU's system that needs to appease all 28 (Now 27) members, this is still being negotiated and likely won't be formalized into 2018 or 2019. Since the UK would be negotiating on its own behalf, it could reasonably negotiate deals much faster - and deals more directly beneficial to the UK rather than other EU members - with both the EU itself and other trade blocs/countries worldwide (I.E, USA and China)
• Regaining resource rights - Most visible with the UK's fishing rights, previously exclusive to the UK and inside its exclusive economic zone, these were divied up among various EU members some years ago which had a disasterous effect on the UK's fishing industry. These rights will go back to the UK.

 

COULD GO EITHER WAY (Not really a pro or a con, but could go both ways):

• No longer accountable to EU 'Overlegislation' - The leave camp pushed hardly for this, and in many areas this can be true, but you have overlegislation in any governmental system - the main way this could benefit the UK, however, is that the UK government is far more accountable to the UK's citizenry than Brussels ever will be. It will be more responsive to the peoples' wishes and concerns.
• No longer party to the EU's trade barriers - the EU is far more of a trade protective area than any other trade organization. It has a history of putting up barriers to protect EU production at the expense of foreign production - Arguably at the cost of better made, foreign products. It restricts free trade, but this can go both ways with parties like China flooding the market.

 

CONS:

• No Schengen, the UK already wasn't a Schengen area member but still had easier access to the rest of the E.U. This will no longer be the case and UK citizens will have to wait with foreigners for customs, as with EU citizens entering the UK. Whether you view this as a cost or a benefit is up to who you are.
• (Potentially) less ease-of-access to the European common market - This depends on if the UK and EU can negotiate the UK having access to the common market - which Germany, arguably the only grown-up left in the EU, is going to heavily push to keep trade easy, but assuming the UK can't keep this access it will be harder - how much harder I'm not certain but harder - to trade with the E.U. It won't be mind-boggling or depression causing - the U.S and China trade with the E.U without formal trade deals - but it's noteworthy.
• If you're end goal is a federal/united Europe, the UK leaving certainly puts a sizeable dent in that goal. Particularly if it causes a domino effect of other nations disenfranchized with Brussels (Austria, Netherlands, Italy, Sweden, potentially France to name a few) to leave as well. It could very well lead to the destruction of the European Union as it's currently known or at the least major reforms to make it more democratic.

[FirestarteR93]

Finally, Thank you @Ozy

 

 

@TrademarkGamer yeye, the same guy, he reminds me of:

[.StεvƐ.]

1 hour ago, TrademarkGamer said:

No. No I wouldn't @megadethsteve666 No politition EVER will be able to keep ALL their promises. 

well they could, IF they were honest about what they COULD do. instead of making promises that they know what happen, they should make ones that the PEOPLE want and know they could do in the time they have.

 

Ever since Blair was in charge, I had a feeling that the country would be on a downward spiral, the conservatives prove it to me.

But the one thing that does stick in my throat is this, the "Labour" party is supposed to be for the working class, that was their original agenda, to always be for the working class people and to take them seriously, yet in recent years, the Labour party have followed in the footsteps of the Conservatives, who are only out there for those who have deep pockets.

 

Here's an example of why I hate the conservatives. back a few years ago, the forests around where I live were under threat to be sold off to the highest bidder, our local MP (Member of Parliament) is a conservative, now, MPs are supposed to listen to their constituents, not our MP, he sat back and did nothing, literally nothing, to help the people save the land from being bought. Fortunately there was enough campaigning by the people and the other candidates for the area that the land was kept from being sold, but since then, no one has liked our MP. When the General Election came around, we all voted for everyone else BUT him yet somehow, he still got control of the area.

[TrademarkGamer]

@megadethsteve666 In 2010 Cameron and Clegg didn't have a clue what they could ans couldn't do, so they couldn't possibly know.

 

You're complaining about him not doing what he said. Well he said he would hold a referendum and he has. 

 

At the end of the day everyone make mistakes

[.StεvƐ.]

^which is true, but, at the end of the day, you should listen to your people, if you make a mess of something and its pointed out to you, then surely you take responsibility and try to fix it. If Cameron was a blue eyed angel, why was he deciding to pull millions out of the public sector, including education, the NHS etc etc, to put into the private sector? why was he planning to remove the ban on fox hunting in the UK? why was he turning back on the things that the people wanted in favour of what he and the upper classes wanted. that's the big question, why is the Conservatives always about those with the big pockets? and why are people so stupid as to follow them and think that they would always look out for everyone, from the bottom of the social ladder to the top.

 

I mean no offence by anything I say, this is my own personal opinions. I just cant understand why people think the conservatives way of thinking would benefit everyone in the country.

[Tandre]

I really hope that EU respond with vigorous countermeasures. UK leaves so that they can kick out refugees. What they do is that they push the responsibility for those refugees on the remaing countries of EU. Sure, they have all rights to do that- but I don't think they can expect a favorably trade agreement. UK won't be able to both have the cake and eat it. 

 

[TrademarkGamer]

Woah woah woah @The_Owl Let's not make sweeping statements without ANY proof. I can assure you my leave supporter friends didn't give a toss about immigration. The biggest issue for us was the dictatorship that is Brussels.

[Tandre]

Calm down @TrademarkGamer . Look at the news, the majority of the leave-side clearly says that they vote leave in order to take full control and close the borders. Your friends, however, are not a majority. 

[TrademarkGamer]

@The_Owl You're speaking of the news that twist information to support their political alignment?

[Tandre]

@TrademarkGamer  What rock have you been living under? Closing borders in order to have less immegration is one of the leave-sides main arguments. 

[TrademarkGamer]

@The_Owl 1. their main point is not closing the borders, its CONTROLLING them. Also you didn't Address my point

[Guest]

I wanted the UK to stay in the EU because in my opinion its been fine in the past ... apart from David Cameron... #CameronGetRekt

[TrademarkGamer]

^as I've stated before in this topic he should have stayed as he is the only one imo that could have stabilised the country 

[Tandre]

14 minutes ago, TrademarkGamer said:

@The_Owl 1. their main point is not closing the borders, its CONTROLLING them. Also you didn't Address my point

Which is about the same thing, as this is in order to close out immegrants. Regarding your "point"... There's no media which doesn't mention the closing aka. controll of the borders as a main argument for brexit- I don't know what you're talking about. 

[TrademarkGamer]

@The_Owl Yes, I know the news outlets have been reporting it, but my point is they twist it to their own particular political alignment. You need to go and research yourself to get a accurate understanding.

 

Controlling is not the same as closing *dusts off dictionary*

 

Control: The restriction of an activity, tendency, or phenomenon

Closed: Not open

[Tandre]

Closing is a term often used in situations like this- I'm aware of what the dictionary says. "UK wants to control the borders in order to restrict the immigration." Where's the twist?

[Guest]

wow.. reading this discussion is like walking on hot rocks... i'm gonna let @The_Owl and @TrademarkGamer  fight this out... Scratch the thing about hot rocks, this is like a online parliament debate XD

[Trucking Australia]

Don;t forget guys, any attacking posts towards each other may result in a verbal warning been issued.

[Nameless Ghoul]

Well put it this way we could be 10 times worst if Labour was in charge.

[NoTime4name]

The EU is still gonna try everything to prevent countries from restricting immigration, wether you're part of it or not. It's happened here in Switzerland where we said yes to 2 initiatives that would've massively restricted immigration but the EU essentially blocked them by threatening with massive sanctions. However I think the UK is powerful enough to make it happen anyway and not give a donkey.

 

And maybe a bit offtopic, but I wonder if this song was playing in the polling stations
 

Spoiler

 

 

[Wowinatino]

 

[KillBones]

People know nothing to the European Union and raised in ignorance deliberately since the beginning of its construction. Less a politician speaks of Europe, the better he going.

 

An interesting interview in the french tv of Daniel Cohn-Bendit, ex-member of the European Parliament, for those don't care about french or don't know french, I translate the interview bellow. I found good to share you this 

 

 

 

"- That night, I was sad, and after I was furious! Now, I say, well, we have to start to explain Europe. Me, I will, Mr. Ambassador, saying "we will overcome!"! But for years, we do not control anything, it's unbelievable that the majority of English, of a certain age ... I have received phone calls from young people in London, they were in tears because the future of youth, it was Europe! They voted overwhelmingly for Europe and it's the older who have decided. The past decided the future of youth! That's what happened!

 

- There is no democracy at two speeds?

 

- No, but I will explain the state of mind of some young people. And I think today, to make Europe desirable, we must first name things: the austerity of Mr Cameron's policy, it's not Brussels which decided. Instead, Cameron wanted to force Europe to make even more austerity. So when Wales, the poor people, those who are low in England, voted against the austerity of Mr Cameron, it has nothing to do with Europe. That is the problem. And me, which made me panic is that, as arguments, they could say anything! The proof? This morning, the biggest Mr Farage's argument - it was on the bus of Mr Johnson - "we will return 350 million pounds every week for social protection." And this morning, Mr Farage said: 'Oh, we were wrong, it will not work" Just one hour later!! But you must realize that it was their more massive argument: "We'll take the money that goes for Europe, and we'll give it back!" But in the morning, just an hour later, they tell them "No, it's April Fool, we just fucking your mouth." That's what's terrible, this kind of debate, it was tight and fierce, but the debate was false. It is true, it is democracy, but it is the victory of lies. We must learn the lessons.

 

- Unfortunately, for years, the campaign is also winning on lies.

 

- Well, that's what scares. And look at History! You want a nightmare? I give you a nightmare. So, Mr Johnson will become Prime Minister, congratulations! Then, Mr Trump will win the US election on lies, congratulations! Today, what is the happiest man on the planet? Vladimir Poutine. Europe is weakened? Congratulations. Continue like this? We must recover but with energy, we must put the European project, the European sovereignty, the European protection at the center, that's what we need to talk...."

[The Imaginative Lad]

As some of you know, I'm from the UK. Things have already started to change. Weirdly one of the changes I noticed was bus fare. My bus fare went up from £4.50 for a return ticket to £6.50 for the same ticket. Just little things like this have been changed. Every little thing that changes builds up and becomes more noticeable in a financial view. I say this as no doubt many other things have changed and not just my bus fare. Many other changes are yet to come and we will just have to deal with them.

[TrademarkGamer]

12 hours ago, The_Owl said:

Closing is a term often used in situations like this- I'm aware of what the dictionary says. "UK wants to control the borders in order to restrict the immigration." Where's the twist?

You said close the borders, you've now changed it to control. Why are even still talking about immirgration, it may have been the leave campaigns main point but that doesn't mean I represents the whole of the leave voters. 

 

I also think many more people would have voted leave if they didn't fear being called a racist. A card the remain camp pulled many a time.

[Tandre]

The fact that you have to quibble my words is an obvious indication that you're arguments are not waterproof.

 

"Why are even still talking about immirgration, it may have been the leave campaigns main point but that doesn't mean I represents the whole of the leave voters."  Why? The immigration is a hot topic in the EU at the moment, so why wouldn't we talk about it? The immigration is their main point, you admit it yourself. At first you claimed that people didn't vote leave because of the immigration, which isn't true. It doesn't represent the whole of the leave voters, no. In a democraty nothing will represent the whole of anything- we're talking about majoriy instead. 

 

I agree with you rearding the racist card... The remain side used it a lot- which they in myopinion shouldn't have done. But at the same time; right wing extremeism is rising in UK, I'm quite sure the very majority of the group that we'd call racists voted leave. However, the very majority of those who voted leave are not racists. So it was wrong by the bremain camp to use that argument.