http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36355138 This from the BBC shows how wrong the Leave campaign are on this point. None of the 5 countries will be joining anytime soon and with regards to Turkey at least 3 countries have serious reservations. As you say it's a pity people won't just be truthful. If their argument/case is good they shouldn't need to make stuff up. The trouble is you and I may know this is wrong but how many people just see the headline and believe it?
Met a bloke in the hospital today (was taking my Mum to have her hearing aids checked out) - he was going on about the fact that he'll be voting "Leave" because "we don't want all those Turks, Albanians and that sort here and if we stay in, they'll be on the next boat .........." I bet he looked at the headline and no further. It's that sort of comment which seriously worries me. People seem to have made up their minds from the headlines and not read any further .............
I just hope there are more people out there who don't just read headlines and instead ask a few questions.
And then there's the ones who just post on Facebook "I'm voting out because I hate David Cameron ....." - WTF? This is probably the most important vote the citizens of this country will have for years and you're going to vote because you dislike a particular politician? Brain dead ........
Some people really shouldn't be allowed to vote. If they hate David Cameron do they also hate Corbin (Labour), Farron (Lib Dem), Bennett (Green), Sturgeon (SNP) and Wood (Plaid Cymru) who are all saying remain? This is not a personality contest. The economy will suffer because of the uncertainty if we leave there is no doubt of that. That means some people will lose their jobs. Someone only has to sneeze and the stock market panics and the pound's value drops!
Agreed. Unfortunately, it's the democratic process. Years ago, back in the early 1980's, I was watching the last episode of a James Burke BBC series called The Day The Universe Changed, where he predicted the World-Wide-Web. He spoke about the way that everyone could have access to real information, first hand, and become connected to each other throughout the World. Then he held up his finger, and on the end of it was an early tiny Central Processing Unit [[CPU] an Intel 4004 I believe, for the nerds]. To me that chip signalled many things, and one of them was an eventual end of parliamentary government. It meant that everyone could become informed and vote on every single issue and not be told what to think. We could decide everything. All we'd need is the civil servants to shuffle the virtual paperwork. Unfortunately, it hasn't gone that way yet, and whilst we have people voting in a particular direction because they are basing it on a personality like or dislike, then we are actually moving away from the government by the people, for the people, ideal.
If you back to the beginning of this process, I said it worries me that the public would be deciding. Too many of the public simply are not intelligent enough to decide. I said I probably wasn't knowledgeable enough either!
Flame me if you find this an inappropriate comparison, but it's a bit like our Transfer Rumour thread. I was talking to my eldest brother today about Leave or Stay [he's for leaving], and he gave me this pathetic excuse for leaving. I said, I'm sorry, but you really haven't thought this one through. You're being emotive about a subject that requires you to think clearly and dispassionately. His answer was that he was just fed up with the EU. Frankly, I expected better from him.
Here's a thought politicians. Why don't you pass a law that any campaign undertaken for any public vote says that any "sides" must publish a simple list of pro's AND cons for their arguments. 10 pros 10 cons. Then "shut the front door" and let us digest this info with your bitching and slagging each other off. Oh and some real facts in there might be fun too.
The BBC debate tonight was entertaining - although didn't tell us much more than Diane James being absolutely incompetent and a one answer politician. Victoria Derbyshire didn't handle it too well, though these things, especially live, are quite difficult to moderate.
Picked this up, from the Mirror, who are supporting the remain campaign, which means allying themselves to Cameron. Should Brexit win the referendum, could it turn out to be a case of Cameron's short term gain becoming a long term loss? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DAVID Cameron has pleaded with young people to register to vote in next month’s EU referendum, admitting his “greatest concern” is a low turnout. “This is absolutely a vote about their future. This vote will determine the sort of country, the sort of economy they grow up in, the sort of opportunities that they have,” he said. No, your ears are not deceiving you. Yes, this was Prime Minister David Cameron. The man who has done more to kick young people off the electoral register than any PM since the 1969 Representation of the People Act extended the vote to over-18s. The man who ignored this newspaper’s #NoVoteNoVoice campaign and totally failed to safeguard our national register during the switchover to Individual Voter Registration, or IER, when millions of young people fell into a democratic vacuum. A moment we might call ‘Yexit’. But the bit that really stuck in the throat came later. “Definitely something that is concerning me is that the last election turnout among young people was more in the 40 per cents rather than the 60 per cents,” he said. Funnily enough, the same David Cameron wasn’t so concerned about young voters turning out on May 7 last year, when he won a slender majority in the general election. Or, indeed, three weeks ago during the local and mayoral elections. Had that 40% turnout amongst young people been 60% would he still be in power? The 18-24 year olds were Labour’s strongest supporters on polling day. Labour took 43% of this age group’s votes. So, I think David Cameron knew full well what he was doing. Some might call it gerrymandering.
Interesting bit about Norway and Switzerland not having control of their borders. Also heard this from the BBC Europe Editor, on Breakfast this morning.
That's because they are both in the Schengen area. Luckily we're not. If we leave would that become a condition of any trade agreement? Something else we don't know.