coldel

British born not paying in and never have done, have their vote removed then I presume.

Exactly. The point that seems to have been made time and again albeit subtly is that those not 'born' here should not be let in. So those born here have more rights than those who do not. So why is RS not entitled to a say given he was born here?

I think this has been a great thread (not because I started it!) in terms of hearing points of view - been kept on the whole very good natured. Interesting to hear how some people are voting one way or another on a single principle vs others who like myself are weighing up the pros and cons.

Its definitely moving in favour of Leave, there is an undecided percentage of around 10% which the stay campaign will need to soak up most of to have a chance (undecideds often stick with the status quo) - it really depends on who actually does bother to turn out on the day that could actually swing it one way or the next. I am still voting In, I have yet to see a strong enough argument to exit where the benefits outweigh the risk. Although the stay campaign have made a complete ar$e of their campaign, the Leave campaigns 'plan' is pretty poor and something I could have written in 30 minutes about 3 months ago - they seem to be relying on the anti immigration feeling in the country rather than focusing on convincing people who have a genuine interest in all aspects of the country.

Slovakia will be looking for a win, which will open the game up a bit more than Wales where they put 8 men in two banks of 4 across the edge of the box. Bit more open game will give our full backs a chance to get stuff in behind for Vardy (surely has to get the nod)

I have started a few footy threads in the past, and been abused for it I think they finally played their stronger form players rather than Roys mates in the second half and did the job, Wales parked the bus and were playing for a draw all the way through. There tends not to be any easy games in tournaments, we should have beaten Russia and probably would have done had Roy been a bit more active with his subs. Hopefully they will qualify, but France and Germany look strong and an outside bet would be the Italians.

Immigration aside, what things do you mean?

Plenty of facts: We do not send £350m to the EU each week The money we send to the EU accounts for around 1% of our GDP 40% of our trade is with the EU (cant remember exact number but there or thereabouts) We are on the winning side in 88% of votes on EU legislation when it is put to a vote The Human Rights Act is not the same as the European Court of Human Rights - one is an act one is a body, the ECHR will always be there and be available to appeal to in or out I could go on, and on, and on. There are hundreds more facts which nobody seems to want to engage with but seem quite happy to mis-quote as a reason for leaving. All the above is true, it just requires people to engage with it, which many are not (and I am not saying that of people here generally on FB I see a lot of people getting it wrong).

I'm actually re-classifying people - people that start any comment with 'Ive heard that...' are lazy and have no inclination to find out the facts, people that mention '£350m per week would buy..." clearly have tried a bit but not very hard to look into it and are voting out before they have listened to anything, others that quote celebs or spurious business people as a reason for voting one way or the other are clearly bonkers! What I have found from both sides en mass is a blatant lack of willingness to engage with the facts that are real and at hand. This has become so much a debate about 'well I saw this Syrian hit a woman the other day' as a basis for voting out presuming that we can somehow just shut up shop its become pretty pointless trying to debate the issues.

So in effect you gets all the benefits but because you do not understand how the EU works and subsequently believe you cannot affect it you are voting out, I think?

I know, the amount of stuff rehashed on Facebook by people that read the Mirror etc is astonishing, blindly believing anything they see on social media or in the tabloids. People literally putting no thought into this at all, when its actually a more important vote than last years general election in my view. What I think joe public struggle mostly with is that sums like £200m a week to the EU sound to them like a lot of money, which of course it is, but in the context of trade and macro economics its small change. Its this coupled with a lack of understanding of the real size of immigration benefits payments (something like 95% of benefits payments go to native UK people) when they read headline stories about 'this guy comes here and claims' as being representative of every person of that origin that is causing a lot of Leave voting.

Lovely. ITBs sound utterly epic. Although looking on the Jenvey site the DE kit does not fit under a 350z bonnet so would need some clever modifications there if this is the case for the HR.

What is it that you feel impacts you so severely that you need to vote Leave out of interest? I wouldn't say we are undemocratic for instance? What say, ten EU legislation, do you feel impact you negatively that you would want out for example?

Or just stick a turbo on a polo As people said, with deep pockets go for it. Would you be able to achieve 400bhp on tap with electric motors like a supercharger for £15k, I would like to see you have a go, would make for a great build thread.

Aye I totally agree mate, people will vote on emotion and not consider the risk. Honestly, I think the ride of emotion around immigration at this time and how poorly the Remain camp have campaigned I think the Leave campaign will win around 55/45, similar margins to the Scottish result.

Why add the peddle weight though...when you could remove the cabin floor

:dots: :dots:

There is a fine line between preaching because you have that allowance in the UK under its law, and then moving into inciting hatred and violence. We had to work hard as a country that when deporting him we were getting enough commitment from Jordan that he would not be tortured and receive a fair trial. The European Court of Human Rights though is a completely non issue for the referendum. Its not actually part of the EU, like the Human Rights Act is. We can ditch the act, but we are still part of a 47 member state participation of the ECHR on which there is a British judge sitting when making decisions. Even if we leave the EU, then next Abu Hamza to pop up can still appeal to the court in Strasbourg if they feel their human rights are being violated.

Once you have installed (at huge cost) the extra batteries, motors and running gear weighing 250kg's - which slows you down whilst off boost of course - how much boost would you need to see it be incremental to performance? How much extra bhp before the extra weight is offset by enough power so you are actually going faster?

I agree he had to be deported, but the main issue wasn't that we couldn't deport him, the issue was to where he was being deported in that it was likely he would not receive a fair trial. I do not disagree that he was a hateful person, but then so are many of the extreme national front activists but I do not see anyone asking them to be removed? Or does having been born here, claiming benefits and screaming equally racial hatred not get as many papers sold... The human rights act is not part of our law either, its simply a device to advise on law for countries in the european economy. For instance for the last 10 years they have said that prisoners must be able to vote. ...I cannot possibly vote on a macro economic policy based on a handful of people who I might object to, I have to take a bigger view than that.

The Leave campaign has laid out its plans on its website this morning, had a brief read through but at least they are FINALLY putting together an idea of how they want to approach this (how could anyone have voted Leave before seeing this?) - anyway in short they 'expect' everything to be concluded by the end of the current parliament in 2020. http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/a_framework_for_taking_back_control_and_establishing_a_new_uk_eu_deal_after_23_june So it looks like the EU budget savings of circa £8bn-£9bn are going on: - 4% increase in spending on the NHS - Removal of the 5% VAT charge on energy That's where all the money will be going, in terms of money back in your pocket it will be on average a £70 a year reduction in your energy bills (using OFGEMs estimate on energy bills average in the UK being £1400 as a rough guideline) and some minor improvements to the NHS. They do not mention though how they will support the industries/businesses/universities that all receive around £6bn a year in EU funding which will cease should we exit which is more of a concern given that over 4000 UK businesses took funding last year which includes companies like Rolls Royce. They 'seem' to be leaning towards the Canadian model in terms of the tariff free and visa based model they have set up, although I am not sure how well that will work given that geographically its a different scenario i.e. would the EU be more driven to free movement than they were with Canada, thats purely my own speculation though. The concessions Canada gave for this in the limited reading I have on it are that specific industries are excluded i.e. farming and food stuffs like chicken/eggs/beef etc. which will be hit with tariffs. Also that the Rules of Origin are still in play, so its only tariff free if a high enough proportion of components of the product are made in the UK. We would also then be outside the EUs Customs Union which as mentioned by a few on here incurs increased costs and complexity, any business with a longer supply chain will find the increases difficult to manage (think the Doc mentioned this) Main concern for me with the Canadian model is from what I can see financial services are not part of the tariff free trade deal, so the EU (and so could Canada to be fair) could easily put tariffs on this area, which is huge for the UK. The plan also does not mention at any point what discussions will need to be had about the 2.5m Brits living abroad, what support would be put in place for them. Overall, its good to see a plan, and a direction i.e. Canadian model. I liked a few parts of it and some of it actually felt quite exciting, but still not convinced its best for me in my situation right now. So I am still, Stay.

So if we're not in the EU, and not paying the membership fees, and no longer have to pay benefits to EU migrants (working and none working, living here and not living here) and no longer have to house them, or provide school places, or hospital treatment, or Doctors...we won't be better off? How does that work? Because the cost is tiny. Read the tabloids they make it out to sound like its a huge drain on the country and its not. Again numbers from memory but something like £50bn annually goes on benefits of which something like 5-8% are on people not native to the UK. Thats on people currently here, which of course you would have to keep supporting even in a Brexit. As for those working, it is proven that migrants who are in employment contribute more than they take, so net positive. So 8% is £4 Billion. Plus the £8.5 BillionPY in net EU contributions = £12.5 Billion / 26,473,000 housholds = £472 PY. So I have to pay £500 per year for the privilege of losing my democracy, losing my free speech, eroding my culture via having shedloads of immigration, and paying for some foreigners kids who live in Romania? If "Tiny" is your argument, I'm not convinced. No wonder the Leave vote is winning. Because you will still have to pay those here. £8bn is not a large amount of money when talking about running the country though. It costs hundreds of billions, and you are willing to risk the financial security of every person in this country for the next 2+ years because of this relatively small cost? As for the second part, that really does sound like the Sun speaking...how have you lost free speech (even though you don't have that in or out), how have you lost democracy?

Our economy is doing well DESPITE being in the EU, our trade within is decreasing annually. We are not allowed to trade freely with countries outside the EU under our own terms, only under EU rules. This stifles our trade. There are certain goods and services that we trade withing the EU that actually cost us more than they would do if we were allowed to buy them from either outside the EU or without EU price fixing. The fact that we continue to thrive comparitively is a testament to the fact we have got it right economically. I'm not talking about 'bullying' or deserving more clout because we are a net contributor but because our economic success is due to our economic models and our population following them. These other countries are indeed 'poorer' but they are so DESPITE many years of generous EU funding. It's their non-acceptance of having to change their economies that's their problem and they, as part of the 'club', form a united front against actually changing to do something about it. When I point to our standard of living deteriorating I'm employing a bit of the same artistic license as Osbourne when he is making his apocolyptic warnings of our economy's demise. As in guessing that we would have been better off than we currently are in my scenario and deducting the difference. Of course there's nobody that can tell the future, it's up to having faith. I have faith in the UK and her population and our resilience. I'm not scared of leaving this collapsing club who refuse to modernise. There were a few mentions recently about 'throwing the baby out with the bathwater'. I'd say that the bathwater is toxic and that baby is no longer a baby, it's a corrupt, cancer ridden old person who refuses to go and get treatment and will poison the rest of its body unless we force a cure on it or bury it. Then maybe we can start again with a new baby having learned from the mistakes of the past. Without wanting to sound personal, and its not meant to, but I think all the above has artistic licence. Can you prove we are succeeding despite being in the EU? Where are the facts that show we would get better deals with other countries if we were outside the EU? I cannot accept that other countries fail simply because of poor economic decisions. Some are just subject to economic winds and tides. Spain relies heavily on tourism and in a recession people do not travel abroad, they take a double whammy on that front. I agree that countries like Greece could work harder at revising their pension rules for instance to reduce public spending, but to apply this broad brush to all European economies not as big as ours is just not correct. I have no doubt the UK population are a tough lot and plenty of talent at its disposal, but thats not really the issue at hand, its how the trade deals are worked, the time frames and cost of implementation and how much of an economic shock the country can absorb in the coming years if we exit. Its very likely we will drop into recession as our GDP is hit during this time of transition, I really hope if that unfortunate situation occurs and I really hope it doesn't, then I don't want to hear those who voted out blaming the government or whoever.

So if we're not in the EU, and not paying the membership fees, and no longer have to pay benefits to EU migrants (working and none working, living here and not living here) and no longer have to house them, or provide school places, or hospital treatment, or Doctors...we won't be better off? How does that work? Because the cost is tiny. Read the tabloids they make it out to sound like its a huge drain on the country and its not. Again numbers from memory but something like £50bn annually goes on benefits of which something like 5-8% are on people not native to the UK. Thats on people currently here, which of course you would have to keep supporting even in a Brexit. As for those working, it is proven that migrants who are in employment contribute more than they take, so net positive.

I think the films are much better, really involving and lots of proper knowledge being pushed around instead of endless chatter about not a lot which the previous three tended to do. Evans is fine, once you have it in your head you dislike him it will irk you and that will be that.