Five reasons the UK should leave the EU – and they’re all rubbish

160612 EU sovereigntyI found an article on the Google+ ‘Politics UK’ page today, claiming to list the top five reasons the UK should quit the EU.

All I can say is, if these are the best reasons for quitting, we should all vote ‘Remain’ next Thursday!

These so-called reasons are so flimsy they can be pulled apart without even trying.

Look at this one: Immigration. It has been proved that the UK needs a certain number of migrant workers to keep the economy going. We have a large (and growing) pensioner population whose livelihoods are dependent on contributions to the economy by a dwindling number of younger citizens who simply cannot provide enough. Therefore we have to have a certain influx of economically-active people from abroad. Claims that they are benefit tourists have been proved to have no foundation. They bring more than £14 billion into the UK economy every year.

And that’s just one reason the arguments against immigration fail.

Let’s try another: Claims the EU is undemocratic. What a crock. This arises because the European Commission, which is unelected, proposes EU legislation. Thing is, the Commission’s members are representatives of EU member states, nominated by each state to represent them. They propose new laws to benefit all EU states and have no power to impose those laws. Their proposals may then be discussed by our democratically-elected representatives including the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament. Our democratically-elected representatives can send proposed laws back to be re-considered, and they can veto any proposals that they believe are totally unsuitable.

Our own system is far less democratic because we have the unelected House of Lords, but nobody ever seems to want to talk about that.

How about trade deal freedom? This is the idea that the UK could negotiate more favourable trade deals with the EU and the rest of the world. It’s a nice thought but we’d all get bogged down in the details. We would not be dealing with the EU as a single entity but would have to hammer out trade deals with each individual member state, and with every other nation in the world where we have previously enjoyed deals as a member of the EU. The process could take years or decades, while our own economy stagnates.

Ah, but at least we wouldn’t have to deal with all that oppressive EU red tape, right? Wrong. Not because we would still have to deal with it but because it isn’t oppressive at all. The EU was created to get rid of excessive bureaucracy. Look at the ‘trade deal’ example above. How much more ‘red tape’ do you think will be created when we have to hammer out scores of individual trade deals with countries around the world? The thought of it is probably making all our diplomats dizzy right now.

Last but not least, there’s the old nonsense that the EU is expensive. It isn’t – we make a profit of £120 million every week from our membership of the EU, mostly due to the contribution of those immigrants that the Brexiters seem to despise so much.

One wonders why these Brexiters are so keen to get rid of the people who pay their wages.

But then, there’s nothing rational about the desire to quit the EU.

Source: 5 Reasons Why Britain Should Leave The European Union | Pint Sized Politics

ADVERT




Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

11 thoughts on “Five reasons the UK should leave the EU – and they’re all rubbish

  1. Justin Greenwood

    what bout the one they have not mentioned, the fact that the eu is looking into google tax evasion practices and unlike osbourne’s good deal for england there actually being a little bit more austere and in one particular country raided there offices, i wonder if this has anythign to do with the google eyed vison of europe, perhaps we need to re-visit this excellent tax deal with google once this government has finally realised what a bambling load of incompetence we have at number 11

  2. billgarnett2012

    enjoyed the article … but wonder if you need to change the headline element…reading and thinking can be hard work …there may well be people who skim read only and focus for fleeting seconds before moving on…failing completely to read the second element… left with the thought that you support this reasoning instead of being a hefty dismantler…

      1. billgarnett2012

        nice idea…or reverse…here are 5 s**t ideas for leaving the EU that you definitely shouldn’t listen to…everything seems to need to be so upfront these days…no room for subtlety/deferred meaning…not even deferred for the briefest of moments…

      2. Mike Sivier Post author

        You won’t find me using profanities in my articles, let alone the headlines!
        I think this one’s okay as it is. It’s short and simple so I hope most people will get it.

  3. Linda

    Yanis Varoufakis: Europe and the Austerity Fallacy lecture link below.

    For me this guy has first hand experience of dealing with the EU and an inside understanding of how alleged ‘Democracy’ works within its walls……with regard to decision making etc….

    I found this most interesting and illuminating,

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WoNhRBk_n30

  4. Graham

    Hi Mike,

    First of all, thanks for taking the time to read my post this morning.

    I completely understand that you do not agree with the arguments for Brexit, but I believe you have missed the point of my post.

    As it says at the top of the article, this post was the second of a two-post series outlining the main arguments for leaving the European Union following a post last Thursday outlining the main arguments to stay.

    It was simply put up so that most of my audience (mostly politically disengaged young people) can see the outline of both sides of the debate, without having to sift through months of propaganda from both sides.

    Keep up the great work!

    Graham.

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      I haven’t missed the point of your post. I could see it was presenting a balanced view to ‘Remain’ arguments. That’s fine by me.
      My post was written in response to those arguments – not as any criticism of you for putting them forward.
      I think we can all agree that the ‘Leave’ arguments really are nonsense.

  5. Linda

    Mike

    I really value the hard work you put in to you blog and I find it very helpful and informative.

    However…..

    re: I think we can all agree that the ‘Leave’ arguments really are nonsense?

    I have read a few of your posts regarding the EU and find myself surprised at the attitude you appear to display toward the general public and anyone who may not agree with your views.

    It has been my experience that there are valid arguments both In and Out, as well as a whole lot of nonsense, heresay and outright falsehoods being put out by people on both sides of the debate.

    I find it very hard to come to a decision because of this.

    What concerns me about the recent tone of your EU blogs is that it may have the effect of closing down people who may not wholly agree with you through fear of being ridiculed…. when they may well have some valuable opinions and insights which we could all benefit from…..

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      What concerns me is that people may be deciding to vote a certain way, based on arguments that don’t stand up. The ‘Leave’ arguments in the article don’t stand up. So my question is, are these people really basing their decisions on failed arguments, or are they simply using those arguments to justify a decision they’ve already made, based on very little?

Comments are closed.