UKC

As in the title.

The general idea is to have a thread where people can put up their reason for voting Remain or Leave without getting jumped on for it. The purpose is to allow people to see the wide variety of reasons that others have for their particular choice without getting bogged down in the point scoring.
There may be some undecided voters on this forum and it might be of assistance to them.

It would be nice to know why people are voting one way or the other. I know my own reasons and Rob 'Exile' Ward's and a few others, but in most cases I know their opinion but not their reasoning.

We can all shred each other on other threads,

In reply to rogerwebb:

I'm in the REMAIN camp after much fence-sitting and deliberation. The reasons are here in a far more erudite way than I could hope to say it.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/06/its-time-leftwing-sup...

In reply to rogerwebb:

I'm voting remain because the whole in/out debate seems to be an internal tory nonsense that they've somehow forced on the nation.

In reply to rogerwebb:

Like the majority of ecologists and environmentalists I am in the REMAIN camp. The EU has been good for the environment.

In reply to rogerwebb:
Fundamentally I believe big issues like climate change, tax evasion and what we think are fundamental human rights need collaboration on a level bigger than the nation state.

Another important reason is that I don't want my children to have to go to war like my 95 year old Grandad did in WWII. He thinks that the rhetoric around immigration and nationalism now is very similar to the 30s, more so than anything else since then and is very worried by it. I don't think it would be immediate but I really do think Brexit and the destabilisation of the EU would make conflict more likely.

Finally there's the damage I think it would do to my family. My wife's job is heavily reliant on EU free movement of services. My job benefits greatly from collaborative structures set up by the EU. My brothers girlfriend is German living in the UK and I have family living in other EU countries all of whom would face increased uncertainty about their right to live and work where they do now.

Edit: In case it wasn't clear I'm voting remain

In reply to Tony the Blade:

I admire your brevity! I tried to match it but failed.


The EU is a far from perfect organisation. Arguably it has expanded too fast and the Euro project suffered from a hubristic optimism from which it is slowly recovering. The expansion has resulted in far greater numbers of migrants to this country than were expected and in some areas services have suffered. It isn’t difficult to criticise CAP or the fisheries policies and the migration of the European Parliament is laughable. There is a lot wrong.

But;

The European Union is the product of an ideal, an ideal that European states should cooperate with each rather than squabble, that they should combine for the common good rather than split for narrow comparative advantage. It is an ideal that emerged from the wreckage of World War 2 and it has delivered much of its promise.

We live in a Europe that is more prosperous than ever before, where a citizen has the right to freedom of movement and the guarantee of fundamental rights http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:12012P/TXT and is able to challenge abuse of those rights. This may not seem that revolutionary to us in the UK but is an almost unimaginable improvement for millions of our fellow Europeans compared to their experience in most of the 20th century.

A prosperous and peaceful mainland Europe is in our national interest, it helps our trade, makes us richer and makes us more secure.

That prosperous and peaceful Europe cannot be taken for granted, at the moment our part of the world faces multiple crises, the collapse of Syria, a vast movement of people across the Mediterranean, war in the Ukraine, the rise of IS inspired terror and all to the background of a global economic downturn.

Leaving the European Union will not insulate us from any of that, it will reduce our ability to influence a collective response and it will reduce the European Union’s ability to make an effective response. It will make the situation worse not better. It will not be in our national interest.

The historical response to the kind of multiple problems facing Europe has been a retreat to nationalism, the desire of each country to protect what it has at whatever cost to its neighbours. This may result in one or more countries ending up better off than those neighbours but also ends up with all worse off than they could have been if they had faced those issues together. At this time with the European Union we have the opportunity to face these matters together for the common good, we can be part of that or we can cheer or jeer impotently from the side lines.

We have heard a lot of ‘facts’ from both sides about whether we will be richer or poorer, whether a particular problem will be better or worse, those of us who are in Scotland will remember this well from 2014, experience from then should tell us that some of those ‘facts’ were deceitful, some fanciful and some bizarre, almost all turned out to be opinion and speculation.

This is a similar situation we cannot predict the future but can identify the future we aspire to bearing in mind that this is a long term issue not just the next five years.
I aspire to a peaceful prosperous democratic Europe where countries combined voluntarily under treaty co-operate to deliver a high quality of life, fundamental rights, and security.

I believe that the UK should be part of that and I believe that the UK leaving the EU makes it less likely.

Vote remain


(this is a broad sweep polemic, I am happy to debate detail on other threads)

In reply to rogerwebb:

A fair proportion of the out camp come over as xenophobic nutters and/or political extremists (none of those on UKC, of course) who seem to believe they will be in positions of power if they win. The in group contains a few with strange views, too, but they don't seem quite as worrying.

In reply to rogerwebb:

If I was allowed to vote (been in France >15 years) it would be to stay in the EU

Voting to leave seems to have lots of risk but no tangible benefits - the reasons given such as regaining sovereignty (which we've never lost, just shared) or controlling immigration (a large proportion of which we could control more but don't) don't seem to be very coherent or believable (especially if we stay in the Single Market/EEA).

And that's before I look at whose in favour of leaving & the ideas they've been promoting for the last decade or more.

In reply to rogerwebb:

I'll be voting to remain.

I have personal reasons, that my girlfriend is from Italy and the potential for her being thrown our of the UK is worrying.

I have professional reasons, that we struggle to find good engineers, and the thought of the Spanish and Polish guys that work for us being thrown out of the UK, or similar people not being as easily employed in the future could be pretty problematic for us.

I'm worried that it would cause a recession in the UK (market confidence seems to indicate it would). I started my career just as the last recession hit, and I'd rather there wasn't another one for a long long time.

I'm happy that the EU moderates our government, and provides a longer-than-parliament-term view on things like the environment and worker's rights.

I think it reflects badly on our country that we're moving towards isolationism and nationalism at a time when we should be more globalist.

In reply to rogerwebb:

I'm voting OUT to see if Remains doomsday scenarios come to pass or Brexits nirvana appears. If I vote IN then I will never know.

In reply to rogerwebb:

Remain because I originally voted to join the EEC. My reasons then were because a united Europe is far stronger than a diverse Europe. There have been too many European wars and you are less likely to go to war if you are economically tied up with each other. Fundamentally I don't believe this has changed.

Also I am a great believer in the Devil you know. The EU is far from perfect, no organisation/federation is ever perfect, but it's members should be constantly striving to improve it from within. Leaving is a leap in the dark and one which I don't think we should risk.

Looking at the views of prominent people I have a lot more faith in those arguing for remain than those who argue for out.

In reply to rogerwebb:

Remain because I love being part of modern Europe; I really value our shared history and culture, I'm proud of what been achieved in recent times (I'm thinking about cooperation and peace; rather than some nonsense about whether we control the shape of our bananas)

It also makes me feel that that the Alps and other amazing wild areas of Europe are jointly owned

Mont Blanc

(Interesting observation: Lots of rational and thought out reasons to remain. Haven't seen any rational reasons to leave yet)

In reply to rogerwebb:

People are tribal by nature, and over the centuries, Europe has certainly given us some spectacular demonstrations of how this can go wrong.

I admire the idea that we should rise above such things, and perhaps consider ourselves to all be of one tribe, but I think most people just don't work that way – identities matter, and can have value of their own.

As such, we need structures and mechanisms in place to make sure that countries get on with each other, ideally encouraging their populations to mix, to swap ideas, goods and members, and to be of more benefit than harm to each other.

Quite simply, I think the European Union does this. The nations in it retain ultimate sovereignty - as they can choose to leave if they really want to, and still control most of their foreign affairs and laws directly – but they can and often do cooperate on matters better decided as a group. There is a great deal of interdependence and mingling, but countries and regions still manage to retain their distinct identities and compete with each other.

It has probably grown too fast, but I think this is at or near an end – there’s little appetite for expansion amongst the voting populations, and there is likely to be considerable resistance from certain other countries, to what can be seen as encroachment onto buffer zones.

And it may have integrated far enough, for the near future at least – but again, there is a lot of resistance to further integration, and the UK has specific opt-outs to having to do so, anyway.

I think we benefit greatly from being part of this large, but fairly loose, union, and I also fear that by leaving, we might do a great deal of damage to what is left.

I have many other reasons for voting Remain, but the above is the most important, and enough for me on its own.

In reply to rogerwebb:

I'm voting in as the thought of finding a new cleaner scares me to death.

In reply to rogerwebb: Good thread.

Since the EU debate began, I have learned a lot more about how the decision making process works. What I’ve found is that, whilst being far from perfect, it is more democratically underpinned than I had previously thought. It did appear to be a faceless unaccountable bureaucracy but actually all decisions have to be agreed by directly elected representatives – in the European Council, Council of Ministers and the European Parliament. It is mostly about consensus and collaboration – something that, in this country, we could do with more of rather than less.

Our economy is deeply wedded to Europe and, on the whole, I think being in the EU has greatly benefitted the UK economically over the last 40 years. There have been many reports from various economic institutions – e.g. the treasury, IMF and IFS – predicting damage that would be caused by leaving the EU. The leave campaign have labelled them as biased and scaremongering but have not presented any robust analysis to counter the arguments. Thinking about it myself I consider that, whilst it is impossible to predict the economic future with certainty, it is much more likely that we will be worse off out than in. And given the current state of the UK finances, that is not a risk we can afford to take. Not to mention the effects of another recession on my own employment and that of family and friends.

On a more fundamental level; there are many governments, organisations and people around the world trying to sow division, confrontation and hatred. This is not a direction that the UK should be going. The world and the UK can only be improved by engagement, cooperation and sometimes compromise between nations and people. I do not want the UK to leave the EU but to become more involved, not by more political integration, but by the UK sitting down with the other EU countries and saying ‘These are our concerns. What are your concerns? How can we address them together?’

In reply to rogerwebb:

How nice to find a thread of calm and rational reflection!

The only war in Europe in the last 70 years was a nationalist one. That's not about NATO but about common interest, trade, and talking.

The most successful democracies are bound to be a bit unsatisfactory to nearly everyone because no one gets everything their own way. But they are SAFE places. Mostly, no one comes to take you away in the middle of the night to half drown you or pull your fingernails out.

Most of the anti immigration spiel has racist undertones (or more, Boris) whilst we need a younger influx into this aging population, to do the work and to pay the taxes to support the health service and pay the pensions.

And environmental protection, workers rights and health and safety will take a serious kicking if we leave - they've already been described often as tiresome red tape.

The whole debate has a feel of the old Python "what have the Romans done for us?" Sketch except that the politicians misorganising the stay campaign can't actually articulate anything positive about it all. Scary.

In reply to rogerwebb:

Remain

For all the reasons given above.

I have listened to the leaver's argument but it just doesn't stack up in the real interconnected, modern, world and I don't want to have to attend compulsory Morris dancing classes.

In reply to rogerwebb:

While not perfect, a coordinated TfL seems to work pretty well on the whole and I really doubt the Jubilee Line would be better off if it withdrew from TfL and went it alone.

In reply to rogerwebb:

Personally, I think one might as well flip a coin and vote accordingly. The whole referendum is a circus with both sides slinging vacuous promises and fallacious arguments and, fundamentally, nothing will really change if we leave the E.U., anyway... and that's even if an "out" vote actually gets effected many years in the future, long after everyone's forgotten what the referendum was about and the muppets spouting bile, today, have moved on in their political careers and no longer need to be responsible.

I'd vote remain, though, because the least scary promises that the leave camp offer are that they'll just set up all the things the E.U. forces on the U.K. now. (If we didn't have to pay all that money to the E.U., we'd give it to the academics and scientists directly... blah... blah...) But they won't. I cannot believe that a government that demands that doctors provide a 24/7 NHS without offering to pay more is the sort of government that would make good on such promises. I know you're a car thief but I trust you with these registration papers and this key... not likely.

This whole thing is a bloody farce. I just wonder who's benefiting from all these referendums - apart from the obvious politicians and Rupert Murdoch and the rest of the press.

In reply to rogerwebb:

I'm voting OUT.

becasue, I'm so sick of the utter bulls*it from BOTH sides, and have given up trying to sort the facts from the bollocks - I've made a decision to 'take the gamble' as I believe that's all anyone can do - if we don't try it, we won't know.

how badly can it go?

In reply to rogerwebb:

I'm for remain as i think we should stop pissing on the doorstep and get more involved in Europe. it does need reform in certain areas but if somethings broken you fix it, you don't just give up. or has this two become the casualty of mass consumer culture?

it's my generation that this will have the biggest impact on, and i feel as the world gets more competitive your better standing with a group of 27, then in the corner trying to shout loudly hoping someone will notice.

Also plan to go road ripping round Europe post university and imagine trying to sort visas out!

In reply to rogerwebb:

I'm voting In because, on balance, I'd rather not live in a country resembling some nightmare mishmash of V for Vendetta and Children of Men.

In reply to rogerwebb:

In

I find nationalism distasteful and believe its about getting along with people of the world not being richer than them. EU is a step in the right direction (although clearly not perfect).

In reply to rogerwebb:

I'm for OUT, I hate the idea that we just become one of the States of a Federal Europe, with an EU army to stamp out protest and dissent in UK. (Re-run of the USSR). Secondly in years to come the millions of people from the middle east and Africa who will have been given EU citizenship will be able to enter the UK under freedom of movement. I don't want my grandchildren to live in a Britain that has lost its identity to Islamic culture and rule. I want them to live in an independent country where they can vote to get rid of the government if they want to.

In reply to rogerwebb:

Remain.

It's the status quo and the arguments I've seen for leaving are either massively exaggerated, misrepresentation of facts, or just plain made up. I wish I could find an example close to hand, but you'll have to take my word for it.

In reply to rogerwebb:

What he said. Remain.

In reply to rogerwebb:
Can the undecided join in?

In terms of short to medium term effect on the economy, remain have the better argument. It will take a long time to negotiate new trade deals, and the remaining EU members may well want to apply punitive measures against the UK. Also the UK does very well in terms of research funding from the EU. The idea that that money saved from leaving the EU will be spent on research funding, NHS or investment in the UK by the current govt is laughable.

However we also need to look at the long term. The EU has expanded to include counties in the east that aren't economically compatible with the western countries. This has completely skewed the labour market in unskilled labour or the self employed trades. Despite the boom in construction rates for tradesmen are kept low by EU workers.

Wages in the UK are almost an order of magnitude greater than in Romania for example. Minimum wage in the UK is a fantastic sum in comparison, so who can blame someone for travelling to the UK, living 6 to a room and putting up with illegal/unsafe conditions? Do that for a few years, send the bulk of the money home to the family and then return a pretty rich man/woman. However the bulk of the wages flow out of the UK, and the depressed wages mean that a UK based worker can't afford a decent standard of living for his family on the wages the likes of Mr Ashley pay.

For self employed tradesmen the pictures even worse. There's no way a UK plasterer or builder can compete with a group of Polish lads working cash in hand. Technically the EU workers should be paying tax and contributing to the economy, but as long as the middle classes are getting cheap extensions and nannies then no-ones too interested in cracking down.

Overall EU workers are a net benefit, and most provide a positive contribution. However there are those in the UK who lose out, and these are the very people who can't afford to do so, and their standards of living will continue to fall. Free movement isn't all positive. That breeds resentment, and the sneering dismissal of the issue by some in the remain camp entrenches those views.

I also don't buy the EU as the upholder of workers rights. Greek and southern EU workers aren't exactly doing well, and the French are rioting about labour reform. The EU is all about big business, (TTIP anyone?), hence the absolute insistence on free movement of people, goods and services. In terms of environmental protection the EU is a positive, although they've taken decades to stop the Spanish trawler fleets hoovering up fish with illegally sized nets, retaining the best 5% of the catch, dumping the rest overboard dead, then repeating until they had a premium quality catch to land. Also if you travel to any of the less developed EU states, (or France), you'll find a less than strict adherence to EU regulations.

Long term I don't know how the EU will develop. Despite Ukip being described as xenophobic fascists, you have to travel to mainland Europe to find proper, serious far right parties. They're on the rise, and issues with Islamist terrorism, large numbers of MENA migrants, and problems with the EU economy mean things could get very nasty very quickly in the coming years. I think we'll then see a very authoritarian side to the EU come out. We also have to look at Turkey joining in the next 10-20 years, and when that happens we'll have a porous border with Syria and all sorts of fun to follow.

Interesting times ahead, and I honestly don't know if being in or out will be worse. The current UK govt may be crap, but at least we can vote them out. Once fully embedded in the EU we're stuck with what we get.

In reply to rogerwebb:

Remain. Because no-one has given me any good reason to leave.

In reply to rogerwebb:

I'm in entirely because of the actions of Bob Geldof.

In reply to rogerwebb:

Remain.

To step into the unknown as things are slowly improving in the country is an invitation for more economic heartache. Not only hurting the economy but potentially thousands of ordinary workers. Those telling us to leave would never feel such misery if things went downhill, they are too busy worrying about their careers.

Seriously, Boris Johnson and Nigel Farrage?

In reply to rogerwebb:

Remain.

Having lived in France for four years, with an Italian wife, two Danish dogs, and now spending half the year in Italy, to vote leave would make me an idiot.

Also, if I wanted to lose all my money, I can think of far more noble causes than Boris & Goves back of a post it note, finger in the air punt!

In reply to rogerwebb:

Remain, because:

1) The much larger uncertainty associated with leaving demands in my view a much higher standard of evidence as to the benefits. The "evidence" from both sides is of insufficient standard, but remaining is a know quantity.

2) Peace on earth with ever faster transport and ever closer links and ever rising population requires genuine equality of people - treatment, opportunity, law. This would seem to suggest a global federal government. Whilst the EU has never had a mandate for this, it lurches in that direction at least on a continental scale. I would rather see separate public mandates for integration with trade, law, freedom of travel and a long term goal of federation. I would rather see that than the pathetic standard of debate this farce has garnered with people left right and centre choosing a view based on their beliefs and affiliations and then cherry picking evidence to match.

In reply to Goucho:

One should never write on the *back* of a post-it. The glue can really screw up a ball-point pen.
(I know... no debate. I couldn't help it. )

At the moment I’m going to vote out. If I could see any tangible benefits for staying in then perhaps my opinion would be different (and no, I’m not a xenophobic nutter and/or political extremists).
Would life have been better had we had given up the Pound and adopted the Euro? Are we going to fully participate in an ever closer union? Do we have the authority to make changes to policies that we don’t like (DC’s renegotiation seems to indicate not). Do we want to be tied to whatever comes out of the TTIP negotiations?
OK, leaving is a risk, but so is staying in. Risk isn’t necessarily bad, it could be an opportunity. Perhaps this is like a marriage that is starting to break down. Leaving isn’t the easy option, but sometimes you just have to make the next move and let the pieces land where they may.
Although, I would feel a lot better about this decision if it wasn’t for the fact that the people that will be doing the exit negotiations are the same people that the majority of the population have absolutely no trust in.
Damned if you do and damned if you don’t. But generally it’s a good idea to listen to your ‘gut instinct’.

In reply to rogerwebb:

Remain.

I find the prospect of Brexit absolutely terrifying; just how any sane informed person can be voting for it, given the dangers, uncertainties and certainties (certain damage), is beyond me. I regard a Brexit vote as amounting almost to a criminal act: a deliberate decision to hurt one's neighbours and one's country, and put even the security and peace of the country and continent at risk. If it's not criminal, I suppose it could be regarded as a kind of vandalism perpetrated by people suffering from diminished responsibility.

I sincerely hope that my worst fears are unfounded, and that I shall be proved wrong in the event of Brexit. But even if I am partially right I shall never forgive the perpetrators. I regard them, frankly, as pig-headed, selfish, ignorant louts, worthy of no greater respect than football hooligans.

One particular worry I have is that, if the Brexiters win by a narrow majority, the business classes and intelligentsia in this country are not going to take it lying down, and there could be extremely ugly turmoil, perhaps even leading to a kind of civil war. A general election (say, with Boris standing for power) could see very ugly and violent scenes, just as we have seen at Trump rallies in America.

If a Brexit scenario unfolds as I fear it may (with a further breakup of Europe, and quite possibly of the United Kingdom itself), the Brexiters will be seen by future generations to be the greatest Breakers and Wreckers in British history.

In reply to Cookie (North East Wales MC):

How badly can it go?
Very badly.
Why not try to get more information about it and make an informed decision. You owe it to your child.

In reply to Nigel Coe:

In case Roger isn't around to say it - this thread will work best if there's no debate, and people can feel free to say what they are thinking, without having to worry about anyone arguing.

There's plenty of room for debate and argument on all the other threads!

It's up to you, of course, but I think it would be best if you removed that post, on this occasion.

(Posted as someone who agrees with you!)

In reply to Nigel Coe:

Also, it would be good if you had your say too, since you're here now anyway.

In reply to rogerwebb:

Remain, of course.

Because we WILL lose a hell of a lot and we WILL gain absolutely nothing of consequence in return. Life will be much harder with a bullethole in the foot.

I can see how a lot of people may be taken in by proud and emotive talk of sovereignty and control but I find it much harder to understand how (the admittedly small number of) intelligent-sounding people on here can have heard all the reasoned arguments and opinions and still remain in denial about the damage leaving would almost certainly cause.

In reply to rogerwebb:

Remain.
Gove.

In reply to rogerwebb:
Out.

CAP, Strasbourg, Fisheries, excess number of politicians with massive salaries, pension after one term in office, thoughtless continued expansion, unwillingness to carry out any meaningful reform, threats veiled or otherwise from the EU leaders of punishment for using democracy to decide a nations future and Cameron trying to use Jo's death as leverage... a vote for what Jo believed in etc.. not very honourable at all.

Human, consumer or workers rights, environmental legislation and protection etc.. many EU countries have better versions of these than the EU standard, because their populations desire them. There is nothing here that the UK can't do for itself.

Farage or Gove are just for an election term or two, the EU is for life. I'm thinking long term than just 2020. It is 41 years since we last had a say on the EU.

In reply to rogerwebb:

Remain

Our current set up works well enough, no convincing arguments have been put to me for radical change rather than gradual reform.

The EU is an interesting and generally good model for how nation states can work together to address pan-national interests, and it should be persevered with.

In reply to rogerwebb:


I'm voting to stay in the EU. My main reasons are...

1. Peace
The period the EU has been around has been some of Europes most peaceful years. I believe the EU contributed to that.

2. Money
The UK is the world's fith biggest economy and is now relatively stable. To gamble on that position seems rash to me. Especially if it's done to try and avoid the comparatively insignificant buy in for being in the EU. The large majority of economic experts agree that we are better off in.

3. International Cooperation and Relations
Working together with other countries has achieved some amazing things. Whilst leaving the EU doesn't stop this it sets a very bad example. It's also a major poke in the eye to the EU countries.

4. Workers Rights
I think the EU has protected people rights and want to maintain this.


As a footnote I don't think free movement of people is the right policy when the EU encompasses the countries it currently does. However the benefits I've mentioned far out weigh this.

In reply to Greasy Prusiks:

Remain. I am a European and I am afraid of unthinking nationalism. The things that make Britain great are all about tolerance and respect. Xenophobia makes me feel ill.

In reply to rogerwebb:

Remain.
I'm a European.
Farage / Johnson / Gove / Duncan Smith.
Human rights and employment protection.
Cooperation and free trade.
Peace, not going back to the 1930s.

In reply to rogerwebb:

Why I’m voting remain.
It all depends how you feel about co-operation versus isolationism. I go for co-operation every time. The big issues of the day and the next few decades include such things as climate change, air pollution, international terrorism and inequality. I don’t think any of these problems will be solved by little us on our own. Just to take one of these, air pollution: much of our air pollution comes across from Europe. How can we on our own affect that? The Paris summit on climate change, which is but one step on a long road, would never have happened without the influence of the EU. Working together, the EU nations are forcing the rapacious phone companies to play fair on roaming charges. Soon they’ll be gone altogether. Could we have effected this on our own? Much of the EU legislation affecting businesses is there to ensure a level–playing field within the single market. Much of it is there to protect trading standards, from which we all benefit. Much of it is there to protect the rights of labour, which have been denigrated greatly since Thatcher’s time. EU regs do much to prevent a race to the bottom in working conditions. Think there are too many on zero hours contracts when they don’t want it? Think people working for Amazon and Sports Direct are exploited and treated like dirt? It would only get worse if we were on our own. It is difficult even for the EU to stand up to global businesses like Amazon and Google. Think we’d do better on our own?
You may have noticed I haven’t mentioned money yet, but this is because I think the issue of co-operation versus isolation is far more important. Yes, it costs us to be in the EU, but if you believe in what the Brexiteers say about where all that cash could be spent you have to be gullible! All the big beasts of Brexit are right-wingers who would love to privatise everything, including the NHS. Even if they put more money into the NHS it would finish up in the pockets of their friends in private companies. John Major had it right when he said “Putting this putative government in charge of the NHS would be like putting your pet hamster in with a hungry python”.
Immigration is the big issue for Brexit. What amazes me is that people of my generation are largely pro-Brexit. Our population structure is top heavy - we are a country of old people. Old people are – and I’m one – a burden on the working population. Who will pay their pensions?Who do they think will be looking after them in their declining years in a care home if we don’t allow in large numbers of immigrants? Historically, no country has ever become weaker through immigration. Quite the reverse. Immigrants come here to work. The vast majority are self-selected go-getters who want to work hard and improve themselves. After all, when we talk about “get-up-and-go” they have shown it in spades. They are young and healthy – no stress on the NHS. They contribute far more in taxes than they get in benefits. They pay taxes and spend their earnings – the country gets wealthier. There isn’t a finite number of jobs but jobs are created by the demand created by people with money in their pockets. Many people may not like immigration, but economically there is nothing better for the country. It created the USA, after all.
Last, but not least, I would ask you to look at the history of Europe in the last hundred years (or more). The EU includes countries which have fought one another many times, as well as many who have been freed from the yoke of Soviet communism and thereby destroyed the threat of USSR. The Balkans is at peace – that’s some achievement. When the EU began in the 1950s with the European Coal and Steel Community, the chances of war in Europe diminished, and the chances of war in Europe have diminished further with each stage of the history of the EU. Apart from my first year, my lifetime has seen peace amongst the nations of the EU. That is worth any of the shortcomings of the EU (of which there are quite a few).
I rest my case, m’lud.

In reply to rogerwebb:

bumping this up in case anyone hasn't seen the competing arguments