EU Referendum .

lol :spangled:

Dont listen to Simon

to add to what joe said - china and brazil's demographics are very different to ours...

a large chunk of our work force is about to retire - something this country has never seen in such proportions before... we can't rest on our laurels, something has to be done to ensure we can support this 'burden' and decline in the active workforce for the foreseable future...

anyone who thinks they're going to get a state pension whos in their 20's or younger now is in for a nasty shock when they come to retire....

I suggest students stop taking drugs & use their brains to SAVE BRITAIN

fuck that, im off to brazil

That's so true. There are loads more pensioners, who are all living longer these days, and NI revenues are going to be nowhere near what is needed to pay them even a basic pension. Just read on BBC that the pensions "black hole" has come down by £60bn and is now only £100bn!!!!! Been talk lately of increasing retirement age to 75... anyone else seen that?

another point which i'm sure will divide you all again and it it may not be to everyones liking but the proposed constitution also joins us in a common foreign, and security policy.

we effectively will lose the right to enter into miltary engagements without our own government facing prosecution under EU law. i'm sure many of you in light of the current iraqi situation would consider this a good point, but none of us know what the future holds and handing over the power and control of your military seems absolutely ludicrous to me!

i think i'm the same as many people when i say i am not anti-europe, i am simply anti the proposed constitution in its current form!

Yes.

This is effectively the case anyway though?

not at all, as proven by our involvement in iraq.

we were bound by UN treaties with regards to entering iraq without backing.

however there is a massive difference between breaking, or disengaging from treaties and breaking the laws of your own constitution which is effectively what is being proposed.

That's not how I read it. It doesn't stop us engaging in unilateral action in our own interests, only if it would be contrary to EU's interests.

We've effectively had this for 60 years being part of NATO

which is a treaty, which we have always been able to deviate from if so wished or the moment required us to.

what is being proposed are laws which would remove any power to do so, that is what i am against.

There is a strong arguement that the Iraq war was illegal (Article 51 and Article 42 of the UN charter)... Countries can't just invade other countries.

This I guess will effect things like SAS covert operations, where we say train militias in foreign countries.

But as a member of the UN we can't just invade other countries!

maybe i'm being slightly mis-understood i don't know? i am not worried about losing our power to invade countries at free will, a power which does not exist anyway!

i am concerned that we won't have the ability to exercise freewill over our involvement in conflicts. surely you can see the need for our parliament to decide whether our own troops are involved. there will be times, this i am certain of, that our military interests will deviate from that of the EU constitutions members and when these times arrive we need to be able to decide our own fate!

for example what if we disgaree with a conflict the EU becomes involved in, we are signing upto something which means we would then be required to commit troops to a conflict we may not support!

Lack of unity and decentralistion, the fundamental building blocks of capitalism, have precluded the prevention of both world wars and many smaller conflicts. We should learn from experience and work to build on the UN foundation, with the accompanying centralisation and subsumation.

Loss of power is not necessarily a bad thing.

Harry

THE UN ARE BUNCH OF PUSSY'S!!!!

Who REALLY cares what they say or do.

Confuzzled, your argument is a perfect example of divide and rule. If the UK can choose not to invade a country, then why shouldn't the North East be able to opt out? How about a particular neighborhood or family?

A classical example of the Prisoners' Dilemma, and a practical case of the irrationalism of the very foundations of the capitalist system.

hmm ok, I can see the technical difference you mean. In practice what would happen if it was judged that we'd engaged in military action that broke the constitution. Would UK get sued or what?

Is it not like the UK/US and the Iraq war where even if you accepted that International Law was broken effectively nothing is done about it... as it happens even though plenty people believe that the Law was broken there is not even any charges being brought.

At the end of the day it comes down to politics and power anyway??

disagree with the world in it's current climate i would say that it was! we are not about to form a socialist european state, nor are there any signs that the rest of the world is about to follow suit. retaining power will be fundamental to ensuring the continuing success of our country.

radical socialism, communism, is not coming anytime soon to western europe. we are, where we are, and therefore must make the best possible decisions for our current environment.