I did not vote, but there are sound arguments for leave. For example if we consider trade. Now if we look at total good and services exports from UK we will see that EU share has dropped from 55% in 2000 to 45% now, the other world's share has risen respectively. The next thing to consider is that UK has actually a trade deficit and a huge one with other EC countries while with rest of the world UK has a surplus. Which means that UK is more effectively trading with other countries. Actually UK exports to EC declined in the last 10-15 years. Of course it's not as clear cut, a lot deficit and surplus is generated by UK being a sort of middle man for example with Switzerland, so UK basically import services (it mostly works with services) from EC and then re-sells to Swiss, thus creating deficit in one place and surplus in the other. Also UK international trade is influenced by agreement with EC. But it also true that UK trade with USA, Arab world, Asia is not based only on deals of these countries with EC. No actually it helps, but the majority of the trade is covered with special intra-government agreement between UK and said countries.
So Leave backers say, that UK deficit with other EC rose x2 times and exports basically unchanged over the last 15 years, so UK is not benefiting from open market, in fact other countries like Germany benefiting more from open access on UK market. While with UK trade with other countries, not EC, are increasing and going in more favorable direction for UK (surplus).
The trade stats can be easily found in web, it's a complicated matter of course, but it is a viable point and all this data will show that Britain itself actually more successfully trades outside of EC than inside EC open market.
Me as a very pro-remain, I can admit there are some honest reasons for leave, I just feel the lack of planning makes it very unappealing.
The politicians involved in the Leave campaign have spread such lies in regards to Immigration laws and the "£350M" which as we know is £160M.
I agree as some of the ministers and leaders within Europe have stated it's better to be at the table and to be part of the single market is a good thing.
Obviously pro-leave reasons there are quite a few, but immigration and public spending aren't the big ones although yes it's required.
The
"unelected officials" who have
"jobs for life" within EU is a big reason, we're talking about jobs for life and are paid around £235,000 per annum, Obama is on roughly the same.
The officials are unelected but when you look at some of their backgrounds they have been in respectable positions such as being the prime-minister of Luxembourg for 18 years.
The kind of leadership, experience and stability that can give is a good thing in some cases.
The EU does not pass laws, the heads of the EU make proposals to be discussed and then passed into law by the member states (iirc, don't quote me on that but I'm pretty sure).
I think a lot of people have an issue with the money the EU has divided amongst its governing body and there is a lot of them, but they are simply a scapegoat to push an agenda. If footballers can be on 200k p/w then surely the heads of European governing body can be I personally do not see an issue.
What I do find terrible for Brussels being the location of the EU is it's lately been a terrorism hotbed and thinking the diplomatic heart has terrorism on it's doorstep which is a very strange thought for me.
In terms of governing law to the UK the true figure given at the Referendum debate was 11% of laws through the EU directly affect the UK, which we are a part of the decision making. We as a country decide how our spending goes (one of the highest GDP in Europe behind Germany).
The issues for the UK isn't the EU it's the people in control of the UK, the Parliament doesn't have a plan, I said on another topic Finland has a future committee, they look forward as a country.
Luxembourg, teaching is a great career to have, in the UK education isn't really funded correctly and as a government personally there should be free education to Bachelors level, a funded NHS and schemes to get people from unemployed to work.
Those should be the 3 targets the Unemployment problem is still a very large issue and without those people paying tax and contributing the former is very hard to fund.
I would personally vote leave if there was a plan, if we knew the logistics of immigration, trade, health care and education was on the table "this is the amount we'll be affording education as a base-line figure we stipulate we won't go below this", "We'll be looking at getting another 1% of the population back to work this calendar year through these initiatives", rather than "Take back control" it's a very arbitrary thing to say.
I have a problem with people saying "those dictators in Brussels" that's not how the EU operates, same with the immigration argument as a previous post says they're not saying "free movement for labour", you can't just add a noun to it and suddenly it slips through the net.
The fact is, it's not about the EU.
Bottom-line is, it's down to government officials; When you go from Tony Blair, to Gordon Brown, to David Cameron it's simply not good enough.
Yes maybe the EU could have reform in places, and it's getting quite volatile with people wanting to leave due to inequality within the EU in terms of influence. But first look to the current government, we're essentially as a nation risking 40 years of development based on some arbitrary slogan such as "take back control".
We may as-well elect Mr Blobby as next prime minister.
