How will you vote in the EU referendum?

Personal animosity has no place in a discussion of political issues. All it shows is the antagonism is one poster to another - and that can impact on the poster being attacked. Even long-standing members who appear to be robust in debate can be affected enough to stop posting.

I do wish people would keep their own personal agendas out of threads such as this.

Are you POGS? Have you read what POGS says about people whose country of origin is here but live elsewhere?
If she thinks the same as you, then anyone who moves from their country of origin has no rights.

The answer djen is that they may have lived here for 20 years but that they are not UK citizens. Their 'rights' are in their country of origin.

POGS, what thought do you give to EU citizens who have lived in the UK and paid taxes, etc., for over twenty years but have no say in whether we stay in or not?

I take it as read that the DM wont get things entirely accurate and will have a bias.
But the overall point I think is correct in that the EU would rather there was no patriotism.

But patriotism cannot be stamped out.

This is a response to the daily mail link posted by obieoneon behalf of petra and my comments are limited to the article.

I approached it determined to suspend my pro EU bias and read it through twice. Initially, I was interested in the historical context until I began to process what it was really about. I won't bore you an analysis of the whole article but there were issues which I consider duplicitous at best.

Firstly, I don't agree that the EU is totally incompatible with internationalism. Even more contentious are the historical examples given of where a united Europe has been attempted and failed: the Romans, Charles V, Napolean, Lenin and Hitler. Is this journalist really comparing brutal, violent and repressive regimes with unity in Europe today? And do we then include Winston Churchill, considered by many to be one of the greater post war visionaries of a united Europe?

This second issue relates to migrant numbers and the "clash between internationalist ideals and self-interest." This is not the only journal which blurs the distinction between a migrant and a refugee. The distinction is that "a refugee is a person who is forced to leave their country to escape war, persecution or natural disaster". A migrant is a person who moves from one place to another to find work or better living conditions."

The UK and Ireland opted out of the Schengen Agreement and of the EU's visa policies and the removal of internal border controls between Schengen member States.

The UK has an opt out of compulsory quotas of asylum seekers.

I am not saying that the UK government can or should disregard the problems faced with migration of this magnitude across Europe and the implications for the UK. It is however deliberately misleading to show photographs of distressed refugee children under the same banner as migrant crisis and to infer that the solutions are to be found only in other European countries.

That's not the point at all- of course- no-one is planning on kicking the UK out, or have I missed something. But it was worth pointing out the figures- as many seem to think they are heavily stacked against the UK.

I'm sure in that case it would be seen as a positive for those countries who have UK citizens claiming unemployment benefit for them to leave their country.

If the UK is the beneficiary of having more unemployed claimants in other EU countries , I think that's what is being said? then it's worth kicking us out of the EU if that's the strength of the argument.

POint is though, that if they can no longer get benefits (often at much higher rates than in the UK) - they will return and draw benefit from the UK. As seen, the numbers are considerable.

I am taking in all posts as I am so far an undecided. I don't feel I have sufficient information and therefore watching and listening to as much coverage as I can. I do admit to a slight fear factor, not if we can survive outside the EU but what the backlash from those 27 countries left will do if they have any ill will towards us. Then I think to myself why should we want to belong to a 'club' that could act that way in the first place.

However I will , no doubt 'dare to say' , I really am not giving one thought to the UK citizens who are receiving welfare such as unemployment in the other EU countries. As far as I am concerned they contribute nothing to the UK economy and have chosen not to reside in the UK by choice and that is their privilege to do so. Harsh? Maybe!. I appreciate others have a totally different view I guess it depends on your personal circumstance , e.g do you live outside the UK, do you have family residing and working in another country, are you a UK citizen or speaking as a citizen from outside the UK . I have a nephew in Cyprus and nieces in America and Spain but I genuinely feel they contribute zero to the UK , only if and when they visit for a holiday and they pay vat.. The same as I contribute to another country within the EU only if and when I visit the country. I would not for one minute believe I could/should have any right to tell a citizen of say Greece, Germany, Poland how they should decide their countries future, I only have a right to express an opinion, for what it's worth.

I am hoping after Cameron and the EU have at last finalised exactly what his negotiations have achieved we get to hear more explicit information from 'both camps' but the problem is always trying to establish non biased information. At some stage though those , like myself, will have the information and can no longer fall back on the somewhat lame excuse of waiting to hear what the negotiations have come up with. In the meantime I am totally thrown as to where I will put my cross.

Again in response to Thursdays question, by Alea, on Thursday

Can you substantiate the 1000s and 1000s claim please?

From the International Business Times today:

A new survey has revealed that the number of Britons claiming benefits across European Union countries currently outweighs the number of immigrants from those respective countries that are receiving welfare in the UK - a stark contrast to government figures.

According to a survey conducted by the Guardian newspaper, responses from 23 of the 27 EU countries show that at least 30,000 British nationals are claiming unemployment benefit across the bloc.

The survey results compare data showing that, for example, the number of Britons claiming benefits in Germany, outnumber the amount of Germans receiving welfare in the UK.

Using the same method, the report says there are 23,011 Britons siphoning state welfare from Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Belgium, Luxembourg, Germany, Austria, France and Ireland. Meanwhile, nationals from those EU countries account for just 8,720 benefits claimants in UK.

Thanks obieone

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3434497/Mr-Cameron-s-beloved-EU-imploding-reason-elected-elite-running-simply-don-t-understand-deep-national-differences-run.html

This is petra's link I think? It is very interesting.

That was in response to Ana's comment.

Indeed not easy. In the UK, politicians are elected to make most decisions for us.

*So above I was talking about the UK, I thought that was clear.
And below I am talking about 'here' where I live. I would have thought that was clear too, as the UK is not a direct democracy, and people do not have to regularly vote on major issue at local or national level, as is the case here where I live (Switzerland, I am sure you knew that).*

Here I live in a direct democracy where we constantly are requested to vote on major issues, the people having the last say. On 28th of Feb, we will have to vote on several major issues- all requiring real study of all the pros and cons- and it's very hard work. It's also very concerning that many people vote with their guts but have not taken time to study the facts, advantages and possible consequences- and are swayed by populist (mis) information and posters, etc.

Sorry, I meant a few days a year.

Because of something I read earlier on another site, I have been looking at non-executives in government departments.
I had not realised there were so many.
Lots of them come from companies like KPMG and PWC.
Lloyds Bank and RBS figure quite often. Even some from Amazon.
These are people who earn a lot of money anyway, yet the government sees fit to give them £15,000 or £20,000 per year. Many of them have a whole string of non-exec positions as well as their normal job.

Why do these people get that much money for a few days a week, yet the DWP can strip poor people of the small amount they are given?

That's why I say it depends how rich you are as to whether Cameron cares.

obione no, I don't think the vote is divided by wealth, but when it comes to the EU, I do believe the government puts the interest of business above everything else.

This is backed up by an OECD report on the government's approach to the assessing the impact of any new EU regulations. The OECD has pointed out that the current approach

... is business-oriented and firmly linked into government objectives to sustain the competitiveness of the economy and raise productivity.

and states

... the needs and perspectives of citizens, employees, consumers and public sector workers are also important. They could be reinforced, and given greater prominence.

I agree with this.

Of course according to me, Ana. That is what I wrote.

Quoting Jalima: Completely losing track now, am I fit to vote?
Well, it was a joke because I thought I had asked for a link which could possibly help me make up my mind but I hadn't in fact posted the request because something else interrupted me, and in the meantime someone else had asked for it.
Have you ever gone upstairs and forgotten what it was you went up for, and had to go downstairs again to remember? Well, it was that sort of moment

But I did want the link and I do want to read the pros and cons from all sides before I decide. I am thinking about the future of my DC and DGC rather than my own.

It's also very concerning that many people vote with their guts but have not taken time to study the facts, advantages and possible consequences- and are swayed by populist (mis) information and posters, etc.

Sorry, granjura, but it's not obvious who you're talking about there - the people where you live, or the people in the UK?

Quoting Jalima: Completely losing track now, am I fit to vote? blush

Indeed not easy. In the UK, politicians are elected to make most decisions for us. Here I live in a direct democracy where we constantly are requested to vote on major issues, the people having the last say. On 28th of Feb, we will have to vote on several major issues- all requiring real study of all the pros and cons- and it's very hard work. It's also very concerning that many people vote with their guts but have not taken time to study the facts, advantages and possible consequences- and are swayed by populist (mis) information and posters, etc.

According to you, of course, durhamjen.