From: Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 18 Dec 17 - 07:32 PM

Well, Nigel, let's look again at my "long, unstructured rant." Here's a distillation of the points in there that you are clearly so uncomfortable with that you find the path of least resistance is to glibly dismiss it all as a "rant." Do note that my post lambasted not only the EU but also the party of which I'm a paid-up member.

*A few phrases such as "unelected bureaucrats in Brussels," "the EU gravy train," "taking back control," "immigrants driving down wages," "immigrants straining our public services," "ever closer union," "stealing our sovereignty," add more of your own. Not one of those is based on a honest assessment of where we are today as EU members.
As an 'honest assessment' of where we are today.
Unelected bureaucrats: The EU commission (the EU's executive body) The commission president and the individual commissioners are not directly elected by the peoples of Europe and we cannot sack them.
The gravy train: your original post (second paragraph) mentioned Nigel Farage as an example of someone benefitting from the gravy train, while you are claiming it's not an honest assessment. Which is it? And while picking on Farage, why not add the Kinnock family who continue to ride the train for all it's worth?
Taking back control: You're right, it's not an example of where we are today, rather where we wish to be.
Immigrants straining public services: this is a complex question, but that doesn't mean that it can just be dismissed with a wave of the hand.
Ever closer union: is the continuing mantra of the EU, and meant that the referendum was not a choice between leaving the EU and maintaining the status quo, as the status quo was never an option.
Stealing our sovereignty: is not a claim I've ever heard. Our parliament was slowly giving away our sovereignty.

*...we are a major member of a huge free-trading bloc with whom we do half our trade in goods.
About 43% of UK exports in goods and services went to other countries in the EU in 2016 240 billion pounds out of 550 billion pounds total exports.
That share has generally been declining, since exports to other countries have increased at a faster rate.
54% of our imports into the UK came from other countries in the EU in 2016. That proportion has fallen since reaching a peak of 58% in 2002, although it's been rising slowly again since 2011.
So although half our trade in goods may be with the EU, the balance is changing, and as imports from EU exceed exports to EU the balance of trade is that they need our markets more than we need theirs. (above details from Here)

*The fact that we are a leading financial services centre not only in Europe but in the world: there are plenty of financial institutions in the EU who are now licking their lips at the prospect of grabbing big lumps of that for themselves once the bureaucracy has hobbled us after brexit.
They may be licking their lips at the hope of grabbing big lumps. That doesn't mean that we will simply give in and allow such a grab to happen.

*The fact that, because you can't be in the EU unless you sign up to democracy, human rights and the rule of law, we don't have wars in Europe any more.
We already had democracy, human rights and the rule of law. These are not things given to us by the EU. Equating the lack of wars in Europe with the presence of the EU ignores the work done by NATO. As the EU does not, yet, have its own army I believe you are greatly overstating its importance.

*There's a lot wrong with the EU. The EU fisheries and agricultural policies are great ideas gone bad. The bureaucracy is definitely unwieldy and top-heavy. An EU army is just a bloody bad idea. The common currency was a deal that an average sixth-former could have told you would never work properly.
And yet the EU continue to push for greater integration, an expansion of the eurozone, and the presence of an EU army.

* But as a big, influential member of the club we should be right in there fighting for reform.
We have tried that. Cameron thought he could get the EU to backtrack to avoid Brexit. See what happened. To the EU in general there is only one possible direction of travel, that is closer integration. If the UK was acting as a brake, in any way, it was only slowing that integration. We had no chance of stopping it.

*Trade will be difficult and finding new trading partners to do deals with will be hard, considering that we don't make much stuff and a lot of what we do make can't compete with the likes of China with its vast production scales and cheap labour.
Europe will still want to trade with us. They sell us more than they buy from us, and can't afford to lose our market, together with losing our funding.

*The services sector which is over three-quarters of our economy will be badly hit by levels of bureaucracy so far unheard of.
Good argument that one. We will be hit by bureauocracy so far unheard of. If it's unheard of, how can you factor it into your arguments?

*We will have skilled labour shortages all over the economy as EU workers increasingly find this country a very unattractive place to come to, if they can get in at all.
Any reason why you believe they will find this country 'unattractive'?

*We've already discovered, surprise surprise, that we may be able to control people coming in but we can't control them leaving. EU citizens are already voting with their feet.
Financial times shows that net migration (EU to UK) has fallen to a new low, but that is still net migration to the UK. So those 'voting with their feet' are still voting to come here.

*I'm not voting for people who put political posturing above the interests of this country, and that includes Jeremy Corbyn, who, instead of putting up a feisty opposition to brexit and presenting the country with a genuine alternative, seems to have become totally paralysed. The interests of this country are far more important than sticking to ridiculous and pusillanimous standpoints such as "we must abide by the will of the people."
Yes, the interest of the country, and of its people are more important. It's just that we disagree whether those interests are better served by us being a separate sovereign nation, or a part of the EU.

*As even Nigel has pointed out, it was just over a third who expressed that will. Another third expressed the opposite and just under another third kept schtum. That is not an overwhelming mandate to take all of us, especially the young, to hell in a handcart...
No it's not a mandate to take us to hell in a handcart. But many of us do not believe the doom merchants who say that is where Brexit will lead.

Whether you agree or not with what I say, it ill-behoves an idiot who tends to pepper his posts mostly with long quotes from other posters, including, tediously, the thread title, date and time of post and poster's name-PM, then one or two lines of snarky, ill-informed distemper of his own, to criticise someone else who spends a fair amount of time constructing posts with closely-argued points. Please either take on those points one by one - there they are, Nigel, spelled out for you - or just clear off with your vexatious, lazy nonsense.
Your 'dark side' is starting to show again.
I quote earlier posts, with times etc. as the responses may not immediately follow the original, and it makes it easier to follow what has been said. The time stamp allows other readers to see that I am not deliberately misquoting anyone, or attributing opinions to the wrong person (which some on here do).