Thought I'd start a new thread as this is going to be a major talking point this year...have not made up my mind yet...(unlike bucksfizz)....but thinking of voting for an exit as Europe is not doing Britain any good at all it seems....

Before the Scots had their independence referendum someone asked cameron if he would resign if the Scots voted for independence and he said he would'nt, but it was reported afterwards that an insider had said cameron would've resigned if they'd voted for independence.

He would resign if it was a vote to LEAVE(thankfully) and someone with more gumption and who believes in the country would fight harder for a GOOD deal..

I doubt that he will leave if the vote goes against him. I am happy with the job he did on negotiating better terms. There was no way he could get much, but at least he got a few things. It is pretty academic as we will vote to stay in.

My estimates have been good so far. I predicted on here that there would be a Conservative clear majority and UKIP would get just one MP.

Current odds

Stay 2/5
Leave 15/8

Haystack, IF YOU really believe that cameron obtained the best REFORMS to the best of his ability then you truly are deluded...Or YOU were/are quite happy with being in that corrupt, undemocratic, unaccountable organisation whether there had been reform negotiations or not.

YOU need to google Cameron, Bloomberg speech to see what he should have got or even somewhere close. Instead of some watered down non descript concessions he trumpeted as a victory...LMAO!

As to him resigning yes i believe he will, no one would have confidence in HIM obtaining the best trade deals if the negotiations was left to him.

Well i certainly hope you are very much wrong(which i believe its your wistful thinking) in that the UK votes to remain because it'l mean total intergration and ever more closer union and more immigration......

But then again by the tone of your posts thats what you prefer anyway, I believe the opposite will happen, and that the LEAVE side will triumph..

Cameron was never going to get anything significant. The EU is too large to be modified much. I hope we leave, but I can't see it. The public will think it is safer to stay in,

The mid-east holiday season is getting into it's stride, that will really encourage people to vote in to the €uroloony bin.

April fools day, or are they mad/desperate to enough to try it?


Who Needs Helicopters? Draghi Plans "Fool-Proof" ECB-Backed Debit Card

LOFL!!...You could'nt make it up..

Its been reported in the Telegraph that .....

China has thrown down the guantlet in an escalating trade war over the global steel glut, imposing punitive tariffs of 46% on hi-tech steel produced in Britain.

And its been on the news today that when cameron was in China, he was telling anyone that would listen that Britain was China's best friend in the West....For frick sake, what a t+++er...

Interesting figures












A FAIR SOLUTION regarding the Migrant issue?




I DIDN'T DO THESE CALCULATIONS, I AM JUST PASSING THEM ON.




Our rulers - Mrs Merkel and M. Hollande - have demanded that all European countries take their "fair share" of the (mainly Muslim) migrant hordes over-running Europe's apparently unguarded borders.




But how do you decide what a "fair share" is? Merkel and Hollande try to link the number of migrants to each country's GDP as that will ensure Britain gets landed with most of the flood of human beings pouring into Europe.




But why not link the number of refugees each country takes to its population density?




Here is how it works out.




Europe's most densely populated country is England.




England's population density is 413 people per square kilometre (413 ppl/km2).




Now, how many refugees would the main European countries need to take for them to reach the same population density as Europe's most densely populated country - England?




To reach the same population density as England (413 ppl/km2), Germany could take 67 million migrants, France could accommodate a whopping 160 million and Spain and even larger 161 million.




And our close neighbours in Scotland have room for over 25 million! That should please Socialist Sturgeon.




In all, just thirteen European countries could accommodate more than 680 million migrants before reaching the same population density as England.




Well. That seems to solve the problem of deciding how countries should take their "fair share" of the migrant swarm. So, using these figures, there's no need for Europe's most densely populated country - England - to take any migrants at all and our friends in these other countries can comfortably absorb over 680 million migrants.




That seems to me to be giving each country the "fair share" that Merkel and Hollande demand!




It is very fair and politically correct to argue that England is full for now.

The figure of 413 people per square kilometre is clearly wrong and therefore the calculations as well. The 413 people per square kilometre is a figure that was reported by official sources in mid 2013. There are no up to date accurate firgures. The figures should be for the UK and not England. For instance the most recent figure for Scotland is 65. Wales is probably similar.

It makes no sense to subdivide the UK in these stats. One of the things that gives us a high density is the size of London and the higher density of the South East. The further north you go the lower the density. Plenty of room for immigrants up north.

What a true cnut you really are haystack, it's quite plain YOU'RE one of those bleeding heart mass open door- open borders liberals, and in all probability an EX teacher..

What about the effects to Schools..The NHS..And all the other public services that is already bursting at the seams, which is almost entirely caused by mass immigration..

YOU lefties complain about not enough funding is being put into the NHS, and yet YOU persist in railing for more open door immigration!!!!!...

YOU are an idiot of the highest order....

I don't want any more immigration at all, but I prefer if discuss the problem with accurate statistics and not reported headlines.

It is very amusing to be called a lefty and I am certainly not a an ex teacher. I am pretty right wing and used to own a software company.

Well to say you were in a position of responsibility, your opinions and thoughts belittle that of someone who is supposed to have run a business..

You might argue that conurbations like London and other high density area's dosn't give a true picture of the available land across the UK as an whole,a lot of it not suitable for building houses on, but what you refuse to except is that no matter where they put the immigrants they have to be housed, schooled, and treated at Doctors surgeries and Hospitals, and on the roads infrastructure..

When do you say enough is enough??...

grannyboy

Keep the personal abuse down,please, and particularly towards Haystack. There's surely no need for it.

And 'Haystack left'? Hmmm? Not so. But he is somewhat left of 'Attilla the Hun'.

IMHO, his posts are usually extremely solid and based on facts and reality.

However, I do wish he would take just a little time to add his source's URL address when he Copies and Pastes. Not that I would ever accuse of of 'editing them up' but it would be nice to check and also give credit to the original author.

Exec,

I though Hays gave lessons to Attila or was that Granny?

The immigration problem has nothing to do with population density. France has a very low density but the effects of immigration on infrastructure such as health and nhs would be just as bad in any country.

The anti immigration lobby uses population density as a weapon. The reality is that you can get the whole population of the world onto an area slightly bigger than the Isle of Wight.

I am less bothered by the numbers than I am about the effects without spending on key infrastructure areas that we cannot afford.

ExecLine(461) "Keep the personnel abuse down, please"

I don't believe i've been excessively abusive by any means, just where it waranted it.

As to "IMHO, his posts are usually extremely solid and based on facts and reality."


Well if you've just based that on today, and just read the posts today then you should go back over a couple of days postings, you will see we've had a few heated debates where haystack has posted something which has been incorrect and which i've corrected, he's not liked it of course, but i don't like deceivers and those who accuse people of being racist and little Englanders for stating the FACTS and the truth..

And if you come into the haystack mould, then you know what you can do...

As you can see from haystacks stupid reply to population density...

IE: "The anti immigration lobby uses population density as a weapon. The reality is that you can get the whole population of the world onto an area slightly bigger then the Isle of Wight."

Ho yes and would they be able to lay down in comfort, or is that standing room only..

Haystacks tries to make out everything would be fine and dandy, and he likes telling us that he dosn't want to have uncontrolled immigration, yet goes out of his way to make excuses for it....SENSELESS!!!..

I don't even want the level of immigration that we have now, but you won't stop it unless you have debates based on accurate data. Headlines from the Express and the Mail are not based on reality.

Most right minded poeple don't want the immigration that's been allowed now. The problem is we can't do a thing about it SO LONG AS WE ARE IN THE EU..

The reason you get headlines like those in the Express/Mail is because the government does not give out the true figures, or non at all, you can't trust them because they've got ulterior motives...At least the papers will be nearer the figures then the government...You can look back to 2005 when Labour said that ONLY around 13000 Poles would come over when they were allowed to vie for the jobs...Look how many came..