User blog comment:Draugluin the werewolf/EU referendum/@comment-26347028-20160624075142/@comment-26347028-20160626091143

And? If our system wasn't the failure it is, they'd probably be in a coalition.

It really will. The sheer differences in both economy and culture over the area in question make it unreasonable. Each in turn could be gotten over, but they weren't. And now they're paying the price.

Not the main cause, that's the economic differences. But a part of it.

You were suggesting we should help everyone by your words, not the EU. We can deal with some, but when it's becoming (66/89%) of our population growth, and we're struggling to keep up anyway. With immigration tripling (or timesing by nine by NINos!), we simply cannot get our NHS, education, or building quota, to keep up. Admittedly, we're not doing as much as we could, granted, but even that isn't going to make much difference in the face of the enormity of it. We simply cannot let this continue.

And all your "evidence" is is you crediting one side of the argument, when the supposed "experts" are split on the issue. That is why I disregard them. They can't together say one thing, so you can't say that "experts say…" stuff.

So Greece, Italy, Spain, and Portugal aren't bankrupt? We're worse off by it, and so is Germany. That's putting it simply. The fact that we may have still grown while we were in doesn't mean it was higher than if we'd been out. Because that would've been higher in all probability.

…Your point being?

We could, but it'd be hard and harm national relations. I'm not suggesting it, anyway, I'm saying if the EU extends our "period of notice" indefinitely or something stupid like that (which they probably won't, anyway).

And what is one president against the other three? It's a decision by the countries, anyway, not the presidents of the EU. I didn't say they will, I said they could.