Backroom Errata

[Husar]

First off, I was not saying that the UK was better.
Secondly, one second you're on about precision then you suddenly extrapolate a minuscule data set and conclude that the EU - with such countries as Hungry, Romania and Bulgaria - has less corruption. Might there be a reason that the leaders of these three countries don't need to offshore? I'm sure that Germany ranks as one of the least corrupt countries on the planet. However, they've combined most of their systems with those that are known to be extremely corrupt.

So... take the blinkers off once in a while.

Exactly, you were only talking about corruption in the EU. If I was supposed to guess from that that you think Britain is not better, why did you use the argument in support of Brexit? Or did you not? That's what I meant with more precision, I am left to guess what exactly you mean.

As for extrapolating and precision, I found exactly one single MEP on the list, you said "some of the EU politicians". That's plural, so you already extrapolated from one MEP to several politicians, then say I'm imprecise for doing the same. At least I provided a source for my extrapolation, you provided absolutely nothing and left me guessing what you actually mean and where you take that info from.

So yeah, it's your argument, you might have a point, you might not, from the sources I found, you're completely wrong. It's not even my job to provide sources for your argument...
As Pannonian said, the local politicians don't matter since you specifically mentioned that the EU itself wasn't serious about corruption. Local politicians that aren't in the EU and are supposedly overruled by the EU say nothing about the EU unless they're British and will not be in the EU anymore soon. My second list has one EU MP and four British MPs, the other list has several government officials and other important British people and I wouldn't find any EU officials, so how exactly is Brexit going to help with lowering corruption based on the Panama Papers?