Brexit - Merged Threads

[anser2]

12 hours ago, 12gauge82 said:

Very interesting perspective Rewulf, thinking about it, I think your quite right.

The EU really is a horrible beast, a dictatorship dressed up in saints clothing.

Why do people keep keep on with this lie. The EU is not a dictatorship! MEPs voted in by you and i, Council of ministers and the Commision  voted in by member countries who were voted in by their people. Unlike the Uk where only the House of commons is voted in by the people. Nobody votes for the House of Lords.

[Cannon]

The arrogance of the british has shown itself quite clearly in recent days. Europe will have zero obligation to the uk after brexit. Europe will continue to prosper and grow, whilst we will be left fighting for the scraps of international trade deals. The british have no manufacturing worth talking about anymore. They sell people skills. Call centre staff and administrative personnel etc. India provides them cheaper.

The idea that Ireland is a small player in the equation is nonsense. When you deal with Ireland, you deal with Europe. If you're happy to pay a considerable increase in postage, income tax, fuel duty, food tax etc then by all means carry on. Your quality of life will deteriorate and your expendable income will fall. It's the clearest example of national self harm that I've witnessed in years, and unionists support it because of blind arrogance. Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face.

[Gordon R]

I presume you include yourself when you speak of the arrogance of the British.

[Cannon]

2 hours ago, Gordon R said:

I presume you include yourself when you speak of the arrogance of the British.

Yet more arrogance. Thanks for proving my point once more. It's never ending. Ingrained so deep that anybody with an alternative viewpoint to a british man must be wrong. This elitist attitude has no place in the 21st century. It belongs in the dark ages with the dup. You have strong opinions Gordon R, but your inability to view things from a perspective other than that forged of your own emotional and illogical reactions discredits you, and only serves to detract moreso from the distant possibility of someone perceiving you as a fine and amicable character.

[12gauge82]

5 hours ago, Cannon said:

The arrogance of the british has shown itself quite clearly in recent days. Europe will have zero obligation to the uk after brexit. Europe will continue to prosper and grow, whilst we will be left fighting for the scraps of international trade deals. The british have no manufacturing worth talking about anymore. They sell people skills. Call centre staff and administrative personnel etc. India provides them cheaper.

The idea that Ireland is a small player in the equation is nonsense. When you deal with Ireland, you deal with Europe. If you're happy to pay a considerable increase in postage, income tax, fuel duty, food tax etc then by all means carry on. Your quality of life will deteriorate and your expendable income will fall. It's the clearest example of national self harm that I've witnessed in years, and unionists support it because of blind arrogance. Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Well that's a heavy and rather pessimistic prediction, I and many others who voted for Brexit are rather more positive than that. The UK has one of the most diverse skills bases within Europe, yes our manufacturing was dead, funnily enough though, it's started a massive uplift due to the readjustment of the pound which has made exports viable again, I'm sure it'll be fine, have a cup if tea and a sit down and try not to worry so much, it'll all come out in the wash ?

[Cannon]

4 hours ago, 12gauge82 said:

Well that's a heavy and rather pessimistic prediction, I and many others who voted for Brexit are rather more positive than that. The UK has one of the most diverse skills bases within Europe, yes our manufacturing was dead, funnily enough though, it's started a massive uplift due to the readjustment of the pound which has made exports viable again, I'm sure it'll be fine, have a cup if tea and a sit down and try not to worry so much, it'll all come out in the wash ?

I'd love to say time will tell, but there isn't enough of it to properly negotiate all aspects of brexit before it happens. Why people put so much blind faith in brexit bemuses me. We're all in for a hard time in the coming years.

[neutron619]

13 hours ago, anser2 said:

Why do people keep keep on with this lie. The EU is not a dictatorship! MEPs voted in by you and i, Council of ministers and the Commision  voted in by member countries who were voted in by their people. Unlike the Uk where only the House of commons is voted in by the people. Nobody votes for the House of Lords.

But this does not look deeply enough at the issues at stake.

MEPs and the European parliament have no legislative initiative. They can amend legislation but only subject to commission approval. They can delay, but not block legislation.

The European Parliament is emphatically NOT equivalent to the House of Commons, where your local MP can, using the Private Member's Bill mechanism, or an Early Day Motion introduce legislation entirely independently of the government of the day, have it debated and - theoretically - passed by a majority of the house. Commons and Lords amendments can be introduced by anyone and Government legislation is subject to them if they are passed - unlike the European Parliament where they simply reword the bill and introduce it again having bribed off the "difficult" member or simply ignored it.

The EU may not (yet) be a dictatorship, but all of its institutions are structured to allow for the possibility of it behaving like one. Don't even get me started on the ECJ, which having only a few years of case law, can effectively "invent" law in its rulings in areas not covered by previous judgements, which are then immediately and retrospectively applied across all member states. It's almost the perfect example of what they call judicial activism and it occurs because the role of the judges is not strictly limited to interpreting existing law as it is in this country (and as it should be, in my view). Effectively, they can advance the cause of the EU via "useful" rulings where member states themselves will not permit (i.e. veto) legislation.

So it's a lie but only just: in their behaviour and their disdain for things like the rule of law and its equal application to all citizens (when was the last time the Germans were fined for running an "illegal" budget surplus at the expense of the southern European states?), seperation of powers, respect for the rights of the individual and the freedom of peoples to exercise a sovereign will - so alarmingly (to them) exercised by those who voted leave - is isn't far from being one.

You'll have guessed that I'm a "leaver" of course. Let me tell you why: it wasn't "immigration", or really "sovereignty" though those are important. I still believe it will be possible to make a good hash of Brexit, if it's grasped as an opportunity with both hands, though that seems not be happening. Rather, it was about the character of the institution and the people in charge.

It's the character of people who are happy to be told "no" in French and Dutch referenda, then ignore the results and orderthem to vote again until they "get it right".

It's the character of people who are happy to stand on a platform saying "we must do more to help alleviate poverty in Africa", all the while charging a 40% tariff on imports of grain from Africa - by which those African poor could fairly work themselves out of starvation and penury and maintain their self-respect. This is the Corn Laws, European-wide, for the 21st century.

It's the character of people who are content to beggar an entire generation of Greek, Italian and Spanish youth to avoid their collossally misguided currency experiment collapsing, with the loss of money for the rich North European countries who - having taken advantage of the South during the good times - are allowed to profit from their misery during the bad. So much for solidarité!

It's the character of people who begin their response to the painful choice of a nation to leave their association with the question "how can we punish them to make sure no-one else follows?" all the while wearing crocodile smiles and promising to negotiate our surrender departure in good faith.

It's the character of people who knew, right at the start, with Monnet and De Gaulle, that they were trying to create a European superstate but, rather than trying to make the case for that honestly and openly and persuading people, began their "project" using subterfuge and continued it for nearly 50 years before admitting the end goal. (If it took them that long to admit that truth openly, what do you think they're currently planning but not admitting for 50 years' time?)

It was pointless arguing whether we'd be economically better off or not during the referendum campaign - no-one was ever going to know. We won't know for another 50 years probably. So after that, all you have left is "who are we associating ourselves with?" Do you really think that a bunch of folk with that outlook on life are the best people to associate with or subject ourselves to, when the vast majority of British people - leaver and remainer - seem to value all of those things like freedom, democracy, equality under the law that we'll only really miss when they are gone?

As for the House of Lords - well, no, we don't vote for them and isn't it marvellous? Or rather, wasn't it? You see, before they abolished all of the hereditary peers, you had a system which created a debating chamber entirely by accident of birth. That is, you got in whatever your politics was. Yes, it was a bit inequitable and meant that there were a rather large number of rich people in there, which gave it a particular perspective (though they do tend to have more time to think about things, not having to slave to survive), but the point was it wasn't nearly as party political as it is now.

The old system meant that the government couldn't rely on controvertial legislation getting passed simply because enough of their peers would turn up to vote on it. They had to persuade and to justify. After Blair kicked out the hereditary peers they had to make up the numbers somehow - so what did they do? Yup - you guessed it - they appointed a whole load of ex-Labour party members to fill up the spaces. Result? A whole load of bad legislation, poorly scrutinized and driven through by "party" appointees who, if they wanted to disagree or vote it down, were probably reminded that their names appeared in the Chief Whip's little black book for some filthy misdemeanour which would be made public if they didn't do what the government wanted...

So yeah. I rather liked the idea that people were appointed by accident of birth, whatever their politics. It would have been fairer to generate a list of random mobile telephone numbers and ask their owners to sit in the house - but an unappointed Lords is a lot better than a party political, easily knobbled Lords in my book, any day of the week. Think about it.

Edited December 5, 2017 by neutron619
Clarity. Inadvertent use of "defecit" when I meant "surplus".

[Penelope]

8 minutes ago, neutron619 said:

But this does not look deeply enough at the issues at stake.

MEPs and the European parliament have no legislative initiative. They can amend legislation but only subject to commission approval. They can delay, but not block legislation.

The European Parliament is emphatically NOT equivalent to the House of Commons, where your local MP can, using the Private Member's Bill mechanism, or an Early Day Motion introduce legislation entirely independently of the government of the day, have it debated and - theoretically - passed by a majority of the house. Commons and Lords amendments can be introduced by anyone and Government legislation is subject to them if they are passed - unlike the European Parliament where they simply reword the bill and introduce it again having bribed off the "difficult" member or simply ignored it.

The EU may not (yet) be a dictatorship, but all of its institutions are structured to allow for the possibility of it behaving like one. Don't even get me started on the ECJ, which having only a few years of case law, can effectively "invent" law in its rulings, which are then immediately and retrospectively applied across all member states. It's almost the perfect example of what they call judicial activism and it occurs because the role of thew judges is not strictly limited to interpreting existing law as it is in this country (and as it should be, in my view). Effectively, they can advance the cause of the EU via "useful" rulings where member states themselves will not permit (i.e. veto) legislation.

So it's a lie but only just: in their behaviour and their disdain for things like the rule of law and its equal application to all citizens (when was the last time the Germans were fined for running an "illegal" budget deficit at the expense of the southern European states?), seperation of powers, respect for the rights of the individual and the freedom of peoples to exercise a sovereign will - so alarmingly exercised by those who voted leave - is isn't far from being one.

You'll have guessed that I'm a "leaver" of course. Let me tell you why: it wasn't "immigration", or really "sovereignty" though that is important. I still believe it will be possible to make a good hash of Brexit, if it's grasped as an opportunity with both hands, though that seems not be happening. Rather, it was about the character of the institution and the people in charge.

It's the character of people who are happy to be told "no" in French and Dutch referenda, then ignore the result and tell them to vote again until they "get it right".

It's the character of people who are happy to stand on a platform saying "we must do more to help alleviate poverty in Africa", all the while charging a 40% tariff on imports of grain from Africa - by which those African poor could work themselves out of starvation and penury.

It's the character of people who are content to beggar an entire generation of Greek, Italian and Spanish youth to avoid their collossally misguided currency experiment collapsing, with the loss of money for the rich North European countries who - having taken advantage of the South during the good times - are allowed to profit from their misery during the bad. So much for solidarité!

It's the character of people who begin their response to the painful choice of a nation to leave their association with the question "how can we punish them to make sure no-one else follows?" all the while wearing crocodile smiles and promising to negotiate our surrender departure in good faith.

It was pointless arguing whether we'd be economically better off or not during the referendum campaign - no-one was ever going to know. We won't know for another 50 years probably. So after that, all you have left is "who are we associating ourselves with?" Do you really think that a bunch of folk with that outlook on life are the best people to associate with or subject ourselves to, when the vast majority of British people - leaver and remainer - seem to value all of those things like freedom, democracy, equality under the law that we'll only really miss when they are gone?

As for the House of Lords - well, no, we don't vote for them and isn't it marvellous? Or rather, wasn't it? You see, before they abolished all of the hereditary peers, you had a system which created a debating chamber entirely by accident of birth. That is, you got in whatever your politics was. Yes, it was a bit inequitable and meant that there were a rather large number of rich people in there, which gave it a particular perspective, but the point was it wasn't nearly as party political as it is now.

The old system meant that the government couldn't rely on controvertial legislation getting passed simply because enough of their peers would turn up to vote on it. They had to persuade and to justify. After Blair kicked out the hereditary peers they had to make up the numbers somehow - so what did they do? Yup - you guessed it - they appointed a whole load of ex-Labour party members to fill up the spaces. Result? A whole load of bad legislation, poorly scrutinized and driven through by "party" appointees who, if they wanted to disagree or vote it down, were probably reminded that their names appeared in the Chief Whip's little black book for some filthy misdemeanour which would be made public if they didn't do what the government wanted...

So yeah. I rather liked the idea that people were appointed by accident of birth, whatever their politics. It would have been fairer to generate a list of random mobile telephone numbers and ask their owners to sit in the house - but an unappointed Lords is a lot better than a party political, easily knobbled Lords in my book, any day of the week. Think about it.

One of the best posts on the subject.

[TriBsa]

+1

[Rewulf]

Awesome post Neutron 

"It's the character of people who knew, right at the start, with Monnet and De Gaulle, that they were trying to create a European superstate but, rather than trying to make the case for that honestly and openly and persuading people, began their "project" using subterfuge and continued it for nearly 50 years before admitting the end goal. (If it took them that long to admit that truth openly, what do you think they're currently planning but not admitting for 50 years' time?)"

This, is my primary reason for wanting out.

Edited December 5, 2017 by Rewulf

[12gauge82]

Yes excellent post, my thoughts to.

[sandspider]

1 hour ago, neutron619 said:

But this does not look deeply enough at the issues at stake.

MEPs and the European parliament have no legislative initiative. They can amend legislation but only subject to commission approval. They can delay, but not block legislation.

The European Parliament is emphatically NOT equivalent to the House of Commons, where your local MP can, using the Private Member's Bill mechanism, or an Early Day Motion introduce legislation entirely independently of the government of the day, have it debated and - theoretically - passed by a majority of the house. Commons and Lords amendments can be introduced by anyone and Government legislation is subject to them if they are passed - unlike the European Parliament where they simply reword the bill and introduce it again having bribed off the "difficult" member or simply ignored it.

The EU may not (yet) be a dictatorship, but all of its institutions are structured to allow for the possibility of it behaving like one. Don't even get me started on the ECJ, which having only a few years of case law, can effectively "invent" law in its rulings in areas not covered by previous judgements, which are then immediately and retrospectively applied across all member states. It's almost the perfect example of what they call judicial activism and it occurs because the role of the judges is not strictly limited to interpreting existing law as it is in this country (and as it should be, in my view). Effectively, they can advance the cause of the EU via "useful" rulings where member states themselves will not permit (i.e. veto) legislation.

So it's a lie but only just: in their behaviour and their disdain for things like the rule of law and its equal application to all citizens (when was the last time the Germans were fined for running an "illegal" budget deficit at the expense of the southern European states?), seperation of powers, respect for the rights of the individual and the freedom of peoples to exercise a sovereign will - so alarmingly (to them) exercised by those who voted leave - is isn't far from being one.

You'll have guessed that I'm a "leaver" of course. Let me tell you why: it wasn't "immigration", or really "sovereignty" though those are important. I still believe it will be possible to make a good hash of Brexit, if it's grasped as an opportunity with both hands, though that seems not be happening. Rather, it was about the character of the institution and the people in charge.

It's the character of people who are happy to be told "no" in French and Dutch referenda, then ignore the results and orderthem to vote again until they "get it right".

It's the character of people who are happy to stand on a platform saying "we must do more to help alleviate poverty in Africa", all the while charging a 40% tariff on imports of grain from Africa - by which those African poor could fairly work themselves out of starvation and penury and maintain their self-respect. This is the Corn Laws, European-wide, for the 21st century.

It's the character of people who are content to beggar an entire generation of Greek, Italian and Spanish youth to avoid their collossally misguided currency experiment collapsing, with the loss of money for the rich North European countries who - having taken advantage of the South during the good times - are allowed to profit from their misery during the bad. So much for solidarité!

It's the character of people who begin their response to the painful choice of a nation to leave their association with the question "how can we punish them to make sure no-one else follows?" all the while wearing crocodile smiles and promising to negotiate our surrender departure in good faith.

It's the character of people who knew, right at the start, with Monnet and De Gaulle, that they were trying to create a European superstate but, rather than trying to make the case for that honestly and openly and persuading people, began their "project" using subterfuge and continued it for nearly 50 years before admitting the end goal. (If it took them that long to admit that truth openly, what do you think they're currently planning but not admitting for 50 years' time?)

It was pointless arguing whether we'd be economically better off or not during the referendum campaign - no-one was ever going to know. We won't know for another 50 years probably. So after that, all you have left is "who are we associating ourselves with?" Do you really think that a bunch of folk with that outlook on life are the best people to associate with or subject ourselves to, when the vast majority of British people - leaver and remainer - seem to value all of those things like freedom, democracy, equality under the law that we'll only really miss when they are gone?

As for the House of Lords - well, no, we don't vote for them and isn't it marvellous? Or rather, wasn't it? You see, before they abolished all of the hereditary peers, you had a system which created a debating chamber entirely by accident of birth. That is, you got in whatever your politics was. Yes, it was a bit inequitable and meant that there were a rather large number of rich people in there, which gave it a particular perspective (though they do tend to have more time to think about things, not having to slave to survive), but the point was it wasn't nearly as party political as it is now.

The old system meant that the government couldn't rely on controvertial legislation getting passed simply because enough of their peers would turn up to vote on it. They had to persuade and to justify. After Blair kicked out the hereditary peers they had to make up the numbers somehow - so what did they do? Yup - you guessed it - they appointed a whole load of ex-Labour party members to fill up the spaces. Result? A whole load of bad legislation, poorly scrutinized and driven through by "party" appointees who, if they wanted to disagree or vote it down, were probably reminded that their names appeared in the Chief Whip's little black book for some filthy misdemeanour which would be made public if they didn't do what the government wanted...

So yeah. I rather liked the idea that people were appointed by accident of birth, whatever their politics. It would have been fairer to generate a list of random mobile telephone numbers and ask their owners to sit in the house - but an unappointed Lords is a lot better than a party political, easily knobbled Lords in my book, any day of the week. Think about it.

+ lots. Eloquently put.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Yes that sums it up rather well, bravo Sir.

[12gauge82]

I might take a cut and paste of that so I can just ham the next remainiac that trys to save me from myself and explain I've made the wrong choice ?

[Gordon R]

Quote

Yet more arrogance. Thanks for proving my point once more. It's never ending. Ingrained so deep that anybody with an alternative viewpoint to a british man must be wrong. This elitist attitude has no place in the 21st century. It belongs in the dark ages with the dup. You have strong opinions Gordon R, but your inability to view things from a perspective other than that forged of your own emotional and illogical reactions discredits you, and only serves to detract moreso from the distant possibility of someone perceiving you as a fine and amicable character.

Cannon - I took exception when you spoke of the arrogance of the British. Just who are you to label all the people, including myself? I see things from all perspectives, but wherever I stand I seem to see a halfwit posting garbage. Take a day off.

[Laird Lugton]

12 hours ago, Cannon said:

Yet more arrogance. Thanks for proving my point once more. It's never ending. Ingrained so deep that anybody with an alternative viewpoint to a british man must be wrong. This elitist attitude has no place in the 21st century. It belongs in the dark ages with the dup. You have strong opinions Gordon R, but your inability to view things from a perspective other than that forged of your own emotional and illogical reactions discredits you, and only serves to detract moreso from the distant possibility of someone perceiving you as a fine and amicable character.

Well outted Gordon!

[Cannon]

51 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

Cannon - I took exception when you spoke of the arrogance of the British. Just who are you to label all the people, including myself? I see things from all perspectives, but wherever I stand I seem to see a halfwit posting garbage. Take a day off.

Have a look at your own posts without your rose tinted glasses on, then get back to me about garbage content. Your posts are made up of arrogant opinions. If it doesn't sit right with you, it mustn't be right. What a terrible way to be. I pity you to be perfectly honest. You'll never get the most out of life if you keep going the way you're going. 

 

Back on topic, it's the tail wagging the dog in government at the minute. The tories obviously don't hold the dup in high esteem. They tried to cut a deal without them. Where's the respect? If the tories had their way, they would have absolutely nothing to do with the dup. The anti-Irish rhetoric has gone beyond a joke. So much so that the dup would rather shaft everybody in the country before they would agree to anything that was brought to the table by the Irish government. They want like for like comparison with the uk, but only when it suits them. These people should not be propping up a government. It's unbelievable that such backwards hate filled bigots can have a say in the future of these Islands.

Edited December 5, 2017 by Cannon

[Gordon R]

Quote

Have a look at your own posts without your rose tinted glasses on, then get back to me about garbage content.

Re-read them - you have cornered the market on arrogance and garbage.

[Rewulf]

5 minutes ago, Cannon said:

Have a look at your own posts without your rose tinted glasses on, then get back to me about garbage content. Your posts are made up of arrogant opinions. If it doesn't sit right with you, it mustn't be right. What a terrible way to be. I pity you to be perfectly honest. You'll never get the most out of life if you keep going the way you're going. 

 

Back on topic, it's the tail wagging the dog in government at the minute. The tories obviously don't hold the dup in high esteem. They tried to cut a deal without them. Where's the respect? If the tories had their way, they would have absolutely nothing to do with the dup. The anti-Irish rhetoric has gone beyond a joke. So much so that the dup would rather shaft everybody in the country before they would agree to anything that was brought to the table by the Irish government. They want like for like comparison with the uk, but only when it suits them. These people should not be propping up a government. It's unbelievable that such backwards hate filled bigots can have a say in the future of these Islands.

Now read that back to yourself, youve just described your own posts on the subject Mr angry man.

[Cannon]

1 hour ago, Rewulf said:

Now read that back to yourself, youve just described your own posts on the subject Mr angry man.

More assumptions. I'm as calm and happy as it's possible to be. I'm merely expressing my observations as I see them. Some are just too blind to look anywhere else except where they want to look, or where they have been brainwashed to look all their lives. 

[Gordon R]

Quote

It's unbelievable that such backwards hate filled bigots

No trace of  a sweeping generalisation there. It is some time since I have seen such vitriolic junk. Whilst you claim to be calm, happy, a man who sees both sides etc., your posts suggest a very closed mind  and very limited mentality.

[Cannon]

54 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

No trace of  a sweeping generalisation there. It is some time since I have seen such vitriolic junk. Whilst you claim to be calm, happy, a man who sees both sides etc., your posts suggest a very closed mind  and very limited mentality.

Quite the orator Gordon. If only what you spoke was in any way the truth, people might just show an interest in your posts. I do see both sides, and seeing both sides has enabled me to draw many a righteous conclusion. When you step back from a situation and evaluate all contributions, it doesn't take much 'mentality' to deduce who's right and who's wrong. There's always a trigger point or two, which funnily enough a lot of people are willing to overlook because they would rather bury their heads in the sand and live out their lives status quo. Instead of dealing with historical injustices and possibly preventing future ones from occurring, people let lifes comforts dictate the next move. If doing the right thing, or acknowledging an injustice brings any form of discomfort, no matter how slight, the british simply turn the other cheek. It's a trait that they have always had. Everything is ok as long as it's going my way. Then when someone with an enlightened point of view comes along, they are deemed unwelcome. Their opposing contribution doesn't reflect my ill conceived beliefs, ergo this person is a threat. I must attempt at all costs to discredit this individual, even if it means selling my soul. Rather than open your mind Gordon, you have again retorted with a rather shallow and amateur response. It's never too late to do the right thing.

[12gauge82]

I know very little of the DUP other than they are a pro UK party in Ireland, what specifically are they doing that is rubbing people up the wrong way?

[Gordon R]

Cannon - I genuinely think you need medical help. You ramble on and on, without making a point.

neutron619 - whilst responding to the all seeing, all wise Cannon, I omitted to say that your post was excellent. Forgive the oversight.

Edited December 5, 2017 by Gordon R

[Cannon]

19 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

Cannon - I genuinely think you need medical help. You ramble on and on, without making a point.

neutron619 - whilst responding to the all seeing, all wise Cannon, I omitted to say that your post was excellent. Forgive the oversight.

Do you need me to spell it out for you? Or are you incapable of reading between the lines? Answers on a postcard