- Joined
- Mar 25, 2012
- Location
- IOM
Why what did they stop you from doing? What EU laws were you personally affected by and/or annoyed about?
Genuinely curious.
Brexit - whats the difference.....
- Thread starter cncas2123
- Start date
Why what did they stop you from doing? What EU laws were you personally affected by and/or annoyed about?
Genuinely curious.
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2010
- Location
- doncaster
I am not falling for that remainer line I feed you and you go on a rant as to why I am wrong, no thanks I have my reasons and I know my own mind don't need a lecture from a remainer telling me why I am wrong.
Though I will give you one reason people like you who love the EU boy what a joy it was seeing the faces of the remainers on the morning after we voted to leave if we never leave that image will be forever in my mind it was pure joy.
- Joined
- May 6, 2019
- Location
- North West
It has always been about the money for remainers. Brexit endangers people's means to source the cheapest labour for the highest possible productivity. A lot of the middle and upper classes know what side their bread is buttered on and it scares them shitless that something may have come along to upset the neo liberal apple cart.
The EU is nothing but a machine that aims to devolve powers from sovereign nations to embellish its own ends.
- Joined
- May 8, 2018
- Location
- south east england
I think originally in the 70's the labour party was more against the EU/EEC, but with kinnock and then blair at the helm they wedded themselves to it.
from the bbc website:
"1975: Labour votes to leave the EEC
A one-day conference held by the Labour Party to debate Britain's membership of Europe has voted by almost 2-1 to leave the European Economic Community."
Being a member of the eu has not raised living standards in the uk, locals have to compete with cheaper sources of labour from the old eastern european countries who'll happily squat/rent share in overcrowded flats/houses for years on end in order to send money back home etc...
Add on top the increase in crime, homelessness, increased demands on already stretched health services [and education] why should the average british person be in favour of the EU?
- Because if we're not part of their dictatorial project 'they'll punish us with tariffs' and try to destroy us?
from the bbc website:
"1975: Labour votes to leave the EEC
A one-day conference held by the Labour Party to debate Britain's membership of Europe has voted by almost 2-1 to leave the European Economic Community."
Being a member of the eu has not raised living standards in the uk, locals have to compete with cheaper sources of labour from the old eastern european countries who'll happily squat/rent share in overcrowded flats/houses for years on end in order to send money back home etc...
Add on top the increase in crime, homelessness, increased demands on already stretched health services [and education] why should the average british person be in favour of the EU?
- Because if we're not part of their dictatorial project 'they'll punish us with tariffs' and try to destroy us?
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2014
- Location
- Glasgow and Home - N Ireland
Right now that encapsulates their Economic Policy. People frantically turning over the pages to see what's behind it to be met with a blank page and some crayons.
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2012
- Location
- IOM
Well I guess that's a difference between you and me because I would never take pleasure in the unhappiness of others, but whatever floats your boat I suppose.
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2010
- Location
- doncaster
Rubbish if we had a 2nd ref you would love coming on here and rubbing it in if the vote was reversed that's what most remainers are waiting for.
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2012
- Location
- IOM
Congratulations on promoting yourself to being a mind reader. Got this week's lottery numbers as well?
Frankly, you're wrong, I wouldn't be crowing about it if remain ended up prevailing. I'd be happy because I think it's the right thing to do, but I wouldn't seek to, nor take any pleasure in, making a big song and dance about it - that's just not my character.
Frankly, you're wrong, I wouldn't be crowing about it if remain ended up prevailing. I'd be happy because I think it's the right thing to do, but I wouldn't seek to, nor take any pleasure in, making a big song and dance about it - that's just not my character.
- Joined
- May 22, 2012
It's not in Britain's character to be led, but lead. Unlike being led by a bunch of anonymous parasitic wine-quaffing nobodies swilling from the gravy train as they plunder our waters, fill our towns with Roma beggars and E. European criminals and alcoholics. Which is where the biggest leave votes hailed from, those affected by them issues and not living away from it all. While this takes place we are told, wrongly, that it makes us wealthier. Alas whilst increasing population grows an economy, most of the growth hails from the state sector to support the extra and productivity per head here is down or stagnant depending on where you resource the figures. People saw through the big lie and voted accordingly. Without the EU each imported person can be checked and placed under different rules to ensure they are a required worker with the means to support themselves, not chancers or criminals. I doubt the UK would have voted leave if this was seen to be done in the first place.
No country would ever vote for their population to be supplanted, a suicidal proposition, and this was borne out in the referendum.
No country would ever vote for their population to be supplanted, a suicidal proposition, and this was borne out in the referendum.
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2014
- Location
- Jockoland
You're going to lose your shit when you realise the House of Lords is the second biggest unelected legislature on the planet mate...
V
vorcirion
Guest
You forgot to include: "And some, I assume, are good people.". It's basically the same nationalist message that Trump has been saying. Foreign people are dirty, criminals...that they are invading your country etc. Pure stupidity.
- Joined
- May 22, 2012
No, the stupidity is allowing unlimited numbers of people into nations with insufficient checks, which in turn creates a rise in nationalist sentiment which by the sound of your reply you despise. You can see this throughout Europe, where tens of millions of 'stupid' people are turning to those political parties. QED.
- Joined
- May 22, 2012
Not as such. The Lords can amend legislation, and send it back to the Commons, can delay it but cannot make laws itself.
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2013
- Location
- Kent
Dunovers post, especially the " Without the EU each imported person can be checked and placed under different rules to ensure they are a required worker with the means to support themselves, not chancers or criminals" that is suggesting chances, criminals, freeloaders etc wouldn't have been so essily able to wander in and cause suffering to those around them, is hardly the same as saying they are all dirty.. lol
As he said, it affects those who are around areas where such undesirable chancers and criminals have begun topopulate. I just moved from the South east of the UK, i lived on the shore of a damn nice town which has forever been blessed with a nice British culture, but now a town which illegals are landing into durectly via tiny boats etc, illegally. That's not why i moved, but ceartin parts are not very nice anymore, & it's a damn shame really, I'd hate to see the state of what's left of that beautiful town i grew up in, when i return 10 or 20 years time from now, i can imagine it being totally different everywhere, not just in ceartin parts of it (as it is atm). But I'll leave it at that..
& Comparing Dunovers post to the words of Trump? lmao....
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2012
- Location
- IOM
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
In 2016 the Brexiters declared that the referendum was about regaining sovereignty. They promised we would win back an independence and confidence we had apparently lost. They advertised a utopia of democratic openness and rediscovered global dominance. They lied.
Everything voters thought they were taking back they were in fact giving away. That putative EU “control” was not going to our parliament. It wasn’t even going to our prime minister. It was transferring directly to the United States. Its president now apparently has the power to dictate both our diplomatic appointments and Brexit policy. He has it because we gave it to him.
--------------------
The Darroch affair is not a story about one man, no matter how committed and competent his decades-long career. It is a morality tale about a country which resolved to take control of its destiny but instead gave away everything it had. An arrogant government obsessed with its own mythology has been repeatedly humbled for three years: by its largest trade partner, by the small neighbour to the west it condescended to for years, and now by its new overlord across the sea. We thought we were strong and powerful and were determined we could once again lead the world. In return the world laughed. Never before has Britain been so small or exposed.
--------------------
Let us face the truth of this week. All the talk of sovereignty meant nothing: having torn up our relationship with a group of equals, we are now entirely beholden to a hostile and volatile American nationalist. A fake monster—Brussels—is giving way to one all too real. The only special relationship we ever really had was with the EU, and that is the one we have chosen to throw away.
The purpose of a morality tale is to demonstrate a lesson. Let us hope that we are not too proud or too late to learn it.
- Joined
- May 8, 2018
- Location
- south east england
That's the first time I've had to use that angry emoji, no wonder you're alarmed about brexit reading these kinds of scare story articles.
"The only special relationship we ever really had was with the EU "
It strikes me as odd for such a 'special friend' that they don't want or intend to agree a free trade deal which would benefit the ordinary person in the street, something remain supporters claim is the EU's overriding mission and objectve
Can any one on the remain side explain this reluctance of the EU, seeing as their member state's citizens will also benefit from continued free trade?
"The only special relationship we ever really had was with the EU "
It strikes me as odd for such a 'special friend' that they don't want or intend to agree a free trade deal which would benefit the ordinary person in the street, something remain supporters claim is the EU's overriding mission and objectve
Can any one on the remain side explain this reluctance of the EU, seeing as their member state's citizens will also benefit from continued free trade?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2013
- Location
- Kent
I don't watch this guy often, but 1:35 - 4:40 is good for a 3 minute chuckle 
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2012
- Location
- IOM
Well, let's see.
1) We already had the best free trade agreements in the world, by being a member of the EU. We decided to leave, the EU neither asked us to or wanted us to. So right out of the gate we shot ourselves in the foot.
2) Since the referendum we've been the nation state equivalent of a toddler having a tantrum. The EU have been absolutely crystal clear all along (and before the referendum was even held!) as to what would be available in a deal scenario, and what wouldn't. They were also clear on what would happen in the event of No Deal, and that included immediate third country status. (This 'WTO Deal' which some people insist on referring to it as.)
For some reason we thought we'd get special treatment, that we'd be able to pick and choose which of the EU's rules we had to follow. The EU said upfront this wouldn't happen, and guess what, it hasn't happened.
3) We finally agreed to a deal AND we agreed to the backstop, we ASKED that the backstop be widened to include the entire UK, and then started bleating about EU 'intransigence' when they politely asked us to abide by the terms of the deal that we'd agreed to.
(So at this point of course, EU patience is starting to wear a little thin.)
4) We now have both our Prime Ministerial candidates 'threatening' no deal (the equivalent of us pointing a pellet gun at the EU's left shin whilst we point a shotgun at our own head, it's not much of a threat), Johnson is still talking about withholding some or all of the £39bn to try and force the EU into concessions despite that £39bn being money we owe for EXISTING commitments.
They're both talking about re-opening negotiations, which won't happen, the Withdrawal Agreement we've already signed says that it won't be re-opened.
5) The EU have made it clear that they won't enter any sort of FTA until (1) The £39bn is paid (2) The Ireland situation is resolved and (3) Rights of EU citizens are settled - which means that even if we leave with 'No Deal', we'll immediately have to start negotiating a deal on those three matters anyway.
Why would they give us everything we want (which we already had as a member of the EU!) whilst we don't give them anything of what they've been saying RIGHT FROM THE START that they will need to be sorted out?
Even now, even at this late stage, some people are clinging to the delusion that there's something special about us, that the UK somehow deserves special treatment despite the fact we continually act like a complete arsehole. We've turned ourselves into a laughing stock on a global scale, and we've learned already that once we're out of the EU club, we're just a medium sized player on the world stage (see how Japan refused to give us the same trade deal that they've recently struck with the EU).
So in simple terms, we're the person who turns up at a party uninvited, gets stupidly drunk, picks fights, pukes all over the carpet, and then asks to borrow someone's car as we stagger out into the street.
The bit the EU are saying 'No' to is them lending us their car.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 8, 2018
- Location
- south east england
Are these three the essence of the answer to the question 'why' that I posed? So three things that have nothing to do with trade are holding up a free trade deal? Sounds to me like a form of blackmail tactics the EU are using here...
What about the point " as their member state's citizens will also benefit from continued free trade? " where does that figure in the EU's thinking and intransigence re a free trade deal, are they not displaying a worrying intention to harm their own citizen's financial interests just to make us suffer? [loss of trade = loss of jobs on both sides of the channel?]
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2012
- Location
- IOM
But that is the point mack. The EU is a club, to be a member of the club and enjoy the advantages of being a member, you have to play by the rules.
We chose to terminate our membership, plus we're arguing about settling our bill on the way out, and stamping our feet whilst we do it, demanding that we still be able to enjoy all the good stuff we liked about being a member of the club, whilst wishing to jettison everything we didn't like, despite the fact that all the rules were known upfront and were very patiently explained to us.
And of course those three things are related to trade, the EU isn't going to sign an FTA with us whilst we're basically asking for terms that would allow us to trouser £39bn that we already owe, and throw Ireland under the bus, because it turns out that the EU will put up a united front to defend the interests of even one of its smallest members, yet another dreadful miscalculation that the UK made in its approach to the entire Brexit fiasco, when the idea seemed to be that the EU would buckle because 'German car manufacturers' or whatever other line of bullshit it was that the Leave side came out with.
The EU told us all this stuff three years ago, their position has never changed, it's just that a lot of people weren't listening and instead chose to get excited about the idea of a 'Red, white and blue Brexit'.
The EU is a large and somewhat unwieldy technocratic organisation, which is one of the reasons why a lot of folks would say they voted to leave. And that's fine in and of itself, but it doesn't then follow that it's OK to say, 'Ahh but actually we liked some of the stuff this large and unwieldy technocratic organisation does after all, can we keep those things and ignore everything else that we find a bit inconvenient?'
And shock horror! The large and somewhat unwieldy technocratic organisation says, 'No, you can't'.
You can't have it all mack, leave won, and leaving comes with consequences.
Still, I'm sure Boris Johnson will enjoy massive success when he tries to renegotiate all this stuff and thinks he'll succeed just because he has 'optimism' and 'believes in Britain'.
SPOILER ALERT - He won't.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2014
- Location
- Balcony
We humans as any other living thing have always been strongest in a herd. That is the very basis of our survival and will never change. The UK thinks (and has chosen) that going it alone will make them stronger. But they want to keep some parts of the safety net of the herd. That is not how it happens in reality. Personally, I would be surprised to see you doing better on your own (I wish you all the best though).
You are now putting your destiny and future in the hands of people like Boris who didn't know properly what Art. 5b is, then he was boasting that he now read Art. 5b but didn't have a clue what Art. 5c is. That is the reality you are facing mack, you are led by some populists who can't be bothered to even read the most basic things that will shape the future of your country.
What you can expect became very clear this week when Mr. T called your ambassador a "pompous fool" and a "very stupid guy" and he resigned. There was hardly an outcry from your leaders or proper backup for the ambassador. What I saw instead was kowtowing to the US.
Get ready for a lot more of that. And a lot worse things, not just an ambassador.
To me, you are all sounding like the Mr T supporter who would trash Obama on camera but was adamant that Obamacare must be kept because it saved his life.
You are now putting your destiny and future in the hands of people like Boris who didn't know properly what Art. 5b is, then he was boasting that he now read Art. 5b but didn't have a clue what Art. 5c is. That is the reality you are facing mack, you are led by some populists who can't be bothered to even read the most basic things that will shape the future of your country.
What you can expect became very clear this week when Mr. T called your ambassador a "pompous fool" and a "very stupid guy" and he resigned. There was hardly an outcry from your leaders or proper backup for the ambassador. What I saw instead was kowtowing to the US.
Get ready for a lot more of that. And a lot worse things, not just an ambassador.
To me, you are all sounding like the Mr T supporter who would trash Obama on camera but was adamant that Obamacare must be kept because it saved his life.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2006
- Location
- USA
To me, you are all sounding like the Mr T supporter who would trash Obama on camera but was adamant that Obamacare must be kept because it saved his life.
Kinda like the Mr. T tax cuts, see them bashed 24/7 by rich liberal elites but never seen rich liberal elites volunteering to pay the old rates. Nothing stopping them or any American from writing a check to the US Treasury.
Don't follow the Brexit anymore but my guess is its all going to cost everyone (EU included) more £ but I'd rather be in charge of my own destiny than be under the thumb of a bunch of cash grabbing bureaucrats in Brussels.
Freedom Baby!
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2012
- Location
- IOM
Which bit of your 'own destiny' was the UK being a member of the EU stopping you from achieving?
- Joined
- May 8, 2018
- Location
- south east england
So using the club membership analogy, you choose to tear up your golf club membership and yet they expect you to continue to contribute towards the pensions of the bar staff and groundsmen?
I don't mind paying the 39 billion if it meant we could leave on good terms but with this irish backstop proposal the EU are negotiating in bad faith. Considering what happened in the troubles, it's deplorable of the EU to use the irish border as a ploy and bargaining chip, I don't see how leaving the border as is, is 'throwing ireland under a bus'?
Maybe I'm missing something as it wasn't explained well at the time by the remainer msm [probably because it didn't show the eu in a good light]
looking at the bbc website it explains the backstop thus:
"The border is a matter of great political, security and diplomatic sensitivity in Ireland.
Therefore the UK and EU agreed that whatever happens as a result of Brexit there should be no new physical checks or infrastructure at the frontier.
This is where the controversial "backstop" comes in.
Go on then, what is the backstop?
The backstop is a position of last resort, to maintain a seamless border on the island of Ireland in the event that the UK leaves the EU without securing an all-encompassing deal.
It would involve the UK retaining a very close relationship with the EU for an indefinite period.
The EU have insisted that any Brexit deal must contain the backstop."
-------
The Attorney General, Geoffrey Cox, concluded that "the legal risk remains unchanged" that if a post-Brexit trade agreement cannot be reached due to genuinely "intractable differences", the UK would have "no internationally lawful means" of leaving the backstop without EU agreement.
-------
This sounds to me like a stitch up, given both parties have to agree the encompassing deal, the eu want to put a loaded gun to our head while we negotiate that deal, and they wouldn't agree for the backstop to have a time limit, instead it had to be 'indefinite'
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 8, 2018
- Location
- south east england
Darroch's position after the leak was untenable, why lose further political capital supporting a dead duck?
How do singapore and malaysia manage to trade and go it alone? They don't seem to be doing too badly trading with the rest of the world.
And I wonder how an asian version of the EU [a political and trade union] with china and japan/others would work out?
- Joined
- May 8, 2018
- Location
- south east england
yeah that is disappointing, I'm guessing johnson is going to rely on the civil service advice, and maybe surround himself with a few bright people who'll do the legwork of reading up the legal side of things..but he'll ultimately make the decision. He's got to do something different to Theresa May otherwise the conservatives will continue haemorrhaging voters to the brexit party, it might be May's deal with a backstop time limit.
He is quite a maverick, so who knows what's going to happen, I think the country will liven up a bit, politics could get interesting again for a while...maybe we'll need to have a BoJo thread
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2006
- Location
- USA
I don't know the details but what about immigration and vat tax? Who makes those decisions?
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2007
- Location
- Amsterdam
Ah, immigration and VAT. Crucial for a country to become a master of its own destiny!
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2014
- Location
- Balcony
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2014
- Location
- Balcony
Hahaha, the defender-in-chief trying desperately to find an example to counter.
Quite a few said that they don't want the cut including Buffett and Gates. And you don't know what they are doing with the extra cash. There is no record taking happening that would keep track of things.
Please post your proof that countries are under the thumb as well as for the cash-grabbing?
I give you one simple example that you can understand.
Google the history and find out how travelling on holiday or on business from the UK to Spain cost in the 1960s and 1970s, the documents needed, the extra trouble/cost if someone wanted to buy a house or spend his/her retirement there, customs duties, etc.
Then google how it changed due to the EU?
Making populist statements such as "under the thumb" and "cash grabbing" without any context simply disqualifies you instantly as a debate partner.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2014
- Location
- Balcony
No, it wasn't mack. Please just stop falling for this kind of nonsense.
Ask any diplomat/ambassador of any country and they will tell you that each and everyone is writing similar cables to the government back home, no matter in which country they are. Blunt assessments on how they see the current situation. Everybody knows it and hardly anybody cares much, that is except people like Mr T.
It is only that Mr T couldn't take the criticism as usual and your government was not brave enough to stand up. Now just imagine, they didn't have the guts to stand up to this generally known thing, how will they fare in the next years where they need to stand up again, again and again in their negotiations with lots of countries?
- Joined
- May 8, 2018
- Location
- south east england
@ChopleyIOM
Franco was the dictator of spain until 1975 so that might have had an influence on the costs re spain, possibly?
I think you're being a tad harsh on slotplayer, remember all the msm coverage is pro remain/ pro eu, in a very similar way to the anti trump bias [I know he has his faults but then so did other presidents and the coverage was never as partisan] therefore researching for debates is at least twice as difficult and time consuming coming from the brexit side.
We brexiteers don't even have a fox tv to bat for us, there are not as many articles to quote from or news clips. We have to delve into academic literature and eu text books ourselves, which is not really feasible for me when half my brain cells have been destroyed by playing slots
As chopley has admitted the EU is a technocratic institution, so a lot of it's output is going to be quite complicated and technical, very few uk journalists are analysing it and writing articles discussing EU laws and rules.
Hahaha, the defender-in-chief trying desperately to find an example to counter.
Quite a few said that they don't want the cut including Buffett and Gates. And you don't know what they are doing with the extra cash. There is no record taking happening that would keep track of things.
Please post your proof that countries are under the thumb as well as for the cash-grabbing?
I give you one simple example that you can understand.
Google the history and find out how travelling on holiday or on business from the UK to Spain cost in the 1960s and 1970s, the documents needed, the extra trouble/cost if someone wanted to buy a house or spend his/her retirement there, customs duties, etc.
Then google how it changed due to the EU?
Making populist statements such as "under the thumb" and "cash grabbing" without any context simply disqualifies you instantly as a debate partner.
Franco was the dictator of spain until 1975 so that might have had an influence on the costs re spain, possibly?
I think you're being a tad harsh on slotplayer, remember all the msm coverage is pro remain/ pro eu, in a very similar way to the anti trump bias [I know he has his faults but then so did other presidents and the coverage was never as partisan] therefore researching for debates is at least twice as difficult and time consuming coming from the brexit side.
We brexiteers don't even have a fox tv to bat for us, there are not as many articles to quote from or news clips. We have to delve into academic literature and eu text books ourselves, which is not really feasible for me when half my brain cells have been destroyed by playing slots
As chopley has admitted the EU is a technocratic institution, so a lot of it's output is going to be quite complicated and technical, very few uk journalists are analysing it and writing articles discussing EU laws and rules.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 8, 2018
- Location
- south east england
I think if an ambassador made a similar amount of negative comments re macron, merkel, or Xi Jinping, and they were leaked in the press and on tv world wide they would have to be relocated. I suspect Trump realises a lot of govt officials in various countries don't like him, but 'diplomacy' in this situation requires Darroch to be replaced.
We've not seen the full leaked memos only parts of the text, so it is difficult to judge the whole situation in terms of damage limitation, that'll be the uk govt's sole objective to smooth things over.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2014
- Location
- Balcony
@ChopleyIOM
Franco was the dictator of spain until 1975 so that might have had an influence on the costs re spain, possibly?
I think you're being a bit mean to slotplayer, remember all the msm coverage is pro remain/ pro eu, in a very similar way to the anti trump bias [I know he has his faults but then so did other presidents and the coverage was never as partisan]
We brexiteers don't even have a fox tv to bat for us, therefore research for debates is at least twice as hard coming from the brexit side, there are not as many articles to quote from or news clips. We have to delve into academic literature and eu text books ourselves, which is not really feasible for me when half my brain cells have been destroyed by playing slots
As chopley has admitted the EU is a technocratic institution, so a lot of it's output is going to be quite complicated and technical, very few uk journalists are analysing it and writing articles discussing EU laws and rules.
Well, if you think Franco was the problem, then take Italy or even just France. It is pretty similar. The EU opened borders between neighbours that made movement of people and goods for us every-day folk super-easy.
I did not see any particular bias of ALL the media and probably most of the people did not see it either. You just seem fixated that the media is trying very hard. You google Fox clips on YT from the Obama years. What would you call that? I would call it hyper-partisan, even hysterical once in a while!
Fact is that being part of the EU brought you benefits and disadvantages, however, I would tend to say the former is in the majority. I can firmly say that from my personal experience the benefits far outweighed the negatives as I lived without any troubles in the UK, Germany, France and Spain. It was just like moving to the next street in the same city, so seamless and easy.
That is just a simple example. The entire relationship encompasses a lot more.
You are throwing all that away with the claim that you are getting / want to take control over your country back! All fine and dandy, but don't expect that everyone will be rolling out the red carpet for you. We are living in a globalized world and you will always be weaker on your own, no matter what your populist politicians are trying to tell you.
I brought this example already once but at some point in medieval times travelling from Munich to Hamburg had dozens of checkpoints where you paid taxes/customs duties etc. Each county to its own. Why do you think has the system not prevailed until today? Because it was so good for everyone or because common sense prevailed at some point?
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2014
- Location
- Balcony
There were similar leaks in the past, and there was never this kind of upheaval nor a president/PM of the affected country describing a diplomat as a "pompous fool" or "very stupid". People have human dignity and decency on how to handle such cases, something you, of course, cannot expect from Mr T because he simply cannot elevate himself above trash-TV level. Ask the US to publish the diplomatic cables going to Mr T, you can bet they don't look any different.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 8, 2018
- Location
- south east england
I did edit that post you quoted above about a bit, still the same meaning though, yes I think fox were partisan against obama, but that was only 1 television channel, if you add all the msm content together, trump is easily garnering more constant criticism than the last three presidents ...who to my mind were all charlatans in one way or another, which is the charge against trump, that he is a charlatan unfit to be president. The one difference is he has nailed his colours to the nationalism movement, the others did not, they were more globalist in their outlook, the same as the corporate media [msm]
The main problem with a global govt is like the EU the lack of a democratic control by the public, 60 million brits cannot influence, at the ballot box, the outcome and direction of EU policy, but corporate interests can and lobby hard in this regard. So with a global govt running the world, with a similar structure to the EU, democracy as we currently understand and experience it would be pointless.
You have a direct knowledge and understanding of globalisation in the manufacturing sector from your career Harry, but what is the overall goal of the EU, UN, world bank etc etc..in terms of globalisation, what's the world going to look like politically in 30 years, any predictions you can share?
I'm worried about the future I must say, I don't see it being as people friendly as the last 30 years.
- Joined
- May 6, 2019
- Location
- North West
Business has far too much of a sway on politics and any institution that has monetary gain as its fundamental principle is not going to give two hoots about 'people' in general nor asset sharing. Therefore we essentially see politics mimic this.
Sure, the EU enables easy movement from one place to another but that's because it suits the neo liberal agenda. It wasn't by altruistic design.
I for one feel deeply uneasy about powers being devolved to one central point outside of our own borders. I think others should be concerned too (roughly 52% are).
Funnily enough, those with money, assets or business interests seem to be the first ones piping up and defending the EU. The thing is, these people can shield themselves away from the negative aspects that the institution brings to the table, things the ordinary people have to deal/live with on a daily basis.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2014
- Location
- Balcony
To the vast majority, Mr T is creating the media drama himself by running the US like a reality -TV show that needs constant cliffhangers to keep the viewers tuning in. Plus, he simply needs all the time distractions from other things which could prove negative for him.
Just some examples for distractions:
Before the 2018 election: "We will do an extra 10% tax cut just for the middle class" - desperate effort to get votes, to this day nothing happened
A few weeks ago: "We will deporting millions and millions" - to this day nada or next to nothing. Obama deported far more people than Mr T but focused on specific groups like criminals etc. and not on families who have been in the US for a decade or more. That is not to mention that Mr T simply does not have the human resources to remove millions over a short period. But it sounds good to his base and distracts from other stuff.
Who told you the fairytale that the UK had no influence on the shaping of the EU? You had actually quite an influence.
You think corporate interests are not lobbying hard in the UK government now and always have?
We left the "safe" haven of locked-out borders a long time ago, simply because we still have our nomad instincts. Remember, first it was a cave, then a village, then a county, then a country.
The thing is that the massive advance in technology has changed many things dramatically over a very short period of time, certainly not enough for all people/industries/economies etc. to adapt. Where just a few hundred years ago we would be sailing for months to get somewhere, we are now doing it in just a few hours. Same goes for goods and services. Just a few decades ago you had thousands working in a manufacturing plant, now you have thousands of robots and a few dozen people.
What I see now is that some countries are trying to reverse that evolution, which history tells you is nay on impossible.
The world will keep globalizing, minor setbacks in between, but it will continue with all its positives and negatives. At the same time, people will have to learn to adapt increasingly quicker. Some will, some will fall off the cliff. Was always like that and will never change, it is the simple nature of evolution.
Personally, I am quite content to live in this era. I have certainly tried to make the best out of it which would not have been possible without the "globalized" world.
- Joined
- May 6, 2019
- Location
- North West
You've just highlighted the growing disparity between the haves and have nots. You may feel content, you've made it in life, however there's an increasing gulf between those like you and those who struggle to pay the rent/mortgage every month. The gulf is getting wider by the day. That's the issue.
The EU does nothing to assuage this, in fact it encourages wealth growth of the top earners and limits wage growth at the bottom due to a constant availability of unskilled and cheap labour.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2014
- Location
- Balcony
I am not gonna respond to your whining post, because it is simply wrong and nothing I would say here would help to enlighten you as it seems.
"Like me" - really? You have no clue what I have and have not.
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2006
- Location
- USA
Hahaha, the defender-in-chief trying desperately to find an example to counter.
Quite a few said that they don't want the cut including Buffett and Gates. And you don't know what they are doing with the extra cash. There is no record taking happening that would keep track of things.
Please post your proof that countries are under the thumb as well as for the cash-grabbing?
I give you one simple example that you can understand.
Google the history and find out how travelling on holiday or on business from the UK to Spain cost in the 1960s and 1970s, the documents needed, the extra trouble/cost if someone wanted to buy a house or spend his/her retirement there, customs duties, etc.
Then google how it changed due to the EU?
Making populist statements such as "under the thumb" and "cash grabbing" without any context simply disqualifies you instantly as a debate partner.
BRUSSELS (AP) — European Union regulators have fined Google 1.49 billion euros ($1.7 billion) for abusing its dominant role in online advertising, the third big antitrust penalty they've given the internet giant since 2017.
The latest punishment means the commission has now issued Google with almost $10 billion in fines from probes into various parts of the Silicon Valley tech company's business.
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2006
- Location
- USA
@ChopleyIOM
Franco was the dictator of spain until 1975 so that might have had an influence on the costs re spain, possibly?
I think you're being a tad harsh on slotplayer, remember all the msm coverage is pro remain/ pro eu, in a very similar way to the anti trump bias [I know he has his faults but then so did other presidents and the coverage was never as partisan] therefore researching for debates is at least twice as difficult and time consuming coming from the brexit side.
We brexiteers don't even have a fox tv to bat for us, there are not as many articles to quote from or news clips. We have to delve into academic literature and eu text books ourselves, which is not really feasible for me when half my brain cells have been destroyed by playing slots
As chopley has admitted the EU is a technocratic institution, so a lot of it's output is going to be quite complicated and technical, very few uk journalists are analysing it and writing articles discussing EU laws and rules.
I take it with a grain of salt.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2014
- Location
- Balcony
So you call companies being fined for not following regulations and laws cash-grabbing?
No wonder you think Mr T is above the law!
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2004
- Location
- Finland
No competition (antitrust for american readers) laws in the USA? FTC/DOJ don't care about cartels or abuse of dominant position?
In areas like competition law and data protection, the EU actually works as it should. You need to have enough weight behind you to effectively enforce rules in these areas.
- Joined
- May 8, 2018
- Location
- south east england
I thought the cash grabbing was about taking 10 billion net off the uk each year
To be fair I don't object to fines against big monopolies, but every large successful company is probably guilty of anti competition tactics somewhere and abusing their position. I always suspect it's a tit-for-tat scenario, everytime the usa fine a european based firm [like volkswagen] the eu try to do the same back.
That's another downside of globalisation, the tax evasion strategies perpetrated by large international companies, registering themselves in a low tax country like luxembourg, I think france is introducing a new tax on revenue earned inside it's borders by firms like amazon, google etc [might be facebook, I read the other day...just seen it GAFA is the name of it]
It can be no coincidence that every country has a large deficit and has had to borrow money to run their country, the tax payments from the top companies probably needs to go up
To be fair I don't object to fines against big monopolies, but every large successful company is probably guilty of anti competition tactics somewhere and abusing their position. I always suspect it's a tit-for-tat scenario, everytime the usa fine a european based firm [like volkswagen] the eu try to do the same back.
That's another downside of globalisation, the tax evasion strategies perpetrated by large international companies, registering themselves in a low tax country like luxembourg, I think france is introducing a new tax on revenue earned inside it's borders by firms like amazon, google etc [might be facebook, I read the other day...just seen it GAFA is the name of it]
It can be no coincidence that every country has a large deficit and has had to borrow money to run their country, the tax payments from the top companies probably needs to go up
Last edited:
