LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksOr kept in by 22%Originally Posted by scaryjim
Just sayin'
Or kept in by 22%
Just sayin'
Ah Europe that democratic organisation you know where you have a vote for how it is run? I think there is now around 20,000 EU directives.
To me Europe is a failed political and economic project to bring Europe together. Look at Greece now tearing itself apart with a decimated health system and destroyed economy and a far right wing political movement that had 0.1 1996 percent of the vote now has 7%. Greek rioting continues although not report so much by the media here.
How does the Greek government tax its citizens through power bills of course. Does this sound familiar to anyone?
I think the bottom line is the EU is becoming a European super-state and no-one can reasonably deny that now, judging by the measures being taken to save the Euro and the empowerment of the EU institutions compared with the increased impotency of the nation state governments.
UKIP exists because the main three parties simply don't want to face this reality of a European super-state at this point in time. Even the Russians pointed out what the EU did in Cyprus is comparable to Soviet Union-type behaviour. Spain, Greece, Portugal, Italy are all suffering from the fact they don't have a free floating currency like the UK to devalue their exports.
Greece would have been far better off leaving the Euro and defaulting and the EU knew this.. but the Greeks were/are terrified of having a devalued drachma, but which ironically would have given the country a bright future simply on the potential cheap exports and tourism would have exploded as other Europeans would have flocked to Greece due to the extremely favourable exchange rate.. but the other EU members wouldn't allow this to happen, since the exposure they had to Greek banks in the event of a default on the financial front and refusal to let EU expansion go "into retreat" on the political/ideological front. So a very high-stakes brinkmanship/fearmongering game ensued, there was even talk of war and head of the Greek military was actually replaced earlier this year.. to prevent a Coup d'état.. for a democractic western country this is obviously a very big deal. In the end, pro-EU/Euro side won and now the Greeks have a bleak stagnant future at best, with the currency that is not suited for them and they really don't have control over their own country at this time and perhaps they won't in the future either.
To be honest, this kind of international economic and political tornado is a perfect storm for those in the EU who want to it turn into a Super-state, as individual nations lose powers and EU institutions become even more empowered.
"Judge them by their actions, not their words" is great motto here.. look at the how the EU started and what it is now.. and just think what it will be in 20-30 years time. I believe, we need a referendum in the UK on the EU.
You really need to live in London to see how East Europeans are ruining our country.
I have seen East European prostitutes loitering around a kebab shop
Then, there are squatters and scrap metal specialists- they are all East Europeans. Beggars and the so-called homeless who go round with their trolleys emptying out bins are all East Europeans.
The other prominent countries in the EU like Germany and France have restrictions on East Europeans, why do we not have anything like that and why have we let them flood in with open arms ?
And, this referendum Cameron keeps talking about , how will it be ensured that only British people are allowed to have a say about this referendum ? Do you have to go to a website and enter your UK passport no. ? If not, then the whole excercise is pointless as the exisitng Europeans will definitely say they want the Uk to stay in the EU.
If something is not done soon, in 10 years' time, there is bound to be a civil war.
Last edited by OilSheikh; 28-10-2013 at 10:53 AM. Reason: Should be a kebab shop rather than kebab shops
You know for someone who has non-christian beliefs in a christian country you're shockingly racist and intolerant.
Out of interest, which kebab shops come with prostitutes, I mean that just makes me think of
I'm assuming its prostitute first, then kebab, otherwise the breath situation could be awkward.
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
Pleiades (27-10-2013)
Because anything outside of London isn't part of this country? Because if London isn't exactly how you want it the country is ruined for everyone? I fail to see the rationale of that point. If you don't like how Eastern Europeans are "ruining" London, leave London. There's a lot of country out there to explore, you know.
I'm not opposed to referendae, by the way. I'd love to be asked my opinion on more policies. Hell, I'm entirely up for streamlining Westminster and reducing the number of MPs to free up funds for regular referendae on major policy decisions. But the EU referendum? It's a sap to a vocal minority of euro-skeptics. It's a perfect demonstration of a government buckling under pressure - much like the AV referendum was a sap to the Lib Dems to allow the Tories to form a government. AFAICT no-one in Westminster actually wants a referendum, and Lord knows what they'll do if they have one and the people vote out of Europe, since none of the major parties have any intention of pulling us out. But the Tories want people to vote for them, rather than UKIP, so there's the carrot: they'll give you a referendum.
Sorry, but that doesn't cut it for me. We either allow the government to run the country, or we let the people make the majority of the policy decisions. I just don't think letting the government run the country "until someone gets uppity then we'll cop out and offer them half a chance to get their own way" cuts it. At least the Lib Dems have the guts to say "no, leaving Europe isn't out policy, and we're not going to fudge the issue by pretending we'll consider leaving". That's at least honest, whether you like it or not.
Last edited by scaryjim; 27-10-2013 at 09:56 PM.
capt_cornflake (28-10-2013),kalniel (27-10-2013)
Where did this religion bs come from?
Why should he? He is (AFAIK) a full UK citizen. Your answer is that he should move house because millions of non-citizens show up in a short timeframe and do things he - and many others - don't like, with absolutely no legal/democratic recourse? I don't really agree with his position, but yours is just cynical.
We need a better method for determining when a referendum happens. In this day and age maybe an e-petition with a trigger level. The LibDem position disgusts me - we want a referendum when it suits us (PR), but not one when we disagree (EU). Disgusting Machiavellian hypocrites.
Sorry, but that doesn't cut it for me. We either allow the government to run the country, or we let the people make the majority of the policy decisions. I just don't think letting the government run the country "until someone gets uppity then we'll cop out and offer them half a chance to get their own way" cuts it. At least the Lib Dems have the guts to say "no, leaving Europe isn't out policy, and we're not going to fudge the issue by pretending we'll consider leaving". That's at least honest, whether you like it or not.
I suspect the post you did a while back telling us we're going to hell?
Last edited by wasabi; 28-10-2013 at 12:51 PM.
TheAnimus (27-10-2013)
Why would anyone want to stay in a place that has been "ruined"? If it's that bad, surely moving is a reasonable option? I'm about to move house because I've had a bike stolen from my shed for the second time this summer and the third time in just over a year. Is it fair that some scummy thief should not only steal my stuff but force me out of my house? Probably not, but for me this house is ruined, so I'm moving. I don't get why so few people consider that as an option...
Completely different situations. You should be angling your ire at the Tories, who are the party of "give anyone a referendum if we can get something out of it". The Lib Dems didn't want a referendum on PR - they wanted PR. They accepted the Tory offer of a referendum as part of the coalition deal. If we ever get a Lib Dem majority government (as unlikely as that seems), we won't have another referendum on PR - we'll just get PR.
I dunno why, I just had you down as someone other than a protestant. Am I mistaken?
And importantly, where are these kebab houses?
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
Good question!
More to the point, is it relevant?
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
Been helped or just 'Like' a post? Use the Thanks button!
My broadband speed - 750 Meganibbles/minute
We elect governments to run the country, not to give away the ability to run large aspects of it to someone else. And especially not to tell us it's all about trade, when it isn't, and they knew full well it wasn't.
And if, as you put it, it's a "vocal minority" that want a referendum, then the sooner we have one the better, because it'll be a decisive vote for "in", and that will out paid to any credibility for an "out" argument for a very long time, if not permanently.
Nor is the list of those wanting a referendum by any means limited to euro-sceptics. I have seen quite a few Labour and even LD MPs, and ministers (and shadows) openly stating they want a referendum precisely so they can get a clear "in" mandate and put the issue to rest so tgat we can get on with things, not spend half our time arguing about in or out. There are a lot of enthusiastic pro-EU voices wanting a referendum, and quite a few have said they think, one way or another, it's now inevitable that there will be one .... and for exactly the reason I've just given, that it'll resolve the issue.
So, what's the problem?
It's not as if we have a referendum every five minutes. I'm pushing retirement and I've seen precisely two .... one of which sold us a lie.
And the justification, in both cases, is that they weren't about decisions on running the country, but about changing the way we elect those that run the country.
What would you have preferred? A minority government, paralysed by vest-interest horse-trading on every single decision, ending up able to do almost nothing .... and right in the middle of dealing with probably the biggest (or at least second biggest) economic crisis in a century, if not ever.
A coalition had the single substantial merit of being better than any of the alternatives, and a Lab-LD coalition wasn't on, because it had neither the numbers to make it work, nor was Gordon Brown staying in power as PM, having had on of the worst electoral defeats in Labour history, a viable option. So, we had a coalition, and that means a negotiation on a shared position.
Some things were easy to agree. Some weren't exactly joint policy (tax PAs at £10k), but were certainly in line with Tory philosophy despite being LD policy.
But PR was a sticking point, because it was a red line, both ways. So, a pragmatic solution .... offer a halfway house (remember the referendum was on AV, not PR), and .... let the people decide. And we did. And despite it being a core LD aim (them being the ones most disadvantaged by FPTP), electoral reform is now a dead issue, at least for a while. The referendum settled it, for a good long time. Job done.
The problem with a referendum during a period of severe political apathy is that it gives more weight to the vocal minority. If we hold a referendum for the vocal minority then only the vocal minority will vote. It won't tell us anything about what the country wants as a whole. Some may find that acceptable; I personally find it deeply worrying. We shouldn't base policy decisions on the personal whim of a minority of voters (and let's be honest, Euro-in/out is a whim; there's no clear evidence base that one position is better than the other).
OTOH, you could argue that governing without evidence and a clear mandate is the ground state of British politics anyway...
No, I think a referendum on PR was inevitable, for all the reasons you outline. I was pointing out that attacking the Lib Dems for "wanting" a referendum on PR is fallacious - the referendum was a necessary compromise, not a desired outcome.
Although TBH, the AV referendum was a nice bit of wool-pulling from the Tories. They managed to keep their referendum promise and produce a situation where supporters of PR were encouraging people to vote no because it didn't go far enough. That's one masterful piece of spinnery right there. I also annoyed a couple of "liberal" friends by pointing out that with any reasonable form of PR the BNP should have 11 or 12 seats in Westminster. That didn't go down well.....
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote