advertisement


Oh Britain, what have you done (part ∞+25)?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cav said:
What planet are you on? The EU agreed May's deal. It was the UK that rejected May's deal - 3 times. Or did that not happen?
Click to expand...

People who support leave lie. They probably don't even know they are doing it. Using facts, evidence, data - it just makes them lie more. They need to support their delusion. This fantasy world they have built around them is more real to them than reality. If we just pull it out from under them and force them to confront reality they are likely to run amok or go catatonic. Sure, some will need to be hospitalised for a time. But if we can slowly reintroduce them to reality we'll be able to make them productive members of society again. Well, members of society anyway. Without the high care costs.
 
PsB said:
Benefits: world’s largest free trade zone, so more trade between members. Common (highish) standards. Savings through shared central functions. Critical mass to defend own interests versus other world economies and largest multinationals. Etc.

No, i’m questioning Colin’s point that there are massive differences between the EEC that the UK joined and the UK’s current status. The really big differences between the EEC/EC and the EU have been either desired by the UK (Single Market) or dodged by the UK (euro, Schengen). There are differences, of course, but they don’t seem massive to me (most people would struggle to list many without resorting to Google). But let’s see what Colin comes up with.
Click to expand...
Thanks, but some points/questions on that.

Sorry, my fault in that I wasn't clear. What I'm really after are the benefits of membership of the EU nowadays versus the benefits when the UK joined the EEC back in the 70s.

Those benefits you mention are all real, yes, but they aren't likely to be vote winners among the population existing on the bones of their arse, having been kicked about by tory austerity since 2010. What I'm looking for are benefits of EU membership that should have been sold to local populations around the UK, for example, projects funded by the EU that it could be reasonably argued would never have been funded by UK central govt, let alone a Tory govt. That kind of thing rather than the likes of "we predict everyone will be worse off because the economy will grow by 4% less over 10 years than we predict it would have done as members of the EU", or "I'm going to have to queue at the airport" etc etc. It's important if we ever get a second referendum. If another "remain campaign" continues as it left of, adding the words "racist", "knuckle-dragger", "little-englander" etc as I read here on a daily basis, leave will win again, imo.

Finally, if there has been virtually no significant change between the EEC of the 70s and the EU now, I wonder why Scotland voted decisively against the EEC but is decisively in favour of remaining in the EU now, when the UK overall was earlier in favour of EEC membership? Something must have changed, my friend.
 
eternumviti said:
When I respond to a post, I usually go to the trouble of reading it first.
Click to expand...
All the better to concoct from. I see Lord Mullet of Wetherspoon is taking 20p off a pint to demonstrate the type of savings that will arise for the ordinary drinking man when we are become leadersinglobalfreetrade. Could you perhaps knock something off a case?
 
I’m sure Lord Mullet of Weatherspoon will be able to recoup the 20p once EU employment rights go out of the window and he can get bar staff on ‘workfare’.
 
PsB said:
What the UK has at the moment is all the benefits of EU participation, minus the euro (which I gather you’re not keen on), minus Schengen (ditto), plus a rebate (which you presumably approve of), plus various other opt outs. Please explain how this is significantly different from what the EEC (aka common market, as joined by the UK in the 70s) used to be.
Click to expand...
PsB said:
Benefits: world’s largest free trade zone, so more trade between members. Common (highish) standards. Savings through shared central functions. Critical mass to defend own interests versus other world economies and largest multinationals. Etc.

No, i’m questioning Colin’s point that there are massive differences between the EEC that the UK joined and the UK’s current status. The really big differences between the EEC/EC and the EU have been either desired by the UK (Single Market) or dodged by the UK (euro, Schengen). There are differences, of course, but they don’t seem massive to me (most people would struggle to list many without resorting to Google). But let’s see what Colin comes up with.
Click to expand...

The name may have changed but the goal was the same, a federal Europe. Look at the you tube videos of Foot, Powell and Heath. Foot and Powell were warning of the undemocratic, centralised Federal Europe dictating laws to member states.
 
Colin Barron said:
The name may have changed but the goal was the same, a federal Europe. Look at the you tube videos of Foot, Powell and Heath. Foot and Powell were warning of the undemocratic, centralised Federal Europe dictating laws to member states.
Click to expand...

Then, as now, the nutty anti-Europeans were on the left and right wings of their respective parties.
 
LOL John Mann is apparently stepping down to become a “anti-Semitism adviser”! He seems thick as pigshit, what skillset exactly can he bring to such a role? I’ll be rather interested to see who is footing the bill...

PS Source: Sky News just now. Labour gammoness Flint on now.
 
ks.234 said:
We voted to leave he best deal we’re ever going to get in 2016.
Click to expand...

Yes we did, but we also voted to leave all manner of less attractive things too. A matter of balance and momentum, and the electorate, when finally asked, told the government and the EU that the balance and momentum were wrong.

The question should, of course, have been asked at the time of Maastricht, when we weren't in so deep and the EU trajectory became so clear, and again at Nice, and again at Lisbon. All of these treaties represented fundamental handovers of constitutional sovereign power to Brussels, against the clearly articulated wishes of significant proportions of the electorate and their representatives in Parliament.

The 2016 vote represented the culmination of a long-standing failure of governance.
 
eternumviti said:
Yes we did, but we also voted to leave all manner of less attractive things too. A matter of balance and momentum, and the electorate, when finally asked, told the government and the EU that the balance and momentum were wrong.

The question should, of course, have been asked at the time of Maastricht, when we weren't in so deep and the EU trajectory became so clear, and again at Nice, and again at Lisbon. All of these treaties represented fundamental handovers of constitutional sovereign power to Brussels, against the clearly articulated wishes of significant proportions of the electorate and their representatives in Parliament.

The 2016 vote represented the culmination of a long-standing failure of governance.
Click to expand...
But we still want a deal that will necessarily be on worse terms than what we have now!
 
Tony L said:
LOL John Mann is apparently stepping down to become a “anti-Semitism adviser”! He seems thick as pigshit, what skillset exactly can he bring to such a role? I’ll be rather interested to see who is footing the bill...

PS Source: Sky News just now. Labour gammoness Flint on now.
Click to expand...
I’d like to know who has created this new government role? Who approved it? How much are we paying for the role?
 
ks.234 said:
You voted to leave the deal we’ve got and want a deal that is worse than what we’ve got, but complain that we’re not getting a better deal and believe it’s the EU that’s to blame for us not getting a better deal than we have???
Click to expand...

Yup, pretty much covers it.
 
eternumviti said:
All of these treaties represented fundamental handovers of constitutional sovereign power to Brussels, against the clearly articulated wishes of significant proportions of the electorate and their representatives in Parliament.
Click to expand...

But not the majority, otherwise those things would not have come to be.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top