-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Politics, politics, politics
- Thread starter markysimmo
- Start date
SpurMeUp
Les Howe
It's just one individual. What did he say? I'm sure we could get some quote from our Cabinet that are probably aggressive and rude too. I think people find what they want to find - no doubt me included. But there are important things to consider, so we have to recognise our own bias.
Grays_1890
Chris Jones
So Juncker is not a egotistical drunk then? Mate its easily accessible anywhere to find proof he is a nut job
How about BOJO? "They can go and whistle for their money"
Or Reese Mog or Teresa "I will be a difficult woman" May?
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
They already had that chance, we went to them and asked for such and got sent packing, hence the referendum (and result).
They have consistently stated the 4 pillars are non negotiable, what makes you think they will change their minds any time soon?
I think its impossible they will suddenly offer us even more tailored membership, so why even bother asking?
Or is it to try and judge how anti EU I am? That being the case, its the wrong question. The issue on the vote is not EU/in/out/whatever, it is that a vote was cast, a decision made, which must then be respected. Not recast in the hope of a different result.
Grays_1890
Chris Jones
SpurMeUp
Les Howe
May well be. Plenty in our Parliament too. It doesn't change the underlying issues of whether the EU helps or hinders the UK. Isn't that what's important?
The question was to see how anti EU you are, yes.
Grays_1890
Chris Jones
Of course it is but as politics proves round the world the leaders make a huge difference to things and I don't trust the EU as an organisation and that view has only been strengthened since we voted out. No amount of "what about Farage or May" will change the point I am making.
SpurMeUp
Les Howe
Why is the UK bothering negotiating with the EU if that's the case? I guess that would make you a hard brexit supporter? What implications would that have for car manufacturing workers, service exports to the EU and financial services? Why do you think we should blindly leap off the cliff, without so much as looking at what we are jumping into?
Grays_1890
Chris Jones
The European Union is set up with the aim of ending the frequent and bloody wars between neighbours, which culminated in the Second World War. As of 1950, the European Coal and Steel Community begins to unite European countries economically and politically in order to secure lasting peace
Ok so thats what I stole off the internet. Could it not be argued that firstly it has served its purpose. Secondly since this definition, has the EU as an entity not a country has become to powerful than it should be? I see a totally different EU than the one that was set up and it should not be as powerful as it is.
Possibly. What did he say anyway?
Grays_1890
Chris Jones
You see im just not sure about this arguement. I would ask, does it favour us being a member or Not? Does it do more good than bad for us and the continent as a whole... then why should we care if it has morphed/grown beyond its orginal remit.
SpurMeUp
Les Howe
Fair point. I'd ask how and in what areas is it too powerful? How has this impacted on us?
monkeybarry
Jack Jull
It a bit of a chicken and egg position - those countries have to adopt the Euro when their economy becomes strong enough (I know, the irony!). But after Greece and the Euro concerns Govt have been resisting it. The EU have said they still have to, but at the same they are not going to force it and risk a) political unrest leading to another Brexit and b) risk adversely affecting that economy, thus screwing the Euro again.
However, if they were able to enforce the Euro on the UK, they could set precident at the very top end and force through a mass transition.
If I recall, Sweden has a special status. Can't remember exactly what it is though.
Edit - Sweden decided joining ERM-II is voluntary and had a referendum to vote (the right way ) on adopting the Euro/not.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
What purpose does that serve?
As a member of the EU the four pillars are non negotiable. We tried, we got told unequivocally, no. Hence we decided to leave.
That fundamentally changes the relationship. Perhaps now we can negotiate an arrangement where by we can trade with each other, support each other, and also have our own way with aspects like immigration?
THAT is the point of these negotiations. Not whether or not we stay, but what the future relationship will be. And, as we are not part of the EU, we get to draw our own red lines as they did with us while we were in.
CETA is worth considering here. The EU showed they are willing to set up a free trading agreement WITHOUT the 4 pillars insistence.
This is what I found on movement of people:
Easier transfers of company staff and other professionals between the EU and Canada CETA will make it easier for firms to move staff temporarily between the EU and Canada. This will facilitate European companies' operations in Canada. It will be also easier for other professionals to temporarily supply legal, accounting, architectural or similar services.
Which, to me, sounds entirely practical. And begs the question, if the EU really is just a trading bloc, why insist on complete free movement between states instead of something like this?
Either way, there is precedent for exactly the sort of arrangement I suspect the UK would be happy with. I certainly would be.
Grays_1890
Chris Jones
Well I think its level of negotiation power makes it too powerful in some respects, I don't know the ins and outs and that might seem a weak reply but if you makes a beast like the EU and keep making it stronger than its members as a whole then your defeating the purpose it was originally set up for in the first place. Bend over to them and you just make them stronger, thats the danger I suppose it was I am getting at. If we come out as an individual member there should not be blockers to doing fundamental business just because the name of the EU is so strong it can say so, I mean the EU is only as strong as the members it has but we are a country and that should supersede an organisation which is all the EU is, its not an actual country and it has dubious voting methods that should be questioned and are not.
monkeybarry
Jack Jull
The EU is dodgy as hell.
But it's by no way exclusive.
The difference is it's more accountable to its membership.
The Tory's can (and are) basically do whatever they like to the UK (even with a weak Govt) and we can do nothing except bleat and moan.
The EU will get kick back from its members if it tries to overstep the line too much too often.
Western politics is beyond corrupt.
But it's by no way exclusive.
The difference is it's more accountable to its membership.
The Tory's can (and are) basically do whatever they like to the UK (even with a weak Govt) and we can do nothing except bleat and moan.
The EU will get kick back from its members if it tries to overstep the line too much too often.
Western politics is beyond corrupt.
