Brexit...

[Matt]

24 minutes ago, Palfy said:

And add to that and I believe it might be in the hundred of thousands, workers from other EU countries who had a right to a vote but where denied that vote due to not enough resources to process their applications, which was another flaw in the referendum process that suited the Brexit vote. 

Yer, but they’re foreign so who gives a fuck...

[MikeO]

Just another thought along the lines of people's interpretations of democracy; we currently have a Prime Minister who was voted in my a minuscule number of Tory party members who has dismissed twenty odd members from his party who were properly elected by their constituents. This is how our "democracy" works as it stands; man with no mandate rids himself of people who do have a mandate because they disagree with him.

Democracy UK style 2019. Legally correct but morally bankrupt.

To quote @johnh"Democracy is a very fragile instrument and it only needs to fail once to fail for ever."

It's failed us already and I fear for the future.

[Matt]

1 hour ago, TallPaul1878 said:

Don't you think we have been trying that for the last 30 years or so?

We have tried many times to make compromises and reforms but ultimately there are too many cooks spoiling the broth. The big 3 of Britain, Germany and France all have different ideas for what they want out of the Union. With France being the most federal minded and Britain the least. Germany appears to be kinder towards a federal Europe but more aligned with Britain economically than the French.

The Scandinavian countries all have their own ideas and so do the more Eastern European nations. It seems the southern states who have had histories of dictatorships are happy with a federal union but economically it isn't working for them.

As a concept it has failed. These countries have diverse economies and are shackled by the EU and their stipulations. I understand that the world has become global and China is a looming threat, as are the USA. I don't believe we can operate as individual isolated nations and that Europe needs to remain united, however the instrument of the EU itself doesn't work for me in my opinion and needs to be torn down and rebuilt in a way that works for each member state.

As a concept it has thrived. I will come back to you tomorrow as to explain my opinion, but being on the phone I cannot provide the evidence as easily. 

[Matt]

2 minutes ago, MikeO said:

Just another thought along the lines of people's interpretations of democracy; we currently have a Prime Minister who was voted in my a minuscule number of Tory party members who has dismissed twenty odd members from his party who were properly elected by their constituents. This is how our "democracy" works as it stands; man with no mandate rids himself of people who do have a mandate because they disagree with him.

Democracy UK style 2019.

To quote @johnh"Democracy is a very fragile instrument and it only needs to fail once to fail for ever."

It's failed us already and I fear for the future.

Interpretation is another word for opinion. Britain’s democracy is defined, very clearly, in its laws. 

[MikeO]

2 minutes ago, Matt said:

Interpretation is another word for opinion. Britain’s democracy is defined, very clearly, in its laws. 

I agree, was just making the point that at the moment we're being governed by someone installed by Conservative party rules, no say for the people. Same would apply if Labour were in charge and were employing their own rules.

Needs to stop and go back to the people rather than parties funded by people looking after their own interests making the calls.

[holystove]

2 hours ago, TallPaul1878 said:

Don't you think we have been trying that for the last 30 years or so?

We have tried many times to make compromises and reforms but ultimately there are too many cooks spoiling the broth. The big 3 of Britain, Germany and France all have different ideas for what they want out of the Union. With France being the most federal minded and Britain the least. Germany appears to be kinder towards a federal Europe but more aligned with Britain economically than the French.

The Scandinavian countries all have their own ideas and so do the more Eastern European nations. It seems the southern states who have had histories of dictatorships are happy with a federal union but economically it isn't working for them.

As a concept it has failed. These countries have diverse economies and are shackled by the EU and their stipulations. I understand that the world has become global and China is a looming threat, as are the USA. I don't believe we can operate as individual isolated nations and that Europe needs to remain united, however the instrument of the EU itself doesn't work for me in my opinion and needs to be torn down and rebuilt in a way that works for each member state.

Just like every other EU member state, southern EU has benefited massively from EU membership, massively.  Not just economically, but in their struggle to transform from autocracies into modern liberal democracies (look up the data on Spain in particular, it's spectacular).  I think you are confusing EU membership with eurozone membership, which is more tailored to the rich eurozone members and has not been a success for the southern states from the 2008 financial crisis onwards and has resulted in high (youth) unemployement.  

"Shackled by the EU and their stipulations"?  How can you be shackled by a harmonized rule?  Trade, in general, is more free between EU member states than it is between States of the USA!  Again, I think you are confusing  EU and the Euro (which does come with strict rules).

As an economic partnership, the EU is an unparalleled success.   For most eastern European nation, it has however also been the liberal values (rule of law, human rights, ..) that made them aspire membership.  It may seem self evident in our rich Western European world, but Spain, Greece, Romania, Estonia etc all have very recent experiences with autocratic rule.  The EU acts as an important barrier to a return of those times; this is a big reason so many Eastern European nations that are not yet a member desperately want to join.

Noone knows how the EU will evolve.  The last treaty (Lisbon) actually reinforced certain intergouvernmental areas, which you seem to favour, as an answer to the Dutch and French rejecting the (integrationist) Constitutional Treaty.  Each crisis point has guided the EU in a particular direction and noone can predict the next turn but as a concept it has definitely not failed, to the contrary, it is being mirrored all over the planet (African Union, ASEAN, MERCOSUR, ... ).

Apologies for the long post, but I saw your last couple of posts and the upvotes some of them got so I wanted to clarify some fundamental misunderstandings which were stated as facts.  There is a big difference between being a member of the EU and of the eurozone.  The EU has benefited all members.  The eurozone has, after 2008, primarily benefited the rich members.   The euro as a way of taking away a barrier to trade (different, fluctuating currencies) has been a success, it has however not been effective as a fiscal tool because too many competences remained with the members, rather than being centralized.  Advocating a deconstruction of the EU would create similar problems. 

To make it more concrete, I think you'd struggle to identify the EU rule that is a constraint on member states and which would be better handled in 28 different ways. 

[pete0]

[Palfy]

1 hour ago, RPG said:

Top post.

We have been in Common Market/EEC/EU since 1973 and it just hasn't worked for us as a country. I understand the criticism of democracy being used for political advantage - moving county boundaries etc but what about EU pumping money into areas which it thinks are pro EU, what abour EU senior officials not being allowed to criticise EU - on pain of losing their exorbitant and tax free pensions? This is all a subtle, but very effective, form of administrative dictatorship and we need to get out of its clutches. Of course there will be people who say that leaving will adversely affect them on an individual basis but the decision has to be made on the basis of what is best for the country - while negotiating reciprocal rights to protect people such as Matt or, ultimately, having a fund to compensate people like Matt.

I think we have given EU long enough to reform but not only is it not reforming, it is becoming more and more federal and political and dictatorial which is not what we signed up to in 1973 and certainly not how it was sold to us.

I am pro Europe but very anti EU. A loose trading association of independent sovereign states with voluntary cooperation in other areas of mutual interest would work far better than this increasingly dictatorial organisation which, after more than half a century, still can't make its mind up if it is based in Brussels or Strasbourg or both.

Every think you said then was Symantec’s what proof have you that EU officials cannot speak their minds because they have been threatened with the loss of their pensions again fake news from the far right I would guess. 
You are on a forum where many people in Liverpool have benefited from EU money culturally and financially, a City that was neglected by its own government and supported by the EU, and you believe that was done because Liverpool was a haven for EU activists or something?, using your analogy any entities funding projects could be accused of the same thing, again fake news on your behalf. 
Now you are sucking up to Matt like a politician because you have a glimmer of hope that you may have a friendship developing or at least someone who may sympathise with you, so to further in enhance that you are changing your stance from your other posts to try and court a friendship it’s so blatantly obvious and cringe worthy I’m actually embarrassed for you. 
The only doctoral thing I have witnessed in this whole fiasco is Johnstone culling 21 mid Tories because they dared to follow their beliefs   
We have not been dictated to by the EU we have engaged with the EU, and when a policy hasn’t sat well with us we have used our veto or negotiated a deal that would exempt us from that policy, and every member has that right, again fake news it’s not a dictatorship we have witnessed a dictatorship and it is completely different to what’s happening in the EU. 

[Palfy]

22 minutes ago, RPG said:

Palfy, you have previously come across as a reasonable, articulate and educated person. Can you try finding him again and bring him back out to play please.

Liverpool is a prime example of EU targeting an area exactly as I mentioned in my post. Yes, there is undoubtedly short term gain for the people of Liverpool, (remember that Hitler got the trains running on schedule and was popular with many Germans for economic reasons for a while) but long term the EU is using the situation to ferment internal division within UK which it intends to use for its own benefit, certainly not Liverpool's. It is just a means to a political end for EU and it is following in economic terms the same less subtle methodology used in Germany in the 1930's. Once EU decides it no longer needs Liverpool and similar areas, just watch the investment dry up.

Also, this is a national UK issue and therefore needs looking at as a whole and not from a 'Liverpool centric' perspective as you seem to be starting to do.

As for sucking up to Matt, that is a ridiculous statement to make. I believe in being fair and have agreed and disagreed with him in the past and will undoubtedly do so again in the future. On this occasion I don't agree with his arguments but I can express empathy with the situation he may find himself in. That has nothing to do with sucking up and everything to do with being a human being Palfy.

There is a bit of sore loser coming through in your posts Palfy and I really thought you were better than that.

That is scandalous to suggest the EU have only funded projects in this country to create divisions with in the country or any member state for that matter. 
I’ll have to let Matt make up his own mind on that, but it’s evident to me you are conniving and trying to cause division to suit your agenda, but not a problem I can see through you. 
That’s not evidence to prove your statement of EU officials pensions that a story from a right wing paper and here say, and do you not think that Johnstone actions are more in kin to a dictatorship, or the actions of a democratic person. 

[holystove]

31 minutes ago, RPG said:

From the Right of Centre (but certainly not extreme right wing) Daily Telegraph.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1325398/Euro-court-outlaws-criticism-of-EU.html

I tend to ignore your posts as most of what you write is just trolling unworthy of response.  But once again, when you finally do give a source for your various claims, it falls wide of the mark.   Here is the actual judgement https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:61999CJ0274&from=NL   Your source is a comment piece by an anti-European (Ambrose Pritchard Evans) in a newspaper whose opinion-section has been a joke on matters EU for many decades now.  You'd be a lot better informed if you looked at the primary sources rather than what you get from the Express, Leave.eu and the Telegraph.

"Pro-Europe but anti-EU" is another one of those ...   The EU is the polticial, legal and institutional manifestation of the deepest cooperation among European states and their peoples.  That's what you are against.   So what are you pro?  The alps?

[Palfy]

8 minutes ago, RPG said:

Not at all Holy,

I am pro a Europe of sovereign, independent, allied states, with a loose trading agreement and voluntary cooperation in areas of mutual interest.

That is the grown up way to manage today's modern world. Alliances are important but must be used to protect sovereignty, not to take it away.

The EU is trying to set up a European federal superstate and is no longer fit for purpose in today's world. A European non political Alliance of sovereign, independent states would be fine. But for defence we have NATO, for trade we could either have a loose association or trade under WTO rules. Interpol existed long before the EU and any other areas of mutual cooperation could be addressed on a voluntary basis between independent states.

That gives all states the freedom to trade with who they can arrange bi lateral deals with, inside or outside Europe.

We will never agree on this but I am happy to continue the debate if you wish.

Again been proven that you’re facts are completely false and no reliable evidence to back them up as holy has displayed, bar a far right wing view with no substance. 
I think it’s fairly clear that you are not pro any form of a United Europe. 

[pete0]

Fuck we must be an awful country contributing to help poorer parts of the world, never thought how much of a bastard we are being doing so, as we could upset the small minority of rich people who live there and cause divisions. How dare we highlight and help the neglected. 

Let's leave the EU so we can stop being bastards contributing towards poverty and whilst we're at stop the EU from highlighting our poverty stricken and our unnecessary, unhumanitarian austerity. You see their report, they've got an agenda helping the poor. Don't they know the poor should stay poor. 

 

[Formby]

14 hours ago, holystove said:

Just like every other EU member state, southern EU has benefited massively from EU membership, massively.  Not just economically, but in their struggle to transform from autocracies into modern liberal democracies (look up the data on Spain in particular, it's spectacular).  I think you are confusing EU membership with eurozone membership, which is more tailored to the rich eurozone members and has not been a success for the southern states from the 2008 financial crisis onwards and has resulted in high (youth) unemployement.  

"Shackled by the EU and their stipulations"?  How can you be shackled by a harmonized rule?  Trade, in general, is more free between EU member states than it is between States of the USA!  Again, I think you are confusing  EU and the Euro (which does come with strict rules).

As an economic partnership, the EU is an unparalleled success.   For most eastern European nation, it has however also been the liberal values (rule of law, human rights, ..) that made them aspire membership.  It may seem self evident in our rich Western European world, but Spain, Greece, Romania, Estonia etc all have very recent experiences with autocratic rule.  The EU acts as an important barrier to a return of those times; this is a big reason so many Eastern European nations that are not yet a member desperately want to join.

Noone knows how the EU will evolve.  The last treaty (Lisbon) actually reinforced certain intergouvernmental areas, which you seem to favour, as an answer to the Dutch and French rejecting the (integrationist) Constitutional Treaty.  Each crisis point has guided the EU in a particular direction and noone can predict the next turn but as a concept it has definitely not failed, to the contrary, it is being mirrored all over the planet (African Union, ASEAN, MERCOSUR, ... ).

Apologies for the long post, but I saw your last couple of posts and the upvotes some of them got so I wanted to clarify some fundamental misunderstandings which were stated as facts.  There is a big difference between being a member of the EU and of the eurozone.  The EU has benefited all members.  The eurozone has, after 2008, primarily benefited the rich members.   The euro as a way of taking away a barrier to trade (different, fluctuating currencies) has been a success, it has however not been effective as a fiscal tool because too many competences remained with the members, rather than being centralized.  Advocating a deconstruction of the EU would create similar problems. 

To make it more concrete, I think you'd struggle to identify the EU rule that is a constraint on member states and which would be better handled in 28 different ways. 

Are the eurozone and EU really completely unconnected? The political left in the UK thought the EU was to blame for what happened in Greece. (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/14/left-reject-eu-greece-eurosceptic). Corbyn, himself, (https://www.markpack.org.uk/153744/jeremy-corbyn-brexit/) has been highly critical of the EU's position, and their environmental policies / ridiculous farming subsidies trashed (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/10/brexit-leaving-eu-farming-agriculture). It's not all rosy.

[holystove]

1 hour ago, Formby said:

Are the eurozone and EU really completely unconnected? The political left in the UK thought the EU was to blame for what happened in Greece. (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/14/left-reject-eu-greece-eurosceptic). Corbyn, himself, (https://www.markpack.org.uk/153744/jeremy-corbyn-brexit/) has been highly critical of the EU's position, and their environmental policies / ridiculous farming subsidies trashed (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/10/brexit-leaving-eu-farming-agriculture). It's not all rosy.

On what happened in Greece they are certainly unconnected.  What happened in Greece was the fault of Greece. How it was handled afterwards is the fault of the Troika (which includes the IMF), the inherent weakness of the euro-structure and the Eurozone ministers playing hardball.

I'm not trying to make the point everything the EU does is by definition good (farming subsidies being one example).  My point is that, overall, regarding economic growth, protection of consumers and civil liberties, it has been beneficial to every member state to increase international cooperation and the EU is, and has proven to be, the most effective vehicle to achieve this.

[johnh]

22 hours ago, Palfy said:

John there are examples all over the world that have seen democracy being flouted as here, for instance would you say that it was democracy doing it’s job when Robert Mugabe was so say constantly being elected President of Zimbabwe, I know you are going to say no correlation, but there are some people being refused a vote and people being lied to. 
For me a refusal of a vote or a lie to win a vote is undemocratic know no matter how you dress it up wouldn’t you agree. 

Palfy, Project Fear is also lies and there have been plenty of them from Remain.

[johnh]

20 hours ago, StevO said:

I’m disappointed in you after this post John. You’re a sensible and experienced individual, but to call out Matt like this is extremely harsh. Matt was denied a vote, and is entitled to be frustrated by that. He views democracy in the UK as something that should give him, and Rusty, a vote. How can it be so bad that he doesn’t see that as fair or democratic? Surely you would agree that all brits should have a vote for it to be democratic, and not just those who lived in the UK at the time?

Steve, how does that make me undemocratic?

[StevO]

8 minutes ago, johnh said:

Steve, how does that make me undemocratic?

I didn’t say you were undemocratic. 
I don’t see how you can be happy about certain people being excluded from the vote, and not respect Matts opinion on that as someone excluded. 

[johnh]

45 minutes ago, StevO said:

I didn’t say you were undemocratic. 
I don’t see how you can be happy about certain people being excluded from the vote, and not respect Matts opinion on that as someone excluded. 

Steve,  Where have I said that I'm happy at people being excluded from the vote?  I have never even commented on the issue.  Also, it was Matt who inferred that I was undemocratic.  You posted a number of views in support of Matt, hence my comment 'how does that make me undemocratic' .

[Matt]

54 minutes ago, johnh said:

Steve,  Where have I said that I'm happy at people being excluded from the vote?  I have never even commented on the issue.  Also, it was Matt who inferred that I was undemocratic.  You posted a number of views in support of Matt, hence my comment 'how does that make me undemocratic' .

I didn’t say you were undemocratic, I said you don’t seem to accept what British democracy is  

[StevO]

2 hours ago, johnh said:

Steve,  Where have I said that I'm happy at people being excluded from the vote?  I have never even commented on the issue.  Also, it was Matt who inferred that I was undemocratic.  You posted a number of views in support of Matt, hence my comment 'how does that make me undemocratic' .

I support his views, I agree with most of them but I never said you were undemocratic. I believe it’s not democratic to exclude people from a vote.

I said I was disappointed with the way you have reacted to him, it’s not what I’d normally expect from you. To call him a disgrace was out of order in my opinion and calling isn’t something I normally see from you. 

[Matt]

@johnh. Firstly, I apologize if I came across as insulting. It was not my intent and I still can’t really see how I was. but maybe my recent situation and this whole debate got the better of me. To be surprised, I was very surprised by your reaction.

To clarify my post a bit better

1) I’ve learnt the hard way how important it is to vote, especially as I’m actively denied it now. To use an analogy; imagine you didn’t log on to TT for a while and when you came back whilst we were asking for opinions and dramatically changing the way users could post, you were told your input wouldn’t be allowed. Even though you paid into the forum (albeit briefly considering the lifespan of the forum) you get no say, because you went somewhere else for personal reasons in the meantime.  Do you think that is democratic?

2) my point about you not getting democracy was too short. Since you’ve shared your history, it’s clear that you do as you’ve been an active voter in GEs. Which is how GB democracy works. My frustration is that a referendum is not how democracy in GB works yet you refer to it as decomcratic and that the “people” voted - well, not all of them did. Don’t get me wrong, I think direct democracy is a much better solution because it is a truer form of democracy; the people get to decide, not a bunch of self-serving politicians. But all the people, no exceptions as is the case with Brexit. 

3) I know I’m overly passionate about this because I am a living example of taxation without representation. So, when someone tries to take away my freedoms, I am angry which is why I’ve spent so much time investigating and providing evidence. Evidence is not something Leave can provide because it’s a) unprecedented and b) driven by liars or exaggerated, unproven/incorrect claims

4) people who use catchphrases, especially those that are hypocritical catchphrases, and ignore proof drive me nuts. I’m usually (I’d like to think) quite calm and collected unless there’s some external influence going on, ie ive had a drink or my freedom is being taken away. 

So, again, I didn’t intend to offend. But I stand by my argument. Hopefully now it’s explained a bit better 

[Formby]

5 hours ago, holystove said:

On what happened in Greece they are certainly unconnected.  What happened in Greece was the fault of Greece. How it was handled afterwards is the fault of the Troika (which includes the IMF), the inherent weakness of the euro-structure and the Eurozone ministers playing hardball.

And of the EU, surely - it was foolish of them to let Greece join the single currency, as it was foolish of lenders / investors to treat Greek debt like German debt. A currency union is a dangerous thing in the wrong hands.

As no one in the euro is not in the EU and new members (to the EU) are expected to sign up to the euro, it seems strange to claim they are unconnected, but I may be misunderstanding what you're saying. 

[Palfy]

6 hours ago, holystove said:

On what happened in Greece they are certainly unconnected.  What happened in Greece was the fault of Greece. How it was handled afterwards is the fault of the Troika (which includes the IMF), the inherent weakness of the euro-structure and the Eurozone ministers playing hardball.

I'm not trying to make the point everything the EU does is by definition good (farming subsidies being one example).  My point is that, overall, regarding economic growth, protection of consumers and civil liberties, it has been beneficial to every member state to increase international cooperation and the EU is, and has proven to be, the most effective vehicle to achieve this.

And Britain has prospered whilst we have been members of the EU in financial terms and the rights of it’s citizens particularly when it comes to workers rights. 
There is an argument from those who want to leave that we could have done better financially but that is just conjecture and can’t be proven, but the taking away of the rights afforded to us by the EU will definitely be undermined by a Conservative government they have already said they want change our rights if and when we leave, and you can be sure it wouldn’t be for the better. 

[Palfy]

5 hours ago, johnh said:

Palfy, Project Fear is also lies and there have been plenty of them from Remain.

I do not disagree with that we know Cameron used a tactic like it would be the end for us, and Boris said it would be easy to walk away and the EU would agree to all of our demands, you could go on splitting hairs about who told the most lies for ever and a day.

But the fact people were lied to and for many that could have influenced their vote whether remain or leave, I find it incomprehensible that people who know the referendum was based on lies and ultimately flawed, would not allow a 2nd vote for those who genuinely feel they have been misled in voting the way they did, and want the opportunity to right an injustice, for me that is the sign of a true democracy a democracy that is prepared to right a wrong, not a democracy that says yes we know you have been misled but tough you had your one chance and you should have done your homework and worked it out for yourself, or unless of course you genuinely believe that people weren’t influenced by the canvassing. 

[Bailey]

2 hours ago, Palfy said:

I do not disagree with that we know Cameron used a tactic like it would be the end for us, and Boris said it would be easy to walk away and the EU would agree to all of our demands, you could go on splitting hairs about who told the most lies for ever and a day.

But the fact people were lied to and for many that could have influenced their vote whether remain or leave, I find it incomprehensible that people who know the referendum was based on lies and ultimately flawed, would not allow a 2nd vote for those who genuinely feel they have been misled in voting the way they did, and want the opportunity to right an injustice, for me that is the sign of a true democracy a democracy that is prepared to right a wrong, not a democracy that says yes we know you have been misled but tough you had your one chance and you should have done your homework and worked it out for yourself, or unless of course you genuinely believe that people weren’t influenced by the canvassing. 

Thats a fair point about people believing they have been misled.

I just don't think a second referendum would resolve anything it would just be a rinse and repeat argument for a generation but then again that might happen anyway.

[Palfy]

7 hours ago, Bailey said:

Thats a fair point about people believing they have been misled.

I just don't think a second referendum would resolve anything it would just be a rinse and repeat argument for a generation but then again that might happen anyway.

It probably would but I could accept the vote of a 2nd referendum even if it was the same result. 
I would then expect everyone who has a right to vote being given that right, because as we know there was thousands of EU residents denied a vote due to the logjam in processing paper work, and I would want both sides of the campaign to be strictly monitored for false claims, or maybe not allow any campaign canvassing with a few that it would be a fairer assumption to say if people don’t know now they will never know. 
But the 1st referendum throws up so many issues I don’t accept it’s legitimacy as a fair referendum. 

[MikeO]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-50043549

[MikeO]

More than a year old but it appeared in my suggested watch list, I appreciate it'll not change any opinions but for me demonstrates nicely the absurdity of what happened.

 

[rubecula]

I hate people like that  

[Palfy]

21 hours ago, MikeO said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-50043549

As I’ve always said we have to have a 2nd referendum to truly gauge the feeling of the people now they are more informed, instead of leaving it up to MPs to wrangle over for their own political gains without a care or thought for our concerns, no matter whether your in the remain or leave camp or what party you are aligned to. 
And these polls pretty much echo that, people will say of course you want another referendum because you are a remainer, and to that I would say if I was a leaver I would be honest enough to say that 1st referendum was so flawed in many ways, that I would want to make sure people had an opportunity reconsider their position.