Juncker's behaviour towards Farage in the EP assembly did open some doors. That is disturbing me.
Much as I despise Farage as a self-serving lying frog-faced mount of turd-fungus, he did have a point when he said that the council - particularly Juncker - was in denial. And straight away, Juncker said the council has to press on with its plans for expansion and tighter unification - exactly what is causing people all over Europe to want to call a halt to the whole thing.
And now instead of negotiating with the UK over what has happened, he wants to play a game of chicken to see if he can punish us for daring to leave.
I don't want to leave the EU because the trade, movement, information sharing, policing, security, are all of huge benefit, and I put that above all political arguments. But I've no love for the obsession of the likes of Juncker to persue expansion for its own sake, nor for an excess of laws that interfere with the individual character of a country. But Britain has been in a position to at least limit such things through our own government (rather than relying on our MEPs). Once we're out, we lose any say in the matter.
I find the rantings of an ultra-nationalist against neo-nazis quite hilarious.
:) You are guided by stereotypes of Western propaganda. On the territory of Russia is home to over 190 nationalities, while a large part is the indigenous nationalities that always lived in this territory. To the West they are all - Russian. Russia could not exist if nationalism it was not outside the law. Over the millennia of living together on one territory ideology of the peoples of Russia was the internationalism. Internationalism is the state ideology of Russia. Propaganda of nationalism in Russia is a criminal offense. Nationalism is a Western ideology based on the concept of "divide and conquer". Russia has always resisted this ideology and this concept, and will resist them to their complete destruction. This is the true reason for the antagonism between the West and Russia.
You got it wrong. This is not a political statement it is a statement of facts.
It's presenting the obvious plus ventilating a hidden opinion. That method and its results are described as demagogic instrument by someone who committed suicide in 1945 together with his wife, after poisoning their six children with cyanide.
I am shure you also will have a personal opinion, feeling or vision like most of us. Please feel invited....
I understand that the truth is not always pleasant, but the sooner you accept these facts, the less you will have to surprise the "sudden" appearance of its own nationalists and neo-Nazis.
Your nationalists and neo-Nazis not came from Mars. It is a product of your system. The West sponsored nationalists and neo-Nazis against USSR/Russia, and now they became members of the EU. Now they impose their will on You .
Russian stocking up on popcorn :)
If it were that simple the massive Neo-Nazi movement in Russia wouldn't exist. And yet it does.
It's just a bunch of idiots infected by Western ideology. Unfortunately they can't be prosecuted for their beliefs, otherwise we would have had to officially recognize the entire Western world is criminal.
Yes, we know, indigenous nationalities living together in perfect peace and harmony until someone even mutters the word 'independence' under their breath and then the tanks roll in, the bombs start dropping...
Yes, we know, indigenous nationalities living together in perfect peace and harmony until someone even mutters the word 'independence' under their breath and then the tanks roll in, the bombs start dropping...
Russian conquered most of the territory of the planet Earth due to the ideology of internationalism, uniting all Nations together. The West, in accordance with the ideology of "divide and conquer", seized the territory by destroying the indigenous population. Western ideology is the most criminal ideology in the history of mankind. West is responsible for the genocide of the peoples of entire continents.
I don't want to leave the EU because the trade, movement, information sharing, policing, security, are all of huge benefit, and I put that above all political arguments. But I've no love for the obsession of the likes of Juncker to persue expansion for its own sake, nor for an excess of laws that interfere with the individual character of a country. But Britain has been in a position to at least limit such things through our own government (rather than relying on our MEPs). Once we're out, we lose any say in the matter.
Huge benefit?
Not to the average Briton it isnt, all that snooping and policing sounds a bit Orwellian to be honest!
I could make it more interesting if I could be bothered to make a serious comment, on some of these things, but let's face it what's the point? It's already been tipping the verge of being a mudslinging match for days now.
Plus it's my day off work, and I say f**k Brexit and the EU and let's get drunk instead :D
I could make it more interesting if I could be bothered to make a serious comment, on some of these things, but let's face it what's the point? It's already been tipping the verge of being a mudslinging match for days now.
Plus it's my day off work, and I say f**k Brexit and the EU and let's get drunk instead :D
Yeah, but EU mud is better than "Brexit Leave" mud :))
! Standby alert !
“There are four lights!”
Step up to red alert. Sir, are you absolutely sure? It does mean changing the bulb!
Looking forward to summer in Somerset later in the year :)
Fighting "Propaganda" with even more "propaganda"? This is getting really interesting now!
Propaganda which is recognizable as propaganda is hardly interesting and at best annoying.
Mr. Junckers will next wednesday in EU meeting try to block any saying on country-level about the planned CETA agreement. Such news is only interesting when you know that in NL most probably preparations are made for a(nother, 3rd now) EU-related national referendum, exactly about this CETA (and TTIP) agreement and more specificly about the radical shifts that must be made in existing national laws.
I am really curious about the arguments that will be used.....
You know what? I want to give a robust defence of freedom of movement and EU enlargement, but it's not easy to give an uncritical, glowing endorsement because there are winners and losers.
Does it help businesses find workers? Absolutely.
Does it help people find jobs? Depends. Higher-skilled workers find more opportunities, lower-skilled workers feel more squeezed.
Does it help the poorer countries stabilise and grow? Yes (if the brain-drain effect isn't too bad).
Does it throw more difficulties on deprived communities? Oh yes.
Does it lead to a bigger market, overall, and (ultimately) pay for itself? Yes (in the long term).
Should the disadvantaged have to shoulder the problems created in the short term? No.
If you're struggling in Britain, France, Southern Europe or wherever, it's partially the fault of the EU but still mostly the fault of your domestic government.
There was a (small) Migration Impacts Fund, which was created to mitigate the pressure on communities, but it seems it was scrapped. By whom? Well, the same government that called the referendum! Fund scrapped. There was a petition to reinstate it, but it only received 27 signatures...
Maybe more could've been done to provide working-class opportunities for people to live and work abroad, to make sure that the benefits were spread out more. After all, some employment is de facto subsidised already in the UK, so why not pay for "cohesion"? If you want to build an "EU for all" then it should be for *all*.
Oh, well. It could've been made to work, but it's academic because we're going back to closed borders and WTO tariffs now!
Pinched quote:
WTO tariffs range from 32 per cent on wine, to 4.1 per cent on liquefied natural gas, with items like cars (9.8 per cent) and wheat products (12.8 per cent) somewhere in between.
'Polarised view of my fellow man' or not I still cant understand why lefties (loony or otherwise) support membership of the EU.
When did the left start supporting the globalist agenda?
And more importantly WHY?
The idea of a simple Left/Right political model is long dead, it's just much more complex than that. Given that in this country we've really only had Tory government since joining the EU (and I'm not forgetting Blair's Red Tories in that), the socialist policies we have seen have come as the result of EU policies from some of our more socialist neighbours.
You know what? I want to give a robust defence of freedom of movement and EU enlargement, but it's not easy to give an uncritical, glowing endorsement because there are winners and losers.
Does it help businesses find workers? Absolutely.
Does it help people find jobs? Depends. Higher-skilled workers find more opportunities, lower-skilled workers feel more squeezed.
Does it help the poorer countries stabilise and grow? Yes (if the brain-drain effect isn't too bad).
Does it throw more difficulties on deprived communities? Oh yes.
Does it lead to a bigger market, overall, and (ultimately) pay for itself? Yes (in the long term).
Should the disadvantaged have to shoulder the problems created in the short term? No.
If you're struggling in Britain, France, Southern Europe or wherever, it's partially the fault of the EU but still mostly the fault of your domestic government.
There was a (small) Migration Impacts Fund, which was created to mitigate the pressure on communities, but it seems it was scrapped. By whom? Well, the same government that called the referendum! Fund scrapped. There was a petition to reinstate it, but it only received 27 signatures...
Maybe more could've been done to provide working-class opportunities for people to live and work abroad, to make sure that the benefits were spread out more. After all, some employment is de facto subsidised already in the UK, so why not pay for "cohesion"? If you want to build an "EU for all" then it should be for *all*.
Oh, well. It could've been made to work, but it's academic because we're going back to closed borders and WTO tariffs now!
Pinched quote:
WTO tariffs range from 32 per cent on wine, to 4.1 per cent on liquefied natural gas, with items like cars (9.8 per cent) and wheat products (12.8 per cent) somewhere in between.
(Negotiated tariffs may differ).
I don't agree with everything that you have said, but before I voted, I weighed up the advantages and the disadvantages and decided on balance, that the advantages outweighed the disadvantages by a significant factor. So I voted to remain in the EU.
One thing that really annoys me, is that we (the UK, and for that matter, the rest of the EU) need to train and educate our population so that companies can tap into a well educated and trained work force and produce high quality products and services. There is no way we can compete with the developing world or China (whether in or out of the EU). When I talk about a well educated and trained work force, I am not just talking about university degrees, but also practical skills like mechanical engineering, electrical, electronic, all the building and similar trade skills.
However, although there have been some improvements, it's nowhere near good enough. Governments keep messing with the education system instead of properly funding it.
If more English, Welsh, Scottish and Irish citizens had better access to education (both for the young and for adults), they are likely to get better paid jobs, which means more tax income for the government. A win for everyone.
But alas, the current "in thing" in this country is low cost and "austerity". Yet, despite years of this, we are still in deficit and large amounts of our taxes pay to service the large debt.
Yes, we need to reduce this debt. But as I say, we need to invest in our people (and by that, I mean the legal population of the UK).
! Standby alert !
“There are four lights!”
Step up to red alert. Sir, are you absolutely sure? It does mean changing the bulb!
Looking forward to summer in Somerset later in the year :)
We have one of the best education systems in the world - and it's free. The problem is with lazy shits that can't be arsed to go and get educated or take up training afterwards because it's easier to sit around doing nothing and blaming foreigners for taking the jobs. I believe everyone is good at something - but look around your street - how many people are skilled?
We have one of the best education systems in the world - and it's free. The problem is with lazy shits that can't be arsed to go and get educated or take up training afterwards because it's easier to sit around doing nothing and blaming foreigners for taking the jobs. I believe everyone is good at something - but look around your street - how many people are skilled?
I take it you work in the UK teaching profession?
Why else would anyone heap praise on the crock of **** that is the British education system?
[
I think you may have completely missed the point. There are NO currency differences if there is ONLY ONE currency. With a such a system, there is no such thing as devaluation of the currency. As there is no other currency! The value of the currency will likely find a natural level, but it will be against gold etc, not against any currency, as it would be the only currency.
Mark
err, no; I think YOU have missed the point.
Economies work because there is a gradient in value (be it the value of labour, service etc.). Different currencies exist to allow the local economy to react dynamically to that gradient (just look at the ERM fiasco to see what happens when a country cannot react to the gradient in the best interests of the local economy).
[
I think you may have completely missed the point. There are NO currency differences if there is ONLY ONE currency. With a such a system, there is no such thing as devaluation of the currency. As there is no other currency! The value of the currency will likely find a natural level, but it will be against gold etc, not against any currency, as it would be the only currency.
Mark
err, no; I think YOU have missed the point.
Economies work because there is a gradient in value (be it the value of labour, service etc.). Different currencies exist to allow the local economy to react dynamically to that gradient (just look at the ERM fiasco to see what happens when a country cannot react to the gradient in the best interests of the local economy).
Hmm, maybe you would like to explain that to the people of Russia, the USA and China, all of which are large countries with both rich areas and poor areas, and all of which have a single currency in their respective countries.
Also read some history of how various countries (some richer and some poorer than the UK) used the same currency as the UK.
How economies work is very complex. Mostly, economies relate to trading goods and services. Different currencies exist for historical reasons, because the people in power see their countries currency as a symbol of that power, and because ordinary people feel patriotic and familiar with the currency they have known their whole life. And when it comes to currency, people in general don't like change.
The ERM is and was not a currency and being a poor "half-way house" was always going to be at risk of failing if currency speculators decided they could make money out of it.
And we are seeing in real life, in practice, what happens when a country and it's currency become to be perceived as more risky, as the exchange rate between Sterling and the US Dollar and between Sterling and the Euro gets worse as Sterling looses value. So although UK companies that export can more easily sell abroad, all our imports will become more expensive if the exchange rates stay at their current poor levels (or get worse). And we are a net importer. We buy more than we sell. As shown by our trade deficit. Yet, our real economy has not changed since before the referendum (at least, not yet).
! Standby alert !
“There are four lights!”
Step up to red alert. Sir, are you absolutely sure? It does mean changing the bulb!
Looking forward to summer in Somerset later in the year :)
I don't see why you have to defend free movement AND European expansion. I'd suggest it's European expansion that turns free movement into a controversial issue. Free movement is a lot more palatable when it's amongst countries on a similar economic level.
Hmm, maybe you would like to explain that to the people of Russia, the USA and China, all of which are large countries with both rich areas and poor areas, and all of which have a single currency in their respective countries.
[/quote]
These are nation states.
Nation states are the largest cultural identity with a common economic purpose.
Nation states can develop national economic policies which sit on top of local policies for the benefit of the state as a whole.
Comments
When did the left start supporting the globalist agenda?
And more importantly WHY?
And now instead of negotiating with the UK over what has happened, he wants to play a game of chicken to see if he can punish us for daring to leave.
I don't want to leave the EU because the trade, movement, information sharing, policing, security, are all of huge benefit, and I put that above all political arguments. But I've no love for the obsession of the likes of Juncker to persue expansion for its own sake, nor for an excess of laws that interfere with the individual character of a country. But Britain has been in a position to at least limit such things through our own government (rather than relying on our MEPs). Once we're out, we lose any say in the matter.
- IONIAN-GAMES.com -
:) You are guided by stereotypes of Western propaganda. On the territory of Russia is home to over 190 nationalities, while a large part is the indigenous nationalities that always lived in this territory. To the West they are all - Russian. Russia could not exist if nationalism it was not outside the law. Over the millennia of living together on one territory ideology of the peoples of Russia was the internationalism. Internationalism is the state ideology of Russia. Propaganda of nationalism in Russia is a criminal offense. Nationalism is a Western ideology based on the concept of "divide and conquer". Russia has always resisted this ideology and this concept, and will resist them to their complete destruction. This is the true reason for the antagonism between the West and Russia.
It's just a bunch of idiots infected by Western ideology. Unfortunately they can't be prosecuted for their beliefs, otherwise we would have had to officially recognize the entire Western world is criminal.
- IONIAN-GAMES.com -
Russian conquered most of the territory of the planet Earth due to the ideology of internationalism, uniting all Nations together. The West, in accordance with the ideology of "divide and conquer", seized the territory by destroying the indigenous population. Western ideology is the most criminal ideology in the history of mankind. West is responsible for the genocide of the peoples of entire continents.
Huge benefit?
Not to the average Briton it isnt, all that snooping and policing sounds a bit Orwellian to be honest!
:))
:p
Nah you're probably right actually....
I could make it more interesting if I could be bothered to make a serious comment, on some of these things, but let's face it what's the point? It's already been tipping the verge of being a mudslinging match for days now.
Plus it's my day off work, and I say f**k Brexit and the EU and let's get drunk instead :D
Repair Guides. Spanish Hardware site.
WoS - can't download? Info here...
former Meulie Spectrum Archive but no longer available :-(
Spectranet: the TNFS directory thread
! Standby alert !
“There are four lights!”
Step up to red alert. Sir, are you absolutely sure? It does mean changing the bulb!
Looking forward to summer in Somerset later in the year :)
Of course, whatever you don't like about your own government's agenda can always be blamed on the EU.
- IONIAN-GAMES.com -
Mr. Junckers will next wednesday in EU meeting try to block any saying on country-level about the planned CETA agreement. Such news is only interesting when you know that in NL most probably preparations are made for a(nother, 3rd now) EU-related national referendum, exactly about this CETA (and TTIP) agreement and more specificly about the radical shifts that must be made in existing national laws.
I am really curious about the arguments that will be used.....
Does it help businesses find workers? Absolutely.
Does it help people find jobs? Depends. Higher-skilled workers find more opportunities, lower-skilled workers feel more squeezed.
Does it help the poorer countries stabilise and grow? Yes (if the brain-drain effect isn't too bad).
Does it throw more difficulties on deprived communities? Oh yes.
Does it lead to a bigger market, overall, and (ultimately) pay for itself? Yes (in the long term).
Should the disadvantaged have to shoulder the problems created in the short term? No.
If you're struggling in Britain, France, Southern Europe or wherever, it's partially the fault of the EU but still mostly the fault of your domestic government.
There was a (small) Migration Impacts Fund, which was created to mitigate the pressure on communities, but it seems it was scrapped. By whom? Well, the same government that called the referendum! Fund scrapped. There was a petition to reinstate it, but it only received 27 signatures...
Maybe more could've been done to provide working-class opportunities for people to live and work abroad, to make sure that the benefits were spread out more. After all, some employment is de facto subsidised already in the UK, so why not pay for "cohesion"? If you want to build an "EU for all" then it should be for *all*.
Oh, well. It could've been made to work, but it's academic because we're going back to closed borders and WTO tariffs now!
Pinched quote: (Negotiated tariffs may differ).
One thing that really annoys me, is that we (the UK, and for that matter, the rest of the EU) need to train and educate our population so that companies can tap into a well educated and trained work force and produce high quality products and services. There is no way we can compete with the developing world or China (whether in or out of the EU). When I talk about a well educated and trained work force, I am not just talking about university degrees, but also practical skills like mechanical engineering, electrical, electronic, all the building and similar trade skills.
However, although there have been some improvements, it's nowhere near good enough. Governments keep messing with the education system instead of properly funding it.
If more English, Welsh, Scottish and Irish citizens had better access to education (both for the young and for adults), they are likely to get better paid jobs, which means more tax income for the government. A win for everyone.
But alas, the current "in thing" in this country is low cost and "austerity". Yet, despite years of this, we are still in deficit and large amounts of our taxes pay to service the large debt.
Yes, we need to reduce this debt. But as I say, we need to invest in our people (and by that, I mean the legal population of the UK).
Mark
Repair Guides. Spanish Hardware site.
WoS - can't download? Info here...
former Meulie Spectrum Archive but no longer available :-(
Spectranet: the TNFS directory thread
! Standby alert !
“There are four lights!”
Step up to red alert. Sir, are you absolutely sure? It does mean changing the bulb!
Looking forward to summer in Somerset later in the year :)
I take it you work in the UK teaching profession?
Why else would anyone heap praise on the crock of **** that is the British education system?
Economies work because there is a gradient in value (be it the value of labour, service etc.). Different currencies exist to allow the local economy to react dynamically to that gradient (just look at the ERM fiasco to see what happens when a country cannot react to the gradient in the best interests of the local economy).
Also read some history of how various countries (some richer and some poorer than the UK) used the same currency as the UK.
How economies work is very complex. Mostly, economies relate to trading goods and services. Different currencies exist for historical reasons, because the people in power see their countries currency as a symbol of that power, and because ordinary people feel patriotic and familiar with the currency they have known their whole life. And when it comes to currency, people in general don't like change.
The ERM is and was not a currency and being a poor "half-way house" was always going to be at risk of failing if currency speculators decided they could make money out of it.
And we are seeing in real life, in practice, what happens when a country and it's currency become to be perceived as more risky, as the exchange rate between Sterling and the US Dollar and between Sterling and the Euro gets worse as Sterling looses value. So although UK companies that export can more easily sell abroad, all our imports will become more expensive if the exchange rates stay at their current poor levels (or get worse). And we are a net importer. We buy more than we sell. As shown by our trade deficit. Yet, our real economy has not changed since before the referendum (at least, not yet).
Mark
Repair Guides. Spanish Hardware site.
WoS - can't download? Info here...
former Meulie Spectrum Archive but no longer available :-(
Spectranet: the TNFS directory thread
! Standby alert !
“There are four lights!”
Step up to red alert. Sir, are you absolutely sure? It does mean changing the bulb!
Looking forward to summer in Somerset later in the year :)
- IONIAN-GAMES.com -
[/quote]
These are nation states.
Nation states are the largest cultural identity with a common economic purpose.
Nation states can develop national economic policies which sit on top of local policies for the benefit of the state as a whole.