![]() |
Re: Britain outside the EU
Quote:
1. Some might argue that given that a proportionate number of elected decision makers and appointed Brussels civil servants were British, we weren't governed by a foreign entity. 2. How did that technical gain in sovereignty actually translate into having more control over the destiny of the country? For example. did that mean that we could get better trade deals than we did through the EU? I know it's early days, and Moggy's 50 years aren't up yet, but have Mr and Mrs Soap seen positive outcomes from this increase in sovereignty? 3. Did we need to leave the EU for an investment wizard to make the country prosperous? After all, up until the global crash of 2008, it could be argued that the outcomes of Labour's investment in people and things were improved by access to the Single Market and other EU institutions.. |
Re: Britain outside the EU
[QUOTE=roughbeast;36165783]
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Britain outside the EU
Quote:
|
Re: Britain outside the EU
Quote:
I think the current approach by Leavers is either to kick the tin can down the alley ("we need to wait 40 years to see the fruits of Brexit", "we just need another prime minister, the previous four couldn't make Brexit work so we'll try the same thing again and hope for different results") or to focus on sovereignty and forget the financial promises. |
Re: Britain outside the EU
Quote:
|
Re: Britain outside the EU
Quote:
Surgically extracting a 40+ year old economic nervous system was always going to be a lose-lose situation. Always. Now here's the rub, those zealots who voted Brexit based on their perception of sovereignty, will never address the lies told at the time to get their project over the line. They still won't. The damage to the country in so many ways will never be honestly discussed and here lies the real problem. What is less than obvious is the technical gain in sovereignty much celebrated is actually a danger of sorts. While we were part of the EU, as a rules-based organisation, we had checks & balances in place that curbed the excesses of member state governments. We had to abide by environment controls & standards, we had common standards on all sorts of things: food ingredients, etc. Now, we have no such controls and as such, our Government can take us in a direction far beyond what would have been tolerated when in the EU. Elect a right wing, populous, Government and we're on a crazy train to being a 1st world banana republic. You could argue we on that train already. In summary, it was all a big con. The sovereignty pot of gold at the end of the rainbow turned out to be, as it always was going to do, a handful of dried beans sold to you by a pack of non-dom spivs. The only funny part of all this is that many of those who voted Leave in the hope that we would have fewer immigrants, now have so many more and here's the kicker, they are not the colour they may have wished for :) The inexorable tide of demographics will lead us back into the EU, probably via incremental steps e.g. EFTA first, in approx. 10 years. |
Re: Britain outside the EU
[QUOTE=Sephiroth;36165784]
Quote:
2. My statement was a very simple one regardless of my status as a Leaver or Remainer. (Remoaner is a pejorative term, designed to keep the debate at an 'us and them' level.) We did very well in the EU when we had a government committed to investment In trading, science and technology terms, our membership supported that prosperity. What evidence do you have that a similar government now would do as well as New labour? 3. The ECJ only applied to areas of law we agreed to as a sovereign state, i.e. those areas that were of common interest such as the environment, health and safety, fish, product standards, worker and human rights. The latter was required because of free movement. All other areas of law, the large majority, were nothing to do with the EU. Our courts remained supreme over those because we were a sovereign state. Again, the EU had no collective interest in moving ever closer. A few notable individuals and a couple of countries did, but most of the 500 million population and the 27 countries did not wish it. |
Re: Britain outside the EU
Excuse my fat fingers on my phone. The first sentence should read "... is irrelevant to the point being made about EU rules being made by us..."
|
Re: Britain outside the EU
Quote:
Quote:
On the bit that I've highlighted, we weren't so 'DNA inter-twined' as to have joined the Euro. The Euro got itself into serious trouble and individual countries were then at the mercy of Germany (again). We avoided all that. I still believe that the Euro is the EU's Achilles heel. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
You then bring racial prejudice (highlighted) into this. That's a foul low blow. This immigration row is entirely political points scoring and very shallow. I've not seen a proper labour requirements analysis that we could debate. It's all headline stuff playing to the electoral roll. Quote:
|
Re: Britain outside the EU
Quote:
---------- Post added at 22:05 ---------- Previous post was at 20:59 ---------- Quote:
2. In 1975 I voted against staying in the EEC because it was just a capitalist club. With the introduction of the Social Chapter and other measures forcing capitalism to show its acceptable face, I warmed to the project. I was particularly impressed at how the Commission was used to overcome the natural democratic deficit that comes with size. Again, because the EU is a democracy, France didn't get to bully its way and states didn't vote to remove the veto on anything that mattered. France had to concede that it would have to do without the CAP over time. 3. We were intertwined with the EU right down to the minutia, but because of political opposition Brown had to fake the argument that our economy wasn't congruent with the Eurozone economy yet. Blair was for joining. The only country to fall foul of the rigour required to be in the Eurozone was Greece. Greece had faked its economic data to make it appear ready to join. Blame Greece not the EU. 4. We may have gained technical sovereignty in some respects, but we have lost control and influence in many ways. 5. In good times, before the UK political pendulum began to swing to the right, we helped create, and often initiated, EU law regarding environment, product standards, worker rights and human rights. We still are arbitted by the ECJ regarding products for the reasons you gave. That is the price of tariff-free trade with economic blocs. However, because we aren't signed up to a customs union we have to have our goods checked. Regarding worker and human rights and the environment we are already eroding those standards. Also, Whitehall has been asked to systematically go through all EU laws that Parliament adopted to winkle out which bits The Tories don't want. 6. Again you insult someone. Why accuse someone for being "dafter" than you thought, just because their take on red wall voter motives is different than yours. Adult debate, requires adult conduct. In my view the red wall voted Leave out of frustration that their lives had become blighted since 2010 with the effects of dogma-driven austerity. The genius of Farage, Cummings and Tice was that they successful spun that our woes were due to the EU and particularly immigration from the EU. EU workers were blamed for longer waiting times in the NHS and for lack of school places. The real immorality here was that even though EU workers paid their way and increased our GDP the extra revenue was not put into extra hospitals or school places or into towns with high EU immigration like Boston. Austerity dogma won! Farage also successfully linked the arrival of asylum seekers and refugees with the EU through his disgraceful Breaking Point poster. The good thing is that red wall voters have seen the flow of asylum seekers increase since we left the EU, legal immigration soar and their lives have get worse, albeit all for multiple reasons, not just because we left the EU. How did The Who put it? "We won't get fooled again!" Red Wall voters won't be voting for those who deceived them again. 7. We might agree about your last point. A shallow game is being played by the political combatants with inhumane, surface-scratching, headline gestures such as Rwanda, detention barges and stopping worker's families coming with them. Starmer is as shallow as any, with no real policies to increase our skills set to combat excessive immigration and no attempt to stop the boats by opening up controlled safe routes for everyday asylum seekers. A year ago, he made that suggestion, but buried it again when red wall voters appeared not to like it. |
Re: Britain outside the EU
Quote:
Priceless! On the rest of your post, I would simply say this: 1. I was addressing Ian, not you. 2. Ian presents his case in a less logical manner than you. So I debate with you accordingly. |
Re: Britain outside the EU
Quote:
|
Re: Britain outside the EU
Quote:
Your replies are too patronising to engage with. Adult problems require adult discussion and I see nothing of that here. |
Re: Britain outside the EU
How it started in 2017
Quote:
Six years later Quote:
|
Re: Britain outside the EU
1 Attachment(s)
And yet Uk banks and City Financial institutions report our income to USA and EU. Brexit changed nothing.
I was told it has nothing to do with data protection, there are agreements to share such info between EU and USA (UK has signed while in EU) So, I got new Chinese bank accounts. I received my new Beijing card today. It can be linked with multiple accounts in US dollar, HK dollar, Euro, pound sterling and renminbi. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 14:04. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum