[Cyberyeti]

fromageGB, on 2019-March-26, 13:16, said:

I believe there are some very well educated and well informed remainers, as well.

Yes but even they seem to portray all Brexiteers as racist morons, and while most racist morons are Brexiteers, they're a small fraction of Brexiteers.

[cherdano]

Cyberyeti, on 2019-March-23, 04:55, said:

It should but the EU won't allow it because integral to the single market are things like freedom of movement which many Brits don't want (actually for a variety of reasons, many see no reason why Eastern Europeans are favoured over South Asians with whom a sizable number of people here have ties) and also our courts being overruled by the European ones.

Ok, if you want to be as close to being in the single market without being forced to give up on your xenophobia towards Eastern Europeans, why not a customs union? The backstop is to large extent a customs union; so the May government succeeded in obtaining one without consenting to free movement.

[Cyberyeti]

cherdano, on 2019-March-26, 14:55, said:

Ok, if you want to be as close to being in the single market without being forced to give up on your xenophobia towards Eastern Europeans, why not a customs union? The backstop is to large extent a customs union; so the May government succeeded in obtaining one without consenting to free movement.

Can't negociate our own trade deals if we have a customs union so negates many of the benefits of Brexit, this was one of the key things most Brexiteers wanted.

[cherdano]

Cyberyeti, on 2019-March-26, 15:11, said:

Can't negociate our own trade deals if we have a customs union so negates many of the benefits of Brexit, this was one of the key things most Brexiteers wanted.

Oh ok, so the UK *did* change its mind about wanting to be in the common market then? (Customs union makes it necessary to jointly negotiate trade deals, pretty much by definition.)

[Cyberyeti]

cherdano, on 2019-March-26, 15:29, said:

Oh ok, so the UK *did* change its mind about wanting to be in the common market then? (Customs union makes it necessary to jointly negotiate trade deals, pretty much by definition.)

I think if there had not been the prospect of ever closer political union and it had only EVER been a common market, we would still want to be in it. The other problem is that over the years the EU appears to have got ever more protectionist, particularly on things like oranges/orange juice to protect the Spanish against African imports. I believe OJ got an increase from 3.2% to 16% relatively recently (2016?) meaning we have to pay more.

[fromageGB]

One of the problems with a common market is that it needs to serve its members' interests, and that means the size should be limited to an area of similar countries. When UK joined the Common Market, it was West Germany, France, Italy, and Benelux that we joined, France formerly not wanting us in. Ireland and Denmark came in at the same time, and you could say it was pretty homogeneous. By the time it gets Portugal, Spain, and Greece, and then seemingly the whole of Europe, it could be argued that it is too big for purpose, and each country's objectives and needs are too dissimilar to be served by the same customs arrangements. If it was purely a common tariff area right now, without any political overtones, I would probably still prefer to make separate arrangements.

However, I admit that for me this is not the main purpose of Brexit, but being able to make sovereign laws is. A number of times decisions made in our highest court and parliament have been overruled by Europe, and this is while trying to keep within those constraints, and following our laws which are largely created by the EU. However, the last few years has caused me to lose much faith in our country's management ability, and I was hoping independence would bring about a revival.

[fromageGB]

fromageGB, on 2019-March-17, 10:51, said:

Now that Raab has thrown his hat in the ring, I hope he gets the leadership if and when May gives up.

Nope. Rescinded. Having already voted twice against the botched May deal as being "worse than staying in", he on the third time of asking the same thing has voted for it. There's integrity for you.

[Winstonm]

fromageGB, on 2019-March-27, 08:57, said:

One of the problems with a common market is that it needs to serve its members' interests, and that means the size should be limited to an area of similar countries. When UK joined the Common Market, it was West Germany, France, Italy, and Benelux that we joined, France formerly not wanting us in. Ireland and Denmark came in at the same time, and you could say it was pretty homogeneous. By the time it gets Portugal, Spain, and Greece, and then seemingly the whole of Europe, it could be argued that it is too big for purpose, and each country's objectives and needs are too dissimilar to be served by the same customs arrangements. If it was purely a common tariff area right now, without any political overtones, I would probably still prefer to make separate arrangements.

However, I admit that for me this is not the main purpose of Brexit, but being able to make sovereign laws is. A number of times decisions made in our highest court and parliament have been overruled by Europe, and this is while trying to keep within those constraints, and following our laws which are largely created by the EU. However, the last few years has caused me to lose much faith in our country's management ability, and I was hoping independence would bring about a revival.

A question from an interested but ignorant third party, if you please. I don't understand the place of the EU judicial body. Does that judiciary rule on whether or not a country's law is in accord with the values expressed by the EU?

If so, what parts of the EU charter are distasteful? Reading them, they seem fine.

[Cyberyeti]

Winstonm, on 2019-March-29, 14:42, said:

A question from an interested but ignorant third party, if you please. I don't understand the place of the EU judicial body. Does that judiciary rule on whether or not a country's law is in accord with the values expressed by the EU?

If so, what parts of the EU charter are distasteful? Reading them, they seem fine.

You can appeal a decision of the nation's highest court to the European court, and some of the judgments it comes up with are extremely odd

[Cyberyeti]

fromageGB, on 2019-March-29, 13:40, said:

Nope. Rescinded. Having already voted twice against the botched May deal as being "worse than staying in", he on the third time of asking the same thing has voted for it. There's integrity for you.

I think he decided that Brexit wasn't going to happen without him switching, and "worse than staying in" changed when it became apparent May would be stepping down and they could have a Brexiteer negociating from here.

I don't often agree with Yanis Varoufakis, but his withering takedown of what May did in negociations was spot on. Shame she didn't listen to him at the start of the process when he correctly explained exactly what the EU would do.

[thepossum]

It's a bit hard for anyone to blame May for anything. She is trying to do the impossible.

Blame the incompetence of Cameron who failed to put in place a sensible referendum process, self interested and xenophobic lies by the brexiteers such as Johnson Rees-Mogg and Farage , apathy by Corbyn and Labour, apathy by young voters who did not believe that older voters would sell them out, lack of concern for the well being of Ireland and Scotland. It was a total failure of leadership and democracy, an outcome the majority did not want. May is trying to do the impossible.

Having said that, while I hope Brexit does not happen, the EU has become a bloated expensive bureaucracy of fat cat bureaucrats imposing their will on sovereign member states and economies. It needs serious reform. It causes massive damage on member states economies and cultures despite the good things that come out of greater economic and political cooperation.

[Cyberyeti]

thepossum, on 2019-March-30, 03:17, said:

It's a bit hard for anyone to blame May for anything. She is trying to do the impossible.

Blame the incompetence of Cameron who failed to put in place a sensible referendum process, self interested and xenophobic lies by the brexiteers such as Johnson Rees-Mogg and Farage , apathy by Corbyn and Labour, apathy by young voters who did not believe that older voters would sell them out, lack of concern for the well being of Ireland and Scotland. It was a total failure of leadership and democracy, an outcome the majority did not want. May is trying to do the impossible.

Having said that, while I hope Brexit does not happen, the EU has become a bloated expensive bureaucracy of fat cat bureaucrats imposing their will on sovereign member states and economies. It needs serious reform. It causes massive damage on member states economies and cultures despite the good things that come out of greater economic and political cooperation.

It's very easy to blame May, she blew the negociations in the first few weeks by:

Listening only to her coterie of remainer yes-men
Giving away ANY leverage we had way too early
Allowing the EU to get away with giving basically nothing

Varoufakis told her what the EU would do before they did it and she didn't listen to him or anybody else.

Cameron's real crime was not thinking remain could possibly lose so he screwed up the consequences of it doing so. Corbyn has always been anti-EU but is leading a remainer party so has serious problems on this.

[thepossum]

Whatever it is Cyberyeti, maybe we can all agree it has been 3 years of failed leadership and demo cratic process by Westminster to look after the well being and interests of all the people in different parts of the UK

May has been the one in the hot seat and is still the best bet of getting parliament to stand up, show some leadership and act in the interests of the people. Nobody else has helped. Corbyn just plays party politics. The extremist Brexiteers just care about themselves. It's been three years and still Westminster can't get its act together

[Winstonm]

From outside the situation, it appears (at least to me) that the basis of Brexit support lies in immigration complaints - is that part of freedom of movement in the EU?

[Cyberyeti]

Winstonm, on 2019-March-30, 12:35, said:

From outside the situation, it appears (at least to me) that the basis of Brexit support lies in immigration complaints - is that part of freedom of movement in the EU?

No, nothing to do with it.

Britain has its own reasons which I outlined upthread.

Immigration is fairly minor although does register.

The total lack of enthusiasm for political union is in many ways much more important, and discontent with the way that the politicians are out of touch with the people. Remember we fought for 6 years to avoid political union with Germany, some people have long inherited memories.

[fromageGB]

thepossum, on 2019-March-30, 05:15, said:

May has been the one in the hot seat and is still the best bet of getting parliament to stand up, show some leadership and act in the interests of the people. Nobody else has helped. Corbyn just plays party politics.

Of course she is, it is the prime minister in this country that makes decisions, and is almost as important as John Bercow (joke). She can make MPs stand up, but what she does is entirely what she wants to do (rumour is that vote number 4 for the same plan nobody agrees with is coming early next week) and is not in accordance with party policy, nor in accordance with the manifesto, nor in accordance with the referendum result, which means that she does not command respect. So leadership by definition, but not in the interests of the people.

Corbyn has the job of opposition leader, and regardless of manifesto pledges (you are permitted to drop those if you are not elected) his prime purpose in life is to oppose the government and bring it down. I hope he succeeds, rapidly.

Edit : After a successful vote of no confidence, Theresa May has 14 days to regain "the confidence of the house" and there is no limit to the number of times she can ask for a new vote on the same motion. I reckon that's 28 votes then.

[shyams]

A discussion at the Dail Eireann (Republic of Ireland parliament) today

https://youtu.be/bBntpqVqqQo

[helene_t]

thepossum, on 2019-March-30, 03:17, said:

Having said that, while I hope Brexit does not happen, the EU has become a bloated expensive bureaucracy of fat cat bureaucrats imposing their will on sovereign member states and economies. It needs serious reform. It causes massive damage on member states economies and cultures despite the good things that come out of greater economic and political cooperation.

While I would agree somewhat about the fat cats (the EP in particular is way too expensive), I am curious what you mean by imposing their will and causing massive damage. As I see it, the EU just does what the member states agree on.

Maybe I am biased because most of the things that come out of Brussels is something I happen to agree with (stricter environmental regulations, consumer protection, human rights, harmonization of industry standards).

[Cyberyeti]

helene_t, on 2019-April-02, 16:09, said:

While I would agree somewhat about the fat cats (the EP in particular is way too expensive), I am curious what you mean by imposing their will and causing massive damage. As I see it, the EU just does what the member states agree on.

Maybe I am biased because most of the things that come out of Brussels is something I happen to agree with (stricter environmental regulations, consumer protection, human rights, harmonization of industry standards).

The EU absolutely does NOT do what the member states want. Tusk would not be in his job if they did (his own country Poland said under no circumstances to elect him). Fishing and agricultural policies also caused massive damage.

There's also the fiasco of countries being allowed to join the Euro when they were nowhere close to meeting the criteria because the greater Europe project can't be allowed to be derailed by inconvenient facts.

[thepossum]

helene_t, on 2019-April-02, 16:09, said:

While I would agree somewhat about the fat cats (the EP in particular is way too expensive), I am curious what you mean by imposing their will and causing massive damage. As I see it, the EU just does what the member states agree on.

Maybe I am biased because most of the things that come out of Brussels is something I happen to agree with (stricter environmental regulations, consumer protection, human rights, harmonization of industry standards).

Its hard for me to discuss all the pros and cons I see with the EU and how it has changed. It would take pages but here a few thoughts....

The Eurozone economic system is dominated by a few big economies and has stood in the way of many countries managing their own economies to take account of their specific issues.

There are many good areas of cooperation between EU countries in terms research, environment, human rights, trade etc. However much of the bureaucracy is unnecessary and expensive.

I think ideally it should be reformed and trimmed. Also, anyone who knows about the EU knows about the level of wealth and luxury the bureaucrats have, all paid by poor workers and businesses in member countries.


The biggest danger I see is that the extreme leave debate has been hijacked by fascism and Tory self-interest rather than the interests of the people. But many people in the UK (and other countries) totally missed out on the benefits. Certain regions and classes benefit much more and the ordinary worker and many businesses do not see the positive aspects.


I hoped the UK remained in EU but I understand why people wanted to leave. I think a loser union with smaller central bureaucracy and control would be good

PS Is an expensive European parliament really necessary. What do they actually do except live it up on their big salaries and banquets every night