|
In order to ensure that this thread meets TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we ask that everyone please adhere to this mod note. Posts containing only Tweets or articles adds nothing to the discussions. Therefore, when providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments will be actioned upon. All in all, please continue to enjoy posting in TL General and partake in discussions as much as you want! But please be respectful when posting or replying to someone. There is a clear difference between constructive criticism/discussion and just plain being rude and insulting. https://www.registertovote.service.gov.uk |
On June 24 2016 22:27 Diabolique wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2016 22:15 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
So was there any truth to what Nigel Farage said that there are polls in Sweden, Denmark, and The Netherlands that majority of people want a referendum to leave the EU? We just had an opinion poll last week in the biggest Czech newspaper that the supporters of CZEXIT would win 53% : 47%. We want to be part of the EU, but definitely not the part of this dictatorship buerocratic machine ... 100.000 people voted (in a nation of something like 6-7 millions people, who can vote).
Czech wants out?
That I can not understand at all,they are one of the most succesfull new members coming from the former east block. The eu has been doing quiet well for them,why would they want to go out?'
" dictatorship buerocratic machine "
This is just becoming like a meme now. Blame everything bad on Europe beaurocrats.
Sure they are to blame for a lot but they also achieved a lot of good things.
|
On June 24 2016 22:32 DickMcFanny wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2016 21:58 Nebuchad wrote:On June 24 2016 21:15 DickMcFanny wrote:On June 24 2016 20:57 OtherWorld wrote:
So 40% or 25% = 100%, and that proves that all Muslims are heinous and evil? Geez, I guess with that kind of reasoning you can also claim that every single voter of a anti-european party is a racist who fantasizes about whipping migrants at night.
Yeah, I'm tired of this shit. Nobody has ever said "all" of them are heinous and evil. Nobody even used the word 'evil'. It's the same discussion every time, it's like talking to a wall. You get the same discussion because you're furthering the same points. Please consider the casual difference between saying something like "I have concerns about radical islam, but I don't want to paint "all" of them as heinous and evil. Which is why I question how we keep considering Saudi Arabia as our great ally and let it spread wahabism everywhere." and something like "I have concerns about radical islam, but I don't want to paint "all" of them as heinous and evil. Which is why I don't want to accept refugees." Notice how one targets radical islam, and one targets muslims. Notice how you're always here to support the second. Understand why the wall is met. My point precisely. From 'our' point of view, the term 'radical Islam' is a tautology. Mainstream Islam, not ISIS, not Al Qaeda, not Wahhabism, would be considered off-the-spectrum-far-right and radical by any measure if it didn't have the privilege of being a minority religion and thus being above critical inspection. The notion that people who were indoctrinated by this cancerous ideology from a very young age would just leave it at the door isn't just absurd, it's demonstrably wrong.
In that case I don't understand why you react negatively when you're accused of targeting all of them. That's clearly what you're doing.
|
On June 24 2016 22:05 phantomlancer23 wrote:
I m so happy for brexit.Congratulations to british people they did the smart move for their country despite the threats and terror by the european mafia, i m so jealous of them i want grexit right NOW.I want to see EU burnt to the ground i hope french people follow in this path.
I remember when I visited Greece 15 years, ago, a lot of unfinished houses to not pay taxes (basicly, instead of a roof they had the beginning of a next floort but never planning on finishing it to avoid taxes) and we were told w had the choice to have a receipt or not when shopping, no taxes without receipt so way cheaper. I'm sure people agreeing on massive tax frauds has nothing to do with the Greek debt, it's EU's fault.
Let's remember that not so long ago Europe was plagued by wars. Also don't forget that EU did a lot to accelerate the economical growth of a lot of small European countries. It sure has a lot of flaws but some people seem to forget all the good thing it provides.
|
Northern Ireland22212 Posts
On June 24 2016 22:36 RvB wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2016 21:58 Plansix wrote:On June 24 2016 21:06 Sent. wrote:
I hope the EU wont react with needless hostility. "You're with us or against us" attitude will only encourage more euroscepticism. That doesn’t seem to be the tone I am hearing in the news this morning. Mostly just sad that it is happening an concern that millions of British citizens that live abroad in the EU. There was on commentator from Spain that said there is a very real chance they will lose their healthcare and pensions will be frozen while they work out the cost of living adjustment. I wasn’t 100% sure what that entailed exactly. And UK business people that were talking about their EU employees that might not be able to work for them any more. But its clear it is going to be very rough 2 years for some folks. Were British citizens living in another country allowed to vote? It seems ridiculous if they weren't allowed to vote over something that completly changes your life.
expats who havent lived in britain for over 15 years were not eligible to vote
there was a supreme court challenge over the ruling but it was rejected
|
So France has apparently overtaken the UK in economic size as a result of the UK burning to the ground financially.
|
On June 24 2016 22:39 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2016 22:32 DickMcFanny wrote:On June 24 2016 21:58 Nebuchad wrote:On June 24 2016 21:15 DickMcFanny wrote:On June 24 2016 20:57 OtherWorld wrote:
So 40% or 25% = 100%, and that proves that all Muslims are heinous and evil? Geez, I guess with that kind of reasoning you can also claim that every single voter of a anti-european party is a racist who fantasizes about whipping migrants at night.
Yeah, I'm tired of this shit. Nobody has ever said "all" of them are heinous and evil. Nobody even used the word 'evil'. It's the same discussion every time, it's like talking to a wall. You get the same discussion because you're furthering the same points. Please consider the casual difference between saying something like "I have concerns about radical islam, but I don't want to paint "all" of them as heinous and evil. Which is why I question how we keep considering Saudi Arabia as our great ally and let it spread wahabism everywhere." and something like "I have concerns about radical islam, but I don't want to paint "all" of them as heinous and evil. Which is why I don't want to accept refugees." Notice how one targets radical islam, and one targets muslims. Notice how you're always here to support the second. Understand why the wall is met. My point precisely. From 'our' point of view, the term 'radical Islam' is a tautology. Mainstream Islam, not ISIS, not Al Qaeda, not Wahhabism, would be considered off-the-spectrum-far-right and radical by any measure if it didn't have the privilege of being a minority religion and thus being above critical inspection. The notion that people who were indoctrinated by this cancerous ideology from a very young age would just leave it at the door isn't just absurd, it's demonstrably wrong. In that case I don't understand why you react negatively when you're accused of targeting all of them. That's clearly what you're doing.
Because you can criticize an ideology or idea without being racist towards those who were indoctrinated by it.
|
United Kingdom10823 Posts
On June 24 2016 22:44 DickMcFanny wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2016 22:39 Nebuchad wrote:On June 24 2016 22:32 DickMcFanny wrote:On June 24 2016 21:58 Nebuchad wrote:On June 24 2016 21:15 DickMcFanny wrote:On June 24 2016 20:57 OtherWorld wrote:
So 40% or 25% = 100%, and that proves that all Muslims are heinous and evil? Geez, I guess with that kind of reasoning you can also claim that every single voter of a anti-european party is a racist who fantasizes about whipping migrants at night.
Yeah, I'm tired of this shit. Nobody has ever said "all" of them are heinous and evil. Nobody even used the word 'evil'. It's the same discussion every time, it's like talking to a wall. You get the same discussion because you're furthering the same points. Please consider the casual difference between saying something like "I have concerns about radical islam, but I don't want to paint "all" of them as heinous and evil. Which is why I question how we keep considering Saudi Arabia as our great ally and let it spread wahabism everywhere." and something like "I have concerns about radical islam, but I don't want to paint "all" of them as heinous and evil. Which is why I don't want to accept refugees." Notice how one targets radical islam, and one targets muslims. Notice how you're always here to support the second. Understand why the wall is met. My point precisely. From 'our' point of view, the term 'radical Islam' is a tautology. Mainstream Islam, not ISIS, not Al Qaeda, not Wahhabism, would be considered off-the-spectrum-far-right and radical by any measure if it didn't have the privilege of being a minority religion and thus being above critical inspection. The notion that people who were indoctrinated by this cancerous ideology from a very young age would just leave it at the door isn't just absurd, it's demonstrably wrong. In that case I don't understand why you react negatively when you're accused of targeting all of them. That's clearly what you're doing. Because you can criticize an ideology or idea without being racist towards those who were indoctrinated by it.
Well you've convinced me....
|
On June 24 2016 22:44 DickMcFanny wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2016 22:39 Nebuchad wrote:On June 24 2016 22:32 DickMcFanny wrote:On June 24 2016 21:58 Nebuchad wrote:On June 24 2016 21:15 DickMcFanny wrote:On June 24 2016 20:57 OtherWorld wrote:
So 40% or 25% = 100%, and that proves that all Muslims are heinous and evil? Geez, I guess with that kind of reasoning you can also claim that every single voter of a anti-european party is a racist who fantasizes about whipping migrants at night.
Yeah, I'm tired of this shit. Nobody has ever said "all" of them are heinous and evil. Nobody even used the word 'evil'. It's the same discussion every time, it's like talking to a wall. You get the same discussion because you're furthering the same points. Please consider the casual difference between saying something like "I have concerns about radical islam, but I don't want to paint "all" of them as heinous and evil. Which is why I question how we keep considering Saudi Arabia as our great ally and let it spread wahabism everywhere." and something like "I have concerns about radical islam, but I don't want to paint "all" of them as heinous and evil. Which is why I don't want to accept refugees." Notice how one targets radical islam, and one targets muslims. Notice how you're always here to support the second. Understand why the wall is met. My point precisely. From 'our' point of view, the term 'radical Islam' is a tautology. Mainstream Islam, not ISIS, not Al Qaeda, not Wahhabism, would be considered off-the-spectrum-far-right and radical by any measure if it didn't have the privilege of being a minority religion and thus being above critical inspection. The notion that people who were indoctrinated by this cancerous ideology from a very young age would just leave it at the door isn't just absurd, it's demonstrably wrong. In that case I don't understand why you react negatively when you're accused of targeting all of them. That's clearly what you're doing. Because you can criticize an ideology or idea without being racist towards those who were indoctrinated by it.
The policies that you recommend based on this criticism apply on people, not ideas.
|
On June 24 2016 22:43 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
So France has apparently overtaken the UK in economic size as a result of the UK burning to the ground financially.
I'm sure the workers rioting in France over the new labour laws are happy to hear that.
|
Reading some of the posts on voter turnout and age especially....that situation is nothing new.
On June 24 2016 20:25 Dan HH wrote:
Saw the vote breakdown by age brackets, seems the 65+ have decided this referendum. It's the same in my country, I'm 28 and only once out of 10 I've been on the winning side of a vote. With Europe's low natality rates and high life expectancy, there's simply no way for the 18-35 people to compete with the 65+, it's frustrating but I don't think there's anything to be done about it. I can only hope I won't be on the wrong side of history as often when I'm that age.
There was another graph I saw somewhere that net turnout for the elderly was just that much higher (mid 70s to mid 50s), that's the way it always is in a lot of countries tbh, it's been such in the past that initiatives that benefit youth are going to be easy targets when they don't show up to vote. I'm trying to look for that one graph a lot of stuff I'm seeing is percentages of ages groups voting but not absolute numbers. But long story short on that angle, old (and arguably those with lesser education) turned up and the young didn't.
There was another good poll showing youth numbers across party lines (except for UKIP obviously)
(sorry if this was a repost)
|
On June 24 2016 22:47 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2016 22:44 DickMcFanny wrote:On June 24 2016 22:39 Nebuchad wrote:On June 24 2016 22:32 DickMcFanny wrote:On June 24 2016 21:58 Nebuchad wrote:On June 24 2016 21:15 DickMcFanny wrote:On June 24 2016 20:57 OtherWorld wrote:
So 40% or 25% = 100%, and that proves that all Muslims are heinous and evil? Geez, I guess with that kind of reasoning you can also claim that every single voter of a anti-european party is a racist who fantasizes about whipping migrants at night.
Yeah, I'm tired of this shit. Nobody has ever said "all" of them are heinous and evil. Nobody even used the word 'evil'. It's the same discussion every time, it's like talking to a wall. You get the same discussion because you're furthering the same points. Please consider the casual difference between saying something like "I have concerns about radical islam, but I don't want to paint "all" of them as heinous and evil. Which is why I question how we keep considering Saudi Arabia as our great ally and let it spread wahabism everywhere." and something like "I have concerns about radical islam, but I don't want to paint "all" of them as heinous and evil. Which is why I don't want to accept refugees." Notice how one targets radical islam, and one targets muslims. Notice how you're always here to support the second. Understand why the wall is met. My point precisely. From 'our' point of view, the term 'radical Islam' is a tautology. Mainstream Islam, not ISIS, not Al Qaeda, not Wahhabism, would be considered off-the-spectrum-far-right and radical by any measure if it didn't have the privilege of being a minority religion and thus being above critical inspection. The notion that people who were indoctrinated by this cancerous ideology from a very young age would just leave it at the door isn't just absurd, it's demonstrably wrong. In that case I don't understand why you react negatively when you're accused of targeting all of them. That's clearly what you're doing. Because you can criticize an ideology or idea without being racist towards those who were indoctrinated by it. The policies that you recommend based on this criticism apply on people, not ideas.
Only because we lack the intellectual honesty to make the distinction.
|
So any idea what will happen with immigrants living in the UK now? if anything. I have few friends from Lithuania that has been here for years.
|
On June 24 2016 22:27 Diabolique wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2016 22:15 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
So was there any truth to what Nigel Farage said that there are polls in Sweden, Denmark, and The Netherlands that majority of people want a referendum to leave the EU? We just had an opinion poll last week in the biggest Czech newspaper that the supporters of CZEXIT would win 53% : 47%. We want to be part of the EU, but definitely not the part of this dictatorship buerocratic machine ... 100.000 people voted (in a nation of something like 6-7 millions people, who can vote).
i would be interested to see that in france because i also think that a frexit would win the vote
take a look at this
|
On June 24 2016 22:49 DickMcFanny wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2016 22:47 Nebuchad wrote:On June 24 2016 22:44 DickMcFanny wrote:On June 24 2016 22:39 Nebuchad wrote:On June 24 2016 22:32 DickMcFanny wrote:On June 24 2016 21:58 Nebuchad wrote:On June 24 2016 21:15 DickMcFanny wrote:On June 24 2016 20:57 OtherWorld wrote:
So 40% or 25% = 100%, and that proves that all Muslims are heinous and evil? Geez, I guess with that kind of reasoning you can also claim that every single voter of a anti-european party is a racist who fantasizes about whipping migrants at night.
Yeah, I'm tired of this shit. Nobody has ever said "all" of them are heinous and evil. Nobody even used the word 'evil'. It's the same discussion every time, it's like talking to a wall. You get the same discussion because you're furthering the same points. Please consider the casual difference between saying something like "I have concerns about radical islam, but I don't want to paint "all" of them as heinous and evil. Which is why I question how we keep considering Saudi Arabia as our great ally and let it spread wahabism everywhere." and something like "I have concerns about radical islam, but I don't want to paint "all" of them as heinous and evil. Which is why I don't want to accept refugees." Notice how one targets radical islam, and one targets muslims. Notice how you're always here to support the second. Understand why the wall is met. My point precisely. From 'our' point of view, the term 'radical Islam' is a tautology. Mainstream Islam, not ISIS, not Al Qaeda, not Wahhabism, would be considered off-the-spectrum-far-right and radical by any measure if it didn't have the privilege of being a minority religion and thus being above critical inspection. The notion that people who were indoctrinated by this cancerous ideology from a very young age would just leave it at the door isn't just absurd, it's demonstrably wrong. In that case I don't understand why you react negatively when you're accused of targeting all of them. That's clearly what you're doing. Because you can criticize an ideology or idea without being racist towards those who were indoctrinated by it. The policies that you recommend based on this criticism apply on people, not ideas. Only because we lack the intellectual honesty to make the distinction.
That is a sentence devoid of meaning.
|
On June 24 2016 22:38 pmh wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2016 22:27 Diabolique wrote:On June 24 2016 22:15 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
So was there any truth to what Nigel Farage said that there are polls in Sweden, Denmark, and The Netherlands that majority of people want a referendum to leave the EU? We just had an opinion poll last week in the biggest Czech newspaper that the supporters of CZEXIT would win 53% : 47%. We want to be part of the EU, but definitely not the part of this dictatorship buerocratic machine ... 100.000 people voted (in a nation of something like 6-7 millions people, who can vote). Czech wants out? That I can not understand at all,they are one of the most succesfull new members coming from the former east block. The eu has been doing quiet well for them,why would they want to go out?' " dictatorship buerocratic machine " This is just becoming like a meme now. Blame everything bad on Europe beaurocrats. Sure they are to blame for a lot but they also achieved a lot of good things.
Yes, exactly ... we are really benefiting from the EU. Five years ago, it was still manageable. But now, the EU has turned into something, we do not want to be part of. The EU is not a democracy at all. There is some hope, the UK can move them to change something, but this hope is very low.
|
On June 24 2016 22:43 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
So France has apparently overtaken the UK in economic size as a result of the UK burning to the ground financially.
every two year it changes place anyway, due to the value of the money so it doesn't surprise me
|
Another Scottish independence referendum is “highly likely”, Nicola Sturgeon said after she revealed the Scottish government will begin to prepare the legislation for a fresh vote to break-up the union.
In a hugely significant step, the First Minister of Scotland made clear Scotland voting for Remain - in common with London and Northern Ireland - cleared the way for a repeat of the 2014 ballot.
Sturgeon said it is “democratically unacceptable” that Scotland would be taken out of the EU “against its will”, and it will take “all possible steps and explore all options” to stay in the bloc.
Source
|
On June 24 2016 22:51 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2016 22:49 DickMcFanny wrote:On June 24 2016 22:47 Nebuchad wrote:On June 24 2016 22:44 DickMcFanny wrote:On June 24 2016 22:39 Nebuchad wrote:On June 24 2016 22:32 DickMcFanny wrote:On June 24 2016 21:58 Nebuchad wrote:On June 24 2016 21:15 DickMcFanny wrote:On June 24 2016 20:57 OtherWorld wrote:
So 40% or 25% = 100%, and that proves that all Muslims are heinous and evil? Geez, I guess with that kind of reasoning you can also claim that every single voter of a anti-european party is a racist who fantasizes about whipping migrants at night.
Yeah, I'm tired of this shit. Nobody has ever said "all" of them are heinous and evil. Nobody even used the word 'evil'. It's the same discussion every time, it's like talking to a wall. You get the same discussion because you're furthering the same points. Please consider the casual difference between saying something like "I have concerns about radical islam, but I don't want to paint "all" of them as heinous and evil. Which is why I question how we keep considering Saudi Arabia as our great ally and let it spread wahabism everywhere." and something like "I have concerns about radical islam, but I don't want to paint "all" of them as heinous and evil. Which is why I don't want to accept refugees." Notice how one targets radical islam, and one targets muslims. Notice how you're always here to support the second. Understand why the wall is met. My point precisely. From 'our' point of view, the term 'radical Islam' is a tautology. Mainstream Islam, not ISIS, not Al Qaeda, not Wahhabism, would be considered off-the-spectrum-far-right and radical by any measure if it didn't have the privilege of being a minority religion and thus being above critical inspection. The notion that people who were indoctrinated by this cancerous ideology from a very young age would just leave it at the door isn't just absurd, it's demonstrably wrong. In that case I don't understand why you react negatively when you're accused of targeting all of them. That's clearly what you're doing. Because you can criticize an ideology or idea without being racist towards those who were indoctrinated by it. The policies that you recommend based on this criticism apply on people, not ideas. Only because we lack the intellectual honesty to make the distinction. That is a sentence devoid of meaning.
Intellectual honesty is my favorite internet buzzword for "people that refuse to agree with my smart point of view".
|
On June 24 2016 22:50 Reaps wrote:
So any idea what will happen with immigrants living in the UK now? if anything. I have few friends from Lithuania that has been here for years.
Where I read, the consequences on a national level are unknown now/won't really take place until the exit is final, at the business level, there are some financial institutions (ie Morgan Stanley) that are moving positions to Frankfurt/Dublin/wherever that are more dependent on euro clearing (where movement has to happen immediately since that's how the financial markets work) and other major corporations like Airbus are also reviewing their UK bases/investments/etc and are figuring out what to do.
I think largely most people in this category are in limbo independent of their employer making decisions for them.
|
On June 24 2016 22:58 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2016 22:51 Nebuchad wrote:On June 24 2016 22:49 DickMcFanny wrote:On June 24 2016 22:47 Nebuchad wrote:On June 24 2016 22:44 DickMcFanny wrote:On June 24 2016 22:39 Nebuchad wrote:On June 24 2016 22:32 DickMcFanny wrote:On June 24 2016 21:58 Nebuchad wrote:On June 24 2016 21:15 DickMcFanny wrote:On June 24 2016 20:57 OtherWorld wrote:
So 40% or 25% = 100%, and that proves that all Muslims are heinous and evil? Geez, I guess with that kind of reasoning you can also claim that every single voter of a anti-european party is a racist who fantasizes about whipping migrants at night.
Yeah, I'm tired of this shit. Nobody has ever said "all" of them are heinous and evil. Nobody even used the word 'evil'. It's the same discussion every time, it's like talking to a wall. You get the same discussion because you're furthering the same points. Please consider the casual difference between saying something like "I have concerns about radical islam, but I don't want to paint "all" of them as heinous and evil. Which is why I question how we keep considering Saudi Arabia as our great ally and let it spread wahabism everywhere." and something like "I have concerns about radical islam, but I don't want to paint "all" of them as heinous and evil. Which is why I don't want to accept refugees." Notice how one targets radical islam, and one targets muslims. Notice how you're always here to support the second. Understand why the wall is met. My point precisely. From 'our' point of view, the term 'radical Islam' is a tautology. Mainstream Islam, not ISIS, not Al Qaeda, not Wahhabism, would be considered off-the-spectrum-far-right and radical by any measure if it didn't have the privilege of being a minority religion and thus being above critical inspection. The notion that people who were indoctrinated by this cancerous ideology from a very young age would just leave it at the door isn't just absurd, it's demonstrably wrong. In that case I don't understand why you react negatively when you're accused of targeting all of them. That's clearly what you're doing. Because you can criticize an ideology or idea without being racist towards those who were indoctrinated by it. The policies that you recommend based on this criticism apply on people, not ideas. Only because we lack the intellectual honesty to make the distinction. That is a sentence devoid of meaning. Intellectual honesty is my favorite internet buzzword for "people that refuse to agree with my smart point of view".
It's my favourite buzzword for "I accept evidence, even if it contradicts parts of my (liberal) world view".
But whatever, I didn't go into this actually thinking I could penetrate the bubble.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
