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

sc-darkness

856 Posts

November 20 2017 22:38 GMT

#8041

Another hit on Brexiters

EU agencies relocation

EU27 ministers selected the new seats for the two EU agencies currently based in the UK which need to be relocated in the context of Brexit. Amsterdam (the Netherlands) was selected as the new location for the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and Paris (France) for the European Banking Authority (EBA).

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/meetings/gac-art50/2017/11/20/

Gorsameth

Netherlands22487 Posts

November 20 2017 22:45 GMT

#8042

On November 21 2017 04:44 RvB wrote:
So there's a law that says animals feel pain and they scrapped it? What's wrong with that? I don't think there needs to be a law that says animals feel pain just as there doesn't have to be a law that says humans feel pain. It seems like a symbolic law more than anything. What's necessary are laws to prevent animal abuse. If they actually scrapped those I'd be worried.

Because scrapping (or not replacing the loss of EU laws) Animal abuse laws is the next step?

Abusing animals is wrong because they feel pain.
But now you no longer recognize they feel pain. So why is abuse wrong?

RvB

Netherlands6303 Posts

November 21 2017 17:55 GMT

#8043

You don't need a law to recognise that animals feel pain. There's no law stating that the earth rotates around the sun. It's a matter of fact and you build your laws around these facts. As long as there are adequate laws to prevent animal abuse there's no problem with scrapping this one. If they actually start scrapping laws preventing animal abuse I'll start sharing your concerns.

sc-darkness

856 Posts

November 21 2017 19:02 GMT

#8044

Why is animal abuse on agenda? Did I miss anything?

MyTHicaL

France1070 Posts

November 25 2017 16:45 GMT

#8045

Because they had a vote on it? The conservative party is obsessed with foxing, something that is banned in every other developped country in the world. But it is important, even in regards to humans, that if they can't seemingly pass legislation that guarantees animal rights then good luck replacing EU legislation on human rights, workers' rights etc. I'm still astonished that any blue collar or unemployed would ever vote for these people.

Zaros

United Kingdom3692 Posts

November 25 2017 17:47 GMT

#8046

Because they had an amendment trying to be added converting current EU animals welfare laws to the UK after Brexit, it was voted down because UK law is already sufficient but some people spread fake news saying they voted to deny animals have sentience when they didn't.

MyTHicaL

France1070 Posts

November 25 2017 22:27 GMT

#8047

Ummm no. The animal welfare act is not as inclusive as current EU law. And you can amend an amendment. It has been blown out of porportion but then that is the role of facebook. I seriously hope this "fake news" denouncing trend doesn't make it to this side of the Atlantic. The bottom line is don't get your news from targetted adds, facebook and/or twitter.

sc-darkness

856 Posts

November 27 2017 19:13 GMT

#8048

That's an internal issue. UK should decide for themselves. I'm more interested in Brexit negotiations.

Edit: I understand why some people are interested in this new royal wedding because they get an extra day off, but what about those people who celebrate? Do they have no life? Why spent your free time celebrating someone's engagement when they will probably never say hi to you? I refer to this article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42138938

Then again, I'm not British so it could be just me. I do know some of Labour are republicans though.

Dangermousecatdog

United Kingdom7084 Posts

November 27 2017 20:16 GMT

#8049

Why is TL filled with messages of grief over some celebrity they have never met? Why do people celebrate all sorts of holidays? Why do people celebrate the New Year. It's not even a real concept. Why celebrate the wedding for the second in line of the throne? Some people thought it was good TV. A national holiday is a good excuse for a street party and a social occasion. People do silly things like halloween parties and it's not even a holiday. There's nothing unusual about people celebrating random stuff, and as can be imagined there's been about a thousand years of people celebrating royal marriages.

MyTHicaL

France1070 Posts

November 27 2017 21:19 GMT

#8050

I'm in complete agreement of the celebrity angle; especially in regards to the Royal Family (unsurpisngly I wish what happened in France had happened in the UK. But I don't really get your beef with New Year's lol... I mean it's kind of a holiday that can be celebrated by everyone (with the same calendar) and even by those who do not... I don't think people should obsess over them but they are a way to promote consolidation or togetherness; in a way... But a royal wedding.. celebrating people who are (in)famous out of birthright is lost on me. Bring out the guillotines

sc-darkness

856 Posts

November 27 2017 22:48 GMT

#8051

Yeah, if you celebrate royals as celebrities but not as someone higher than you, then I suppose it's fair. I'm with the French guy on this one, I'm glad my country got rid of monarchy too. That said, I'm not vocal about the UK staying or not as monarchy - that's an internal matter. My point was different.

Dangermousecatdog

United Kingdom7084 Posts

November 28 2017 01:15 GMT

#8052

What exactly is your point? Why do people follow the thousand year old tradition of using a wedding of the royal family as an excuse for a party? If you can ask something like that, you might as well ask why do people celebrate the 1st of January? Why do people have Halloween parties? Why do people go drive somewhere far away and have a picnic in the sogging rain whenever it's a Bank Holiday?

It's exactly like a New Year. It's a semi random date which is a national holiday so most people have the day off. It's on the TV, so people are aware it's happening and there is a generally agreed time when it occurs. Everyone can celebrate it, seeing as the celebration actually involves nothing in particular. You can go to the pub or stay at home. There might even be a street party. I don't give a flying fuck about the royal family, but I don't see why you think it's particularily odd that some people will go out and drink and have a grand time. It's not like it is exhibiting unusual behaviour compared with any number of national holidays, or indeed any different from say a weekend. I don't go to the thread of David Bowies death or Mohamed Ali's death or Alan Rickman's death and ask if they have no life, mourning the death of people who will don't even know you exist.

Plansix

United States60190 Posts

November 28 2017 01:52 GMT

#8053

I don't see a problem with celebrating a royal wedding. It is fun to have events that people can just enjoy and celebrate their country. And its not like tax revenue goes into funding the wedding.

KelsierSC

United Kingdom10443 Posts

November 28 2017 18:12 GMT

#8054

I'm not going to celebrate it.

KwarK

United States44203 Posts

November 28 2017 18:17 GMT

#8055

On November 28 2017 10:52 Plansix wrote:
I don't see a problem with celebrating a royal wedding. It is fun to have events that people can just enjoy and celebrate their country. And its not like tax revenue goes into funding the wedding.

Taxpayers normally front the security bill, which honestly turns out to be most of the bill. But I think that's fair. It's not Harry's fault that a bunch of terrorists would see it as an achievement if they bombed him. That's some shit that we forced on him, the least we can do is pay some guys to check if there's a bomb at his wedding.

I'm wholly neutral about the monarchy as an institution. If some people want to have a party, good for them, I hope they have fun. If other people want to go to work and get time and a half, also fine by me.

Plansix

United States60190 Posts

November 28 2017 19:25 GMT

#8056

On November 29 2017 03:17 KwarK wrote:

Show nested quote +

Even as an American I’m pretty neutral on the whole thing as well. I sort of admire the balance the UK has reached with monarchy as national symbols with little true political power, but holding influence of national discourse. They seem to inhabit a mostly positive place in your national discourse, either being a source of gossipy entertainment or national character. And in some cases, like the most recent royal weddings, small amounts of social change. They have also come across as wealthy public servants that occupy a unique role in British culture.

But again, I’m American and everything looks better when you only hear about the fun stuff like weddings and royal babies.

Laurens

Belgium4557 Posts

November 29 2017 08:02 GMT

#8057

Brexit bill reportedly fixed at somewhere between 45 and 55 billion euros.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/28/exclusive-britain-eu-agree-brexit-divorce-bill/

Acrofales

Spain18387 Posts

November 29 2017 08:17 GMT

#8058

On November 29 2017 17:02 Laurens wrote:
Brexit bill reportedly fixed at somewhere between 45 and 55 billion euros.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/28/exclusive-britain-eu-agree-brexit-divorce-bill/

https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/935585570755104768

There's something to say about not being cutthroat if you want to maintain relations. Not that I know whether the EU negotiators are being cutthroat out the Brits completely unorganized and unrealistic.

I suspect a bit of the former and a lot of the latter.

Laurens

Belgium4557 Posts

November 29 2017 08:25 GMT

#8059

I guess the EU feels it's more important to make an example of the UK to try and discourage others from leaving.

Velr

Switzerland10927 Posts

November 29 2017 09:42 GMT

#8060

Well, is there an actual bargaining chip that the UK could play? If these costs can be shown to exist the EU would either have to show Goodwill or get something in return. Is there something the UK could and is willing to give?