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.
Are there any counterpoints to the first 20 minutes of this video? Basically, it shows the EU as a force that is not elected and yet is completely unaccountable. No one can even name or know the faces of a good majority of people in the EU. Let alone that over 1000 people in the EU are paid more than UK's PM and have countless job perks.
Is there any reason why that could be a good thing? It seems like such an extraction of tax payers tbh as well as fertile ground for abuses to take place.
On June 12 2016 07:55 BurningSera wrote: not a goddamn chance UK will leave EU. the 'poor' or 'aversge' will whine about leaving it but the rich and the powerful people etc will have enough influence to affect the vote etc. contractary to popular belief, UK politics is the simplest form of 'who is the rich who holds the power'.
On the whole though the rich and powerful want to stay in the EU because it benefits them more than anyone else
On June 12 2016 11:26 SK.Testie wrote: Are there any counterpoints to the first 20 minutes of this video? Basically, it shows the EU as a force that is not elected and yet is completely unaccountable. No one can even name or know the faces of a good majority of people in the EU. Let alone that over 1000 people in the EU are paid more than UK's PM and have countless job perks.
Is there any reason why that could be a good thing? It seems like such an extraction of tax payers tbh as well as fertile ground for abuses to take place.
On June 12 2016 11:26 SK.Testie wrote: Are there any counterpoints to the first 20 minutes of this video? Basically, it shows the EU as a force that is not elected and yet is completely unaccountable. No one can even name or know the faces of a good majority of people in the EU. Let alone that over 1000 people in the EU are paid more than UK's PM and have countless job perks.
Is there any reason why that could be a good thing? It seems like such an extraction of tax payers tbh as well as fertile ground for abuses to take place.
The EU is indefensible unless you're a European federalist-at-any-cost. The problem is that the middle classes don't want to risk upheaval and the EU will bully/sanction anybody who doesn't do what they want. It has nothing to do with economics, it is all about federalism and their fear of anybody setting a precedent of not doing exactly what they command/demand.
Take Switzerland, for example. They voted against free movement of people - which makes perfect sense because everybody in the world wants to move to Switzerland. The Swiss govt. therefore had a constitutional obligation to take this issue to the EU, but the EU refused to discuss it with them, and expects them to retake the vote. Ireland was forced to vote again on the Lisbon treaty, when they returned the 'wrong' answer. It looks likely that the EU will try to find some way to ignore the Dutch people's decision to block Ukraine joining the EU, too.
The UK has been shut down on the free movement issue time and time again. It doesn't get more obvious: when you enforce free movement of people across regions of vastly different economic strength, you get mass migration of the poor from the weak economic zone to the strong one. Businesses in the strong economic zone are more than happy to exploit this influx of cheap labour, but for everybody else house prices are driven up and wages are driven down. Living standards fall.
The irony is that while it is overwhelmingly the working class who suffer, it is the 'Labour' party who are overwhelmingly in favour of the EU. I have heard many Labour supporters unironically point out the fact that many Leave voters are working class and have lower levels of education, acting as though this gives them some sort of moral high ground as Remain voters. There is nothing more repulsive than watching the left mock and betray the people it is supposed to stand for; Labour is a fat, complacent, middle class party far more interested in virtue signalling than virtue.
On June 12 2016 11:26 SK.Testie wrote: Are there any counterpoints to the first 20 minutes of this video? Basically, it shows the EU as a force that is not elected and yet is completely unaccountable. No one can even name or know the faces of a good majority of people in the EU. Let alone that over 1000 people in the EU are paid more than UK's PM and have countless job perks.
Is there any reason why that could be a good thing? It seems like such an extraction of tax payers tbh as well as fertile ground for abuses to take place.
Some stupid argument in regard to fishing in the video... The reason why the europe regulate fishing is because there are stock problem, it's not the europe that is creating this, and Danemark is just playing the free rider (like all countries that actually benefit from this stupid union) as it can fish that much thanks to all the other european country who willingly restrict their fishing and prevent the stock of fish from disappearing. The beginning of the video is okayish, the end is stupid as hell : the democracy talk is spot on, the legislation also, but the free trade talk is pure bullshit. It's the biggest problem of Nigel Farage by the way : he has some good lines from times to times, but everytimes he talk about the economy I'm AMAZED at the simplification and the sheer stupidity he is willing to show the world.
On June 12 2016 07:55 BurningSera wrote: not a goddamn chance UK will leave EU. the 'poor' or 'aversge' will whine about leaving it but the rich and the powerful people etc will have enough influence to affect the vote etc. contractary to popular belief, UK politics is the simplest form of 'who is the rich who holds the power'.
On the whole though the rich and powerful want to stay in the EU because it benefits them more than anyone else
exactly, changes cost money and that's the last thing the rich want (unless the changes justified the risk but this is not 1970 anymore). this whole brexit is just an practice to waste some papers and money, give some exposure of David Cameron on social media (every little helps), and possible net him some extra cash from his friends/'enemies' of the campaign. fucking pointless.
On June 11 2016 09:26 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: The point is remain is relying far more on the flakiest voters.The youth vote and the ethnic minority vote will always have far lower turnout than those 65+. Like you said look at the scottish result, decided by 65+ worried about losing their pension.
Questions Who has the momentum? Which side appears more enthusiastic? What direction are those 65+ leaning?
What is your point? That the vote is determined by white 65+ therefore leave will be the result? But lets indulge you by answering your questions as related to the Scottish referendum.
1) Momentum is a meaningless metric for reality of voting on the day. It's only a buzzword for describing changes recorded by innacurate voting polls. Momentum was overwhelmingly described with being for "Yes". 2 )"Yes" was overwhelmingly more enthusiastic. To the point that in these forums, they were already celebrating, until the result came in. 3) The majority of 65+ voted "No".
Actual outcome was "No".
What can you learn from this? Pointless metrics will always be pointless.
My point is, if you're relying on the flakiest voters to win you a referendum you're in for disappointment.I wouldn't be calling the 53% turnout for 18-24s in the scottish poll enthusiasm, compared to the 92% turnout for over 85s?
Good luck getting the youth energised enough to vote because we all know the old timers will be out in numbers.
You seem very emotionallycharged for someone purporting to give a prediction on the referendum. You should calm down a little. You also seem rather fixated on the word "flakiest". Those who will vote will vote. Also who exactly is this "you" which you keep refering to?
"You" is of course, the guy i am quoting? I think many here are underestimating the significance of the vote, but if you can explain to me how net migration of 300,000+ per year does anything other than suppress wages and increase rents and house prices via supply/demand then explain it to me.From what i see those are two of the biggest reasons why the rich want to remain and also why many on the left are now backing leave.
"I" am not relying on anyone to win a referendum for me. As you can see (or not see in this case), I'm not trying to persuade people that a certain side is going to gain majority. But ok, I get it, you hate youth and ethnic minorties and rich people.
On June 11 2016 09:26 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: The point is remain is relying far more on the flakiest voters.The youth vote and the ethnic minority vote will always have far lower turnout than those 65+. Like you said look at the scottish result, decided by 65+ worried about losing their pension.
Questions Who has the momentum? Which side appears more enthusiastic? What direction are those 65+ leaning?
What is your point? That the vote is determined by white 65+ therefore leave will be the result? But lets indulge you by answering your questions as related to the Scottish referendum.
1) Momentum is a meaningless metric for reality of voting on the day. It's only a buzzword for describing changes recorded by innacurate voting polls. Momentum was overwhelmingly described with being for "Yes". 2 )"Yes" was overwhelmingly more enthusiastic. To the point that in these forums, they were already celebrating, until the result came in. 3) The majority of 65+ voted "No".
Actual outcome was "No".
What can you learn from this? Pointless metrics will always be pointless.
My point is, if you're relying on the flakiest voters to win you a referendum you're in for disappointment.I wouldn't be calling the 53% turnout for 18-24s in the scottish poll enthusiasm, compared to the 92% turnout for over 85s?
Good luck getting the youth energised enough to vote because we all know the old timers will be out in numbers.
You seem very emotionallycharged for someone purporting to give a prediction on the referendum. You should calm down a little. You also seem rather fixated on the word "flakiest". Those who will vote will vote. Also who exactly is this "you" which you keep refering to?
"You" is of course, the guy i am quoting? I think many here are underestimating the significance of the vote, but if you can explain to me how net migration of 300,000+ per year does anything other than suppress wages and increase rents and house prices via supply/demand then explain it to me.From what i see those are two of the biggest reasons why the rich want to remain and also why many on the left are now backing leave.
But ok, I get it, you hate youth and ethnic minorties and rich people.
As usual, the side with no valid arguments resorts to accusations of racism.
On June 11 2016 09:26 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: The point is remain is relying far more on the flakiest voters.The youth vote and the ethnic minority vote will always have far lower turnout than those 65+. Like you said look at the scottish result, decided by 65+ worried about losing their pension.
Questions Who has the momentum? Which side appears more enthusiastic? What direction are those 65+ leaning?
What is your point? That the vote is determined by white 65+ therefore leave will be the result? But lets indulge you by answering your questions as related to the Scottish referendum.
1) Momentum is a meaningless metric for reality of voting on the day. It's only a buzzword for describing changes recorded by innacurate voting polls. Momentum was overwhelmingly described with being for "Yes". 2 )"Yes" was overwhelmingly more enthusiastic. To the point that in these forums, they were already celebrating, until the result came in. 3) The majority of 65+ voted "No".
Actual outcome was "No".
What can you learn from this? Pointless metrics will always be pointless.
My point is, if you're relying on the flakiest voters to win you a referendum you're in for disappointment.I wouldn't be calling the 53% turnout for 18-24s in the scottish poll enthusiasm, compared to the 92% turnout for over 85s?
Good luck getting the youth energised enough to vote because we all know the old timers will be out in numbers.
You seem very emotionallycharged for someone purporting to give a prediction on the referendum. You should calm down a little. You also seem rather fixated on the word "flakiest". Those who will vote will vote. Also who exactly is this "you" which you keep refering to?
"You" is of course, the guy i am quoting? I think many here are underestimating the significance of the vote, but if you can explain to me how net migration of 300,000+ per year does anything other than suppress wages and increase rents and house prices via supply/demand then explain it to me.From what i see those are two of the biggest reasons why the rich want to remain and also why many on the left are now backing leave.
But ok, I get it, you hate youth and ethnic minorties and rich people.
As usual, the side with no valid arguments resorts to accusations of racism.
Don't forget accusations of ageism. But I guess you don't care about that. I mean what do you expect when you call them flaky several times eh? Don't forget that this guy here seems to think I am directly heading the "remain" campaign for reasons I cannot quite fanthom.
I don't understand, wouldn't the same thing be happening to French, Indian, and US ships as well...? Not to mention commercial ships.
Britain's £1bn ($1.4bn) warships are losing power in the Persian Gulf because they cannot cope with the warm waters, MPs have been told.
Six Type 45 destroyers have repeatedly experienced power outages because of the temperatures, leaving servicemen in complete darkness.
During the Defence Committee hearing on Tuesday, MPs questioned company executives about the warship failures.
"The equipment is having to operate in far more arduous conditions that were initially required," Rolls-Royce director Tomas Leahy said.
Managing director of BAE Systems Maritime, John Hudson, supported Leahy's comments, adding: "The operating profile at the time was that there would not be repeated or continuous operations in the Gulf."
Waters in the Persian Gulf can get as hot as 90 degrees F (32 degrees C).
The Royal Navy's Type 45 Destroyer, HMS Defender sails into the HM Naval Base Portsmouth for the first time on July 25, 2012.
Leahy told MPs that turbines do not generate as much power when they run in a hot environment, which is not recognized by the system.
"This is when you get your total electrical failure," Leahy explained.
"Suddenly, you have lost your main generator on your system and you are plunged into darkness."
However, a spokesperson from Britain's Ministry of Defence (MoD) denied this, telling CNN: "The Type 45 was designed for world-wide operations, from sub-Arctic to extreme tropical environments, and continues to operate effectively in the Gulf and the South Atlantic all year round."
On June 11 2016 09:26 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: The point is remain is relying far more on the flakiest voters.The youth vote and the ethnic minority vote will always have far lower turnout than those 65+. Like you said look at the scottish result, decided by 65+ worried about losing their pension.
Questions Who has the momentum? Which side appears more enthusiastic? What direction are those 65+ leaning?
What is your point? That the vote is determined by white 65+ therefore leave will be the result? But lets indulge you by answering your questions as related to the Scottish referendum.
1) Momentum is a meaningless metric for reality of voting on the day. It's only a buzzword for describing changes recorded by innacurate voting polls. Momentum was overwhelmingly described with being for "Yes". 2 )"Yes" was overwhelmingly more enthusiastic. To the point that in these forums, they were already celebrating, until the result came in. 3) The majority of 65+ voted "No".
Actual outcome was "No".
What can you learn from this? Pointless metrics will always be pointless.
My point is, if you're relying on the flakiest voters to win you a referendum you're in for disappointment.I wouldn't be calling the 53% turnout for 18-24s in the scottish poll enthusiasm, compared to the 92% turnout for over 85s?
Good luck getting the youth energised enough to vote because we all know the old timers will be out in numbers.
You seem very emotionallycharged for someone purporting to give a prediction on the referendum. You should calm down a little. You also seem rather fixated on the word "flakiest". Those who will vote will vote. Also who exactly is this "you" which you keep refering to?
"You" is of course, the guy i am quoting? I think many here are underestimating the significance of the vote, but if you can explain to me how net migration of 300,000+ per year does anything other than suppress wages and increase rents and house prices via supply/demand then explain it to me.From what i see those are two of the biggest reasons why the rich want to remain and also why many on the left are now backing leave.
But ok, I get it, you hate youth and ethnic minorties and rich people.
As usual, the side with no valid arguments resorts to accusations of racism.
Don't forget accusations of ageism. But I guess you don't care about that. I mean what do you expect when you call them flaky several times eh? Don't forget that this guy here seems to think I am directly heading the "remain" campaign for reasons I cannot quite fanthom.
Hardly. And it's not racist or ageist to point out ethnic minorities or young people are less likely to vote than old timers.These are the facts.
This is a classic far left tactic, attack the person instead of debating what was said.You can't debate it because it's all factual, is that it?
net migration is a positive in the long run if there is even a reasonable level of integration, meaning development of human capabilities of the migrant population.
On June 11 2016 09:26 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: The point is remain is relying far more on the flakiest voters.The youth vote and the ethnic minority vote will always have far lower turnout than those 65+. Like you said look at the scottish result, decided by 65+ worried about losing their pension.
Questions Who has the momentum? Which side appears more enthusiastic? What direction are those 65+ leaning?
What is your point? That the vote is determined by white 65+ therefore leave will be the result? But lets indulge you by answering your questions as related to the Scottish referendum.
1) Momentum is a meaningless metric for reality of voting on the day. It's only a buzzword for describing changes recorded by innacurate voting polls. Momentum was overwhelmingly described with being for "Yes". 2 )"Yes" was overwhelmingly more enthusiastic. To the point that in these forums, they were already celebrating, until the result came in. 3) The majority of 65+ voted "No".
Actual outcome was "No".
What can you learn from this? Pointless metrics will always be pointless.
My point is, if you're relying on the flakiest voters to win you a referendum you're in for disappointment.I wouldn't be calling the 53% turnout for 18-24s in the scottish poll enthusiasm, compared to the 92% turnout for over 85s?
Good luck getting the youth energised enough to vote because we all know the old timers will be out in numbers.
You seem very emotionallycharged for someone purporting to give a prediction on the referendum. You should calm down a little. You also seem rather fixated on the word "flakiest". Those who will vote will vote. Also who exactly is this "you" which you keep refering to?
"You" is of course, the guy i am quoting? I think many here are underestimating the significance of the vote, but if you can explain to me how net migration of 300,000+ per year does anything other than suppress wages and increase rents and house prices via supply/demand then explain it to me.From what i see those are two of the biggest reasons why the rich want to remain and also why many on the left are now backing leave.
But ok, I get it, you hate youth and ethnic minorties and rich people.
As usual, the side with no valid arguments resorts to accusations of racism.
Don't forget accusations of ageism. But I guess you don't care about that. I mean what do you expect when you call them flaky several times eh? Don't forget that this guy here seems to think I am directly heading the "remain" campaign for reasons I cannot quite fanthom.
Hardly. And it's not racist or ageist to point out ethnic minorities or young people are less likely to vote than old timers.These are the facts.
This is a classic far left tactic, attack the person instead of debating what was said.You can't debate it because it's all factual, is that it?
Is it classic far left tactic? I'm sure Trump isn't left, yet he attacks Hillary Clinton. I'm sure personal attacks aren't exclusive to left wing or right wing. It applies to both.
On June 11 2016 09:26 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: The point is remain is relying far more on the flakiest voters.The youth vote and the ethnic minority vote will always have far lower turnout than those 65+. Like you said look at the scottish result, decided by 65+ worried about losing their pension.
Questions Who has the momentum? Which side appears more enthusiastic? What direction are those 65+ leaning?
What is your point? That the vote is determined by white 65+ therefore leave will be the result? But lets indulge you by answering your questions as related to the Scottish referendum.
1) Momentum is a meaningless metric for reality of voting on the day. It's only a buzzword for describing changes recorded by innacurate voting polls. Momentum was overwhelmingly described with being for "Yes". 2 )"Yes" was overwhelmingly more enthusiastic. To the point that in these forums, they were already celebrating, until the result came in. 3) The majority of 65+ voted "No".
Actual outcome was "No".
What can you learn from this? Pointless metrics will always be pointless.
My point is, if you're relying on the flakiest voters to win you a referendum you're in for disappointment.I wouldn't be calling the 53% turnout for 18-24s in the scottish poll enthusiasm, compared to the 92% turnout for over 85s?
Good luck getting the youth energised enough to vote because we all know the old timers will be out in numbers.
You seem very emotionallycharged for someone purporting to give a prediction on the referendum. You should calm down a little. You also seem rather fixated on the word "flakiest". Those who will vote will vote. Also who exactly is this "you" which you keep refering to?
"You" is of course, the guy i am quoting? I think many here are underestimating the significance of the vote, but if you can explain to me how net migration of 300,000+ per year does anything other than suppress wages and increase rents and house prices via supply/demand then explain it to me.From what i see those are two of the biggest reasons why the rich want to remain and also why many on the left are now backing leave.
But ok, I get it, you hate youth and ethnic minorties and rich people.
As usual, the side with no valid arguments resorts to accusations of racism.
Don't forget accusations of ageism. But I guess you don't care about that. I mean what do you expect when you call them flaky several times eh? Don't forget that this guy here seems to think I am directly heading the "remain" campaign for reasons I cannot quite fanthom.
Hardly. And it's not racist or ageist to point out ethnic minorities or young people are less likely to vote than old timers.These are the facts.
This is a classic far left tactic, attack the person instead of debating what was said.You can't debate it because it's all factual, is that it?
Is it classic far left tactic? I'm sure Trump isn't left, yet he attacks Hillary Clinton. I'm sure personal attacks aren't exclusive to left wing or right wing. It applies to both.
Yeah its just a classic tactic of people who can't hold a civilized discussion. It has also become a very standard political tactic because in the world of politics it actually works better than discussing issues (except in London where Saddiq Khan won by discussing issues).
On June 11 2016 20:53 Dangermousecatdog wrote: [quote] What is your point? That the vote is determined by white 65+ therefore leave will be the result? But lets indulge you by answering your questions as related to the Scottish referendum.
1) Momentum is a meaningless metric for reality of voting on the day. It's only a buzzword for describing changes recorded by innacurate voting polls. Momentum was overwhelmingly described with being for "Yes". 2 )"Yes" was overwhelmingly more enthusiastic. To the point that in these forums, they were already celebrating, until the result came in. 3) The majority of 65+ voted "No".
Actual outcome was "No".
What can you learn from this? Pointless metrics will always be pointless.
My point is, if you're relying on the flakiest voters to win you a referendum you're in for disappointment.I wouldn't be calling the 53% turnout for 18-24s in the scottish poll enthusiasm, compared to the 92% turnout for over 85s?
Good luck getting the youth energised enough to vote because we all know the old timers will be out in numbers.
You seem very emotionallycharged for someone purporting to give a prediction on the referendum. You should calm down a little. You also seem rather fixated on the word "flakiest". Those who will vote will vote. Also who exactly is this "you" which you keep refering to?
"You" is of course, the guy i am quoting? I think many here are underestimating the significance of the vote, but if you can explain to me how net migration of 300,000+ per year does anything other than suppress wages and increase rents and house prices via supply/demand then explain it to me.From what i see those are two of the biggest reasons why the rich want to remain and also why many on the left are now backing leave.
But ok, I get it, you hate youth and ethnic minorties and rich people.
As usual, the side with no valid arguments resorts to accusations of racism.
Don't forget accusations of ageism. But I guess you don't care about that. I mean what do you expect when you call them flaky several times eh? Don't forget that this guy here seems to think I am directly heading the "remain" campaign for reasons I cannot quite fanthom.
Hardly. And it's not racist or ageist to point out ethnic minorities or young people are less likely to vote than old timers.These are the facts.
This is a classic far left tactic, attack the person instead of debating what was said.You can't debate it because it's all factual, is that it?
Is it classic far left tactic? I'm sure Trump isn't left, yet he attacks Hillary Clinton. I'm sure personal attacks aren't exclusive to left wing or right wing. It applies to both.
Yeah its just a classic tactic of people who can't hold a civilized discussion. It has also become a very standard political tactic because in the world of politics it actually works better than discussing issues (except in London where Saddiq Khan won by discussing issues).
Like i said before, if you can explain to me how net migration of 330,000+ a year doesn't depress wages and increase house prices and rents through supply and demand I'm all ears?....
I enjoy living in a multicultural society. Anyone who votes tory and then complains about low wages blaming the EU needs shooting. There are plenty of ways to get wages up. Leaving the EU and wrecking our economy in the process isn't one of them. The sheer scale of the uncertainty surrounding our currency would be enough to counter any other good done by leaving. If we want higher wages and lower rents we need to build more houses and invest in skills training, not leave the EU, that's just a daft solution to a manageable problem. The tories have absolutely no interest in closing the wealth gap, low wages and high rents are what they are all about. Leaving the EU just gives them more power to make it worse.
EPT
