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.
On June 21 2016 07:35 WhiteDog wrote: When you can't debate you critic the debate. The situation of politics nowadays is largely the result of politicians and pro europeans, not due to the people. Where was the debate on immigration policy in europe ? Where was the debate on economic policy in europe ? Uldridge comments are a caricature. It's the third post where he is basically saying the leave campaign are whiny bitches that don't have any "solutions" : he has not understood much of the actual debate in regards to europe (which is not about finding solutions for a problem yet, but about debating the frame through which we can find solutions - at the european level or at the national level - with the underlying belief for many that the european level is entirely impotent or undemocratic and can't progress due to the different interests that structure the EU).
The debate on those policies is done a couple of times per week in the European Parliament. You know, that democratically elected government institution no-one bothers to vote for once election time is there because getting one's arse off the couch is too tiring. The people who complain about the lack of democratic accountability of the EU are usually those who can't be bothered to vote.
If you knew anything about the parliament and the EU you would realise it isn't really worth voting, the parliament gets to vote on laws yes, but everything comes from the commission which is unelected, nothing will become law unless the commission sends it to the parliament. The Parliament is essentially rubber stamping unelected decision makers.
well guys whatever it is going to happen on Thursday (we wont leave for sure), it is time to buy some GBP and sell later, easy profit. look at that insane rise
Remain strategists needed Labour voters to clear a path to victory. They may now perform that service for Leave instead. As many as 40 per cent of them back Brexit, compared to just 4 per cent of Labour MPs. In the view of one shadow cabinet minister: “It’s over already.” MPs speak of “horrific” postal vote returns.
The slide in Labour support is the main cause of anxiety in Downing Street. It was the Remain camp’s ominous internal polling that prompted David Cameron to clear the Tories’ media grid and make way for Gordon Brown and Jeremy Corbyn. His survival as Prime Minister now depends on those who voted against him last year.
Inside Labour, the blame is already being liberally distributed. Some identify Corbyn as the chief culprit. Recent polling showed that nearly half of the party’s voters were uncertain of its position on the EU. This, MPs suggest, owes much to the Labour leader’s limited enthusiasm for the cause. As recently as last summer, he was agnostic about EU membership, telling the New Statesman editor that he had not “closed his mind” to Leave. Yet there is no truth in the claim that the lifelong Eurosceptic is a secret Brexiter. “I’ve had private conversations with him. He is convinced that voting Remain is the right thing to do,” a shadow cabinet minister told me.
In common with its centre-left European counterparts, Labour is fractured between an affluent metropolitan wing (“wine drinkers”) and a working-class base (“beer drinkers”). It was this divide that Ed Miliband frequently sought to straddle, at the cost of alienating both groups. Corbyn has made an unambiguous case for immigration, a subject on which he is aligned with some of his Blair-esque critics. But MPs fear that it will come at an electoral price.
Frank Field, Labour’s most senior Leave supporter, spoke sorrowfully of his party’s predicament. “At the last election, we lost 900,000 votes to Ukip because people felt we didn’t represent them,” he told me. “My fear is we’re just lining ourselves up to lose another million – and then we’re finished as a major party.”
there's not much mind paid to the negative consequences for europe from a uk exit. it's why whitedoge wants brexit so bad, and why eu supporters really hate it.
Professor Michael Dougan is the Jean Monnet Chair in EU Law and the entire purpose of the Jean Monnet chair position is to fund academics who are willing to shill for EU integration, this man receives tens of thousands of euros a month for this purpose. This is like taking health advice on smoking from Marlboro's in-house doctor.
Only a couple minutes in and he's already lying
There is no doubt that the UK is Sovereign and parliament is the supreme lawmaking authority in this country, not the EU"
It's the argument that Parliament is sovereign because it chooses to be bound. It's a legal fiction and he knows it. It says in clear language in the treaties that EU law is supreme. So long as we are bound by the treaties, Parliament is not sovereign.
This is like saying I can murder somebody if I want to, I just choose to obey the law and not do it.
Not to mention that regulation can be imposed on the UK without having to pass through parliament at all.
The UK has enormous influence in the EU
Simply untrue. Our historic position of largely leaving Europe to do it's own thing has left us with few countries that still listen to us. Gibraltar and Cyprus being pretty much it.
Since records began in 1996, the UK has not managed to prevent a single proposal placed in front of the EU council from becoming European law. This amounts to 72 measures that the UK opposed that have since become British law. Since 1973 the UK’s voting power in the Council of Ministers has decreased from 17% to 8%, in the European Parliament it has decreased from 20% to 9.7% and in the European Commission it has decreased from 15% to 4%. The UK has about 12% of the EU's population, it provides only 5% of the EU's staff and the situation is set to get worse. More than four in 10 British officials will be enjoying their retirement by 2020 and, based on the number of applicants in recent years, most of them will not be replaced (junior roles have only a 2.4% UK entrance rate) - this matters because legislation unlike in a democracy is drafted by unelected civil servants in the Berlaymont building, the EU Parliament is merely a rubber stamp with amending rights. Over the last European Parliamentary term (2009-14),a majority of British MEPs(across UK party lines) opposed 576 motions out of a total 1,936 that were put before the European Parliament. Of those 576 motions, 485 were nonetheless approved by the rest of the Parliament despite the opposition of a majority of British MEPs. This is a failure rate of 84%. This rises to 89% in Economic & Monetary affairs & 98% loss in Budget votes.
We're sufficiently different enough to other countries that what's best for us is often not best for the rest of Europe. e.g. recent EU port legislation - voted against by every UK MEP from every party, Trade unions and port authorities in the UK are opposed. The legislation still passed and will soon affect us even though everyone agrees it would be bad for us. - If we truly had power in the EU this type of thing wouldn't happen to us.
Also most of the stuff that Cameron got from his "renogotiations" are bullshit "red cards" that require agreement from the majority of EU states to be used - this will never happen due to conflicting interests. It will only get harder as the EU expands.
On June 21 2016 07:35 WhiteDog wrote: When you can't debate you critic the debate. The situation of politics nowadays is largely the result of politicians and pro europeans, not due to the people. Where was the debate on immigration policy in europe ? Where was the debate on economic policy in europe ? Uldridge comments are a caricature. It's the third post where he is basically saying the leave campaign are whiny bitches that don't have any "solutions" : he has not understood much of the actual debate in regards to europe (which is not about finding solutions for a problem yet, but about debating the frame through which we can find solutions - at the european level or at the national level - with the underlying belief for many that the european level is entirely impotent or undemocratic and can't progress due to the different interests that structure the EU).
The debate on those policies is done a couple of times per week in the European Parliament. You know, that democratically elected government institution no-one bothers to vote for once election time is there because getting one's arse off the couch is too tiring. The people who complain about the lack of democratic accountability of the EU are usually those who can't be bothered to vote.
Stop lying to yourself and others (same for Nyxisto) : the debate on most important european subject have no value and most decisions are taken by the commission/council, i.e. behind closed doors. At no point they were central in any of the european elections.
The problem isn't so much that there isn't a discussion happening but that some people with very obscure opinions fueled by perceived social media support want to dominate a discussion or create a certain climate because they feeling that they are the 'true' majority.
Here is what I understand : you, and people who think like you, are losing the debate. It's not that "some people with very obscure opinions" want to dominate discussion, it is that your arguments are not sufficient. Think deeper about your arguments, and try to find solution what is actually felt by the people, not some kind of rebutal to dismiss their concern. That's democracy.
On June 22 2016 02:44 oneofthem wrote: there's not much mind paid to the negative consequences for europe from a uk exit. it's why whitedoge wants brexit so bad, and why eu supporters really hate it.
I don't want it (I want the end of the euro). But I understands it. French are european in the purest sense : many would love a unified United States of Europe (this idea existed in Victor Hugo's mouth back in 1850 ...) and I used to consider myself to be part of those people, but I didn't let my own value / desire shroud my judgement on what is the european union in reality, which is an undemocratic liberal mess that function by putting countries in competition for the worst possible legislation on labor and on fiscality, that accept unrealistic level of unemployment, without any form of oppositions.
The fact that certain people on the remain side said that if we leave the EU we'll lose worker's rights such as paid holidays or maternity leave alone would be enough to change my mind, that's absolute nonsense and I don't believe it for a second. The UK had these rights and more before we joined the EU and any government that wanted to remove those would be absolutely suicidal.
Incredibly patronising.
And on an unrelated note, the entire EU organisation is probably going to collapse within the next 15 years, the Netherlands and France will probably be next to leave, the UK should be a trailblazer and get a head start.
What will happen when the results are very close,like 49.9 vs 50.1 Or even closer,say a few thousand votes. Is there any chance of a new referendum or will it be binding either way?
On June 22 2016 07:15 pmh wrote: What will happen when the results are very close,like 49.9 vs 50.1 Or even closer,say a few thousand votes. Is there any chance of a new referendum or will it be binding either way?
I would guess that UKIP would do really well at the next election and then there might be a second referendum
On June 22 2016 07:15 pmh wrote: What will happen when the results are very close,like 49.9 vs 50.1 Or even closer,say a few thousand votes. Is there any chance of a new referendum or will it be binding either way?
The referendum is not even binding. Parliament could legally ignore it anyway. MPs are overwhelmingly anti-Brexit btw...
And even if the referendum goes to the exit side, there will have to be negotiations with the EU, which will take years most probably. In case of a close referendum they could then always argue, that the negotiated exit conditions were too negative for the UK and that the EU made them a sweet counter offer or something.
The pro-leave posters seem to be so forceful that they have come to dominate this thread. Whoever shouts loudest and longest wins I guess.
On June 22 2016 05:21 jello_biafra wrote: The fact that certain people on the remain side said that if we leave the EU we'll lose worker's rights such as paid holidays or maternity leave alone would be enough to change my mind, that's absolute nonsense and I don't believe it for a second. The UK had these rights and more before we joined the EU and any government that wanted to remove those would be absolutely suicidal.
Incredibly patronising.
And on an unrelated note, the entire EU organisation is probably going to collapse within the next 15 years, the Netherlands and France will probably be next to leave, the UK should be a trailblazer and get a head start.
Our current conservative government is quite hostile towards worker rights because it is pro-business. The UK does not seem to care about the Working Time Directive for example. And although maternity leave will still exist, do you think it will be as strong as now? I doubt the tories would give 52 weeks maternity leave.
Considering all the welfare cuts they have made would it really surprise you if the new rights put into UK law were weaker than the ones given by EU law?
ONS UK population report 2016, releasing tomorrow, 23rd June.Will show population increase over the past year due to both migration and natural births.
On June 21 2016 13:43 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: Soros article in the guardian warning that brexit will lead to a fall in the value of the pound. You can't make this up!
Firstly, you're not even European. Yes, it's democracy but you seem overactive in this EU debate even though you're from Australia. Please let Europeans sort this out instead because it's our future. Also, if nobel prize-winning economists say Brexit is bad for economy, then people like me and you don't have the authority to deny it.
On June 22 2016 05:12 WhiteDog wrote: Stop lying to yourself and others (same for Nyxisto) : the debate on most important european subject have no value and most decisions are taken by the commission/council, i.e. behind closed doors. At no point they were central in any of the european elections.
The problem isn't so much that there isn't a discussion happening but that some people with very obscure opinions fueled by perceived social media support want to dominate a discussion or create a certain climate because they feeling that they are the 'true' majority.
Here is what I understand : you, and people who think like you, are losing the debate. It's not that "some people with very obscure opinions" want to dominate discussion, it is that your arguments are not sufficient. Think deeper about your arguments, and try to find solution what is actually felt by the people, not some kind of rebutal to dismiss their concern. That's democracy.
There is no headway to be made with the Brexit advocates because the position is in itself contradictory. On one side they demand more European democracy, which if genuinely implemented would mean majority votes in the European parliament and legislative initiative which would result in a huge net loss of sovereignty for the UK. At the same time they deride the commission model, although the unanimous decision making gives the UK absolutely disproportionate influence on the EU level.
You can't win this argument by definition because whatever the pro EU side proposes the Brexit side is going to shut it down on the grounds of 'muh sovereignty'. If that is what you start with there's no point to talk.
The Brexit people are like a person who threatens to run out of the room every time you don't agree with them, the EU skeptics you can actually talk to are the ones that are in the remain camp and want to actually reform the institutions.
What a joke! I've just checked eligibility for voting in elections and Commonwealth citizens are able to vote in the UK, while people from EU who pay taxes can't. So, Australians can vote in the UK, but UK citizens can't vote in Australia if they were registered after 1984 or something like that!
Edit: Nevermind, Australians can't vote in the UK if they're not qualifying Commonwealth citizens or British citizens.
On June 21 2016 13:43 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: Soros article in the guardian warning that brexit will lead to a fall in the value of the pound. You can't make this up!
Firstly, you're not even European. Yes, it's democracy but you seem overactive in this EU debate even though you're from Australia. Please let Europeans sort this out instead because it's our future. Also, if nobel prize-winning economists say Brexit is bad for economy, then people like me and you don't have the authority to deny it.
On June 21 2016 13:43 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: Soros article in the guardian warning that brexit will lead to a fall in the value of the pound. You can't make this up!
Firstly, you're not even European. Yes, it's democracy but you seem overactive in this EU debate even though you're from Australia. Please let Europeans sort this out instead because it's our future. Also, if nobel prize-winning economists say Brexit is bad for economy, then people like me and you don't have the authority to deny it.
It's a British choice, other Europeans have as much say in this as Australians.
As far as voting rights are concerned, you're almost right. Otherwise, Australians can't be less concerned if the UK left or not. It's Europeans who are affected after the referendum as well as British people.
EPT
