EU-BREXIT - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in Europe's nation states, the E.U. & Russia.

Moderator: PoFo Europe Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. This is an international political discussion forum, so please post in English only.
User avatar
By ingliz
#14858470
Decky wrote:There is a man working in the mint who operates a machine to make pennies

There are men and women working in banks who operate machines to make pennies - data inputters. Every time a bank approves a loan it's manufacturing money. Cash is only about 10% of the 'money' sloshing around in the economy.

howstuffworks wrote:Since money is really just a representation of value, it didn't take long for people to realize they could just send information about money by telegraph or other electronic means, and it was just as "real" as sending the money itself.


:)
User avatar
By Beren
#14858480
I wonder if Brexit will be detrimental enough for a revolution or it's the revolution itself. Great October is coming guys! :excited:

Image
User avatar
By Nonsense
#14858656
23 June 2016-The Glorious Revolution(Glorifica Nova)-Ubi Nos Duco, Parti Exsequor-(Where we lead, others follow).

The 'revolution' is not yet complete in respect of leaving the EU.

Theresa MAY is a traitor, intent on betraying the leave vote, do NOT take at face value what she says, she has already capitulated to the EU, she has agreed to pay more money to the EU & she will surrender to the EU demand for 'Free Movement'.

It PROBABLY does NOT occur to her, or her government or her Ministers negotiating with the EU, that their is De Facto Free Movement continuing unbroken, pre-Brexit & post-Brexit even if there is no more agreement between the UK-EU.

That is so, because the current batch of European migrant 'workers' already here, will continue to be here post-Brexit.

What, to me, is really making me angry, is not knowing the details of estimating the future liabilities of the UK in respect of these 'legal' EU migrants & vice versa.

Remember, there is a 3:1 ratio of EU migrants here, compared to UK ex-pats in the EU, that should mean a financial balance in our favour, by increasing EU liabilities to the UK.

In retrospect, I believe the referendum was wrong, in that it posed the 'wrong' question.

I think the British people should have been asked, " Do you support the British government in demanding that the Maastricht Treaty be re-negotiated, that if an unsatisfactory conclusion is the result, the UK shall then leave the EU without any obligations on our part to any liabilities".

We are where we are, the Tories are going to be swept from office for a very long time in 2022(if not earlier), that is the price they ARE going to pay for wrecking our economy & failures with the EU.

NOTE: It was the Maastricht Treaty that created the EU, 'Free Movement' & 'Third Countries' that allowed unfettered migration from outside the EU.
User avatar
By Potemkin
#14858723
I think the British people should have been asked, " Do you support the British government in demanding that the Maastricht Treaty be re-negotiated, that if an unsatisfactory conclusion is the result, the UK shall then leave the EU without any obligations on our part to any liabilities".

That would have been an illegal referendum. It would have been no more legal than the referendum held by the Catalan nationalists as to whether Catalonia should secede from Spain. The UK has legal obligations to the EU (and vice-versa, of course), and cannot simply unilaterally declare those obligations to be null and void.
User avatar
By ingliz
#14858725
estimating the future liabilities of the UK

BINO (Brexit In Name Only)

0.65% of GNI; double that if the UK loses its rebate.


:)
User avatar
By Nonsense
#14858930
Potemkin wrote:That would have been an illegal referendum. It would have been no more legal than the referendum held by the Catalan nationalists as to whether Catalonia should secede from Spain. The UK has legal obligations to the EU (and vice-versa, of course), and cannot simply unilaterally declare those obligations to be null and void.


No one says they are "null and void", I said that the Maastricht Treaty should be re-negotiated.
It was that Treaty which brought the EU into being, along with 'free movement' & uncontrolled 'third country' migration.

Re-negotiating that Treaty would, allow the UK to remove itself from the EU, along with 'free movement' & unfettered third country migration.

Now, I do not see that happening, as the EU would not allow it, which brings me to two serious points about the EU.

ONE\ The EU 'Treaties' are nothing but 'traps' from which there is no escape, which is undemocratic, because the electorate never had a voice or vote on any of the follow-up 'Treaties' or amendments post Harold WILSON referendum.

TWO\ In a democratic system, it cannot be right that an elected government can accept Treaty changes without proper consultation of the electorate by referendum, as opposed to a general election over all issues.

To accept the initial Treaty, with subsequent amendments being ratified without specifically consulting the electorate is wrong.

One may as well invoke Treaties from previous centuries now deemed defunct, as having legal validity, when many generations & circumstances have happened since.

The EU itself recognises there are problems with migration\asylum that require change & simply digging into the status quo in order to counter the 'Right' popularity throughout Europe is counter-productive.
User avatar
By Potemkin
#14858980
No one says they are "null and void", I said that the Maastricht Treaty should be re-negotiated.
It was that Treaty which brought the EU into being, along with 'free movement' & uncontrolled 'third country' migration.

Re-negotiating that Treaty would, allow the UK to remove itself from the EU, along with 'free movement' & unfettered third country migration.

Now, I do not see that happening, as the EU would not allow it, which brings me to two serious points about the EU.

The EU would not allow it because it would be an illegal act. Once a legal contract has been sighed (and a treaty is a legal contract), then one party cannot unilaterally renounce it without breaking the law.

ONE\ The EU 'Treaties' are nothing but 'traps' from which there is no escape, which is undemocratic, because the electorate never had a voice or vote on any of the follow-up 'Treaties' or amendments post Harold WILSON referendum.

TWO\ In a democratic system, it cannot be right that an elected government can accept Treaty changes without proper consultation of the electorate by referendum, as opposed to a general election over all issues.

To accept the initial Treaty, with subsequent amendments being ratified without specifically consulting the electorate is wrong.

Since when has the UK been ruled by plebiscite or referendum? You're basically just complaining about the fact that the UK is a representative parliamentary democracy rather than a direct democracy. If you don't like that fact, then you'd better start stockpiling the molotov cocktails and building the barricades right now.

One may as well invoke Treaties from previous centuries now deemed defunct, as having legal validity, when many generations & circumstances have happened since.

But that's exactly what does happen. I believe the treaty according to which the UK declared war on Nazi Germany when it invaded Poland dated back to the early 19th century and had been long forgotten by most European statesmen. But the UK wanted to declare war on Hitler to stop that lunatic in his tracks, and that dusty old treaty was the perfect pretext.

The EU itself recognises there are problems with migration\asylum that require change & simply digging into the status quo in order to counter the 'Right' popularity throughout Europe is counter-productive.

So what do you propose? The EU isn't going to dissolve itself any time soon, and the status quo is, almost by definition, here to stay for the foreseeable future. mainly because legal contracts and treaties cannot simply be torn up whenever you feel it's convenient to do so.
By foxdemon
#14859023
Potemkin wrote:That would have been an illegal referendum. It would have been no more legal than the referendum held by the Catalan nationalists as to whether Catalonia should secede from Spain. The UK has legal obligations to the EU (and vice-versa, of course), and cannot simply unilaterally declare those obligations to be null and void.


Well...actually, the UK has nukes. So all sorts of ultimatums can be given or else Europe disappears in a nuclear fireball. It really depends on whether one is prepared to..as the Americans would put it...play hard ball.

Now that might seem a little extreme. But one must be realistic. International politics is ultimately about power. Historically the English did quite well preying on Spanish galleon. Was that legal? And the British did quite well from massacuring Indian rebels and profiting from opium sales to China. Was any of that legal? So what has happened to the mighty British? Following rules....obeying the law? That is not what made Britain great.


If I was ruling the UK, I’d be ‘white anting’ the EU while preparing an appropriate military solution to deal with any potiential objections to whatever demands I might decide to make. I honestly think the British have lost their touch.
By B0ycey
#14859030
@foxdemon, did you even read what you just wrote.

Apart from the glaring obvious that any nuclear fallout in Europe will effect the UK, France too have nuclear weapons.

Brexit is a joke that might as well finally remove the work 'Great' from 'Great Britain'. If you walk away from a club you can't expect to receive the perks. Throwing your toys out to get what you want is just embarrassing. Instead the UK have two opinion. Either plan for no deal and see what they can get from negotiations or do a second referendum explaining everything to somehow justify reversing this mistake. The incompetence of the UK government means I won't be holding my breath for either.
By Atlantis
#14859043
foxdemon wrote:Well...actually, the UK has nukes. So all sorts of ultimatums can be given or else Europe disappears in a nuclear fireball. It really depends on whether one is prepared to..as the Americans would put it...play hard ball.


The empire is rearing its ugly head again. But it's good to see the masquerading come down to reveal the real face of your people.

I urge you to go ahead with your threats. That would finally propel the EU into action. We have a nearly broke Eastern neighbor with an extensive arsenal. I'm sure to get the Russians to do the dirty deed would cost us far less than 2% of GDP. And isn't it all about competition and the free market, as you have taught us so well? After all, Nato is obsolete and has far too many overheads.
By foxdemon
#14859050
B0ycey wrote:@foxdemon, did you even read what you just wrote.

Apart from the glaring obvious that any nuclear fallout in Europe will effect the UK, France too have nuclear weapons.

Brexit is a joke that might as well finally remove the work 'Great' from 'Great Britain'. If you walk away from a club you can't expect to receive the perks. Throwing your toys out to get what you want is just embarrassing. Instead the UK have two opinion. Either plan for no deal and see what they can get from negotiations or do a second referendum explaining everything to somehow justify reversing this mistake. The incompetence of the UK government means I won't be holding my breath for either.



What are you talking about? ThevAmericans, the Russians and the Chinese have no quarms using military action to get what they want. Britain has been doing the same thing for centuries. Why stop now?


Atlantis wrote:The empire is rearing its ugly head again. But it's good to see the masquerading come down to reveal the real face of your people.


Really? So it’s ok by you? The British have 4 boomers, each with 16 ballistic missiles. Each of those has 12 independently targetable warheads. So that’s almost 800 warheads of 100 kilo tons each. Do you have any idea of how much of Europe the British could reduce to smouldering wastes in under 30 minutes?

Are you sure it is a good idea to punish the UK for leaving?
By Atlantis
#14859052
foxdemon wrote:Are you sure it is a good idea to punish the UK for leaving?


Nobody is punishing the UK. The Brits are doing it to themselves. It's the UK's decision to leave the single market and the customs union. You cannot be inside the single market and outside the single market at the same time. The self-serving logic that marks the Anglosphere since the Iraq invasion (or earlier) will be your downfall, nukes or no nukes.
By foxdemon
#14859061
Atlantis wrote:Nobody is punishing the UK. The Brits are doing it to themselves. It's the UK's decision to leave the single market and the customs union. You cannot be inside the single market and outside the single market at the same time. The self-serving logic that marks the Anglosphere since the Iraq invasion (or earlier) will be your downfall, nukes or no nukes.


That sounds like the explanation an abusive husband tells his wife when she tries to leave. But go ahead and continue fostering bad blood. The UK will provide a useful base of operations for Anglo-Saxon might when it comes time again to teach the Germans some respect (for the third time).

Just so long as you remember that the UK is a nuclear power and maybe it isn’t such a good idea to make them angry. Anyway, best of luck with the negotiations. :)
User avatar
By ingliz
#14859071
foxdemon wrote:the UK is a nuclear power

Not really, even if the missiles are technically outside the PAL, they will still have to ask daddy first if they can play with their toys and launch a first strike. It is a politically, diplomatically and many other long words ending in ly impossible scenario.

The UK would not stand up to the US over Custard Cream tariffs let alone beginning Armageddon.


:lol:
By B0ycey
#14859084
foxdemon wrote:What are you talking about? ThevAmericans, the Russians and the Chinese have no quarms using military action to get what they want. Britain has been doing the same thing for centuries. Why stop now?


For an Australian I don't understand why you give a shit. But sure, nuclear war wouldn't affect you would it. But maybe it would. A third world war effects everyone. Even you.

As for the UK fighting for what it wants, they haven't been able to do that for a hundred years now. They are America's poodle. We take the shit while they profit from it. But just to clarify, Europe are not some weak third world shit hole. They can fight back. So any form of threat 'to get what we want' is unlikely to end well for the continent.

Brexit is bad enough. Let's not play war games and get our fingers burnt shall we. :roll:
By Decky
#14859396
foxdemon wrote:Well...actually, the UK has nukes. So all sorts of ultimatums can be given or else Europe disappears in a nuclear fireball. It really depends on whether one is prepared to..as the Americans would put it...play hard ball.


That would obviously be ideal but sadly France has nukes as well (allowing them to get them was one of the darkest days in British history). MAD prevents us from bringing Europe to its sense by that avenue. :*( You are thinking on the right lines but it isn't possible. It would be better for us to provide diplomatic support to the Catalans and all independence seeking groups to literally break up the nations that oppose us into more manageable chunks.
By foxdemon
#14859410
B0ycey wrote:For an Australian I don't understand why you give a shit. But sure, nuclear war wouldn't affect you would it. But maybe it would. A third world war effects everyone. Even you.

As for the UK fighting for what it wants, they haven't been able to do that for a hundred years now. They are America's poodle. We take the shit while they profit from it. But just to clarify, Europe are not some weak third world shit hole. They can fight back. So any form of threat 'to get what we want' is unlikely to end well for the continent.

Brexit is bad enough. Let's not play war games and get our fingers burnt shall we. :roll:



There was a time when the British were made of sterner stuff.


OK, so I am a shakler dragger. See, here in the Far East nations have self respect. The problem for Australia is to gain the self confidence to stand up to them and make them accept us as their peers.

But that’s the thing. If you want us to respect you, or indeed anyone else in the world, then you have to stand up for your selves too. It doesn’t matter what it takes. The world is a nasty place. I am terribly sorry but you need to grown some balls.

I should say that the EU will lose a great deal from not having the UK involved. This has nothing to do with GDP growth rates or similar neo-liberal hog’s wash. They need you for your experience in responsible governance. Forget economics. The Europeans, well at least the French and Germans, are fools.


Decky wrote:That would obviously be ideal but sadly France has nukes as well (allowing them to get them was one of the darkest days in British history). MAD prevents us from bringing Europe to its sense by that avenue. :*( You are thinking on the right lines but it isn't possible. It would be better for us to provide diplomatic support to the Catalans and all independence seeking groups to literally break up the nations that oppose us into more manageable chunks.


I think we are on the same wave length. The problem is the current elites in the UK are pathetic. I can only advise you to keep the pressure up. Eventually the system will give way and a more robust consensus will triumph.
By B0ycey
#14859425
foxdemon wrote:There was a time when the British were made of sterner stuff.


Perhaps. But the days when Britannia ruled the waves was over a century ago now. We still think we are a bigger hitter, but in reality there are only two players (three if you include Russia) in the game. The EU actually gives the UK some credibility in the sense that as a unit it has the biggest economy in the world and has a military that rivals Russia and China (Perhaps not America). The UK alone is a joke. It's a small nation with a big history. Today we are middle weight. Slightly more powerful than France but weaker than Europe collectively. Even if the UK was stupid enough to do what you suggest, do you think France would sit on their hands? The UK has two choices. Either stop bitching about the EU and leave or remain and accept it for what it is. At the moment we are leaving but for some reason bitching about doing so.

OK, so I am a shakler dragger. See, here in the Far East nations have self respect. The problem for Australia is to gain the self confidence to stand up to them and make them accept us as their peers.

But that’s the thing. If you want us to respect you, or indeed anyone else in the world, then you have to stand up for your selves too. It doesn’t matter what it takes. The world is a nasty place. I am terribly sorry but you need to grown some balls.


The Far East has respect because they don't threaten the world with nukes. Why do you think the world hates America? Asia has the same attitude as I do in regards to international politics. Keep out of internal affairs and keep relationships to trade only. And that attitude is what gives a nation international respect.

Nonetheless, lets say you were Australia's Prime Minister. What kind of respect do you think China would give you if you threaten them with nuclear war? My hunch is no respect at all with an Arsenal of nukes targeted at every single Australian city within minutes of your threat.

I should say that the EU will lose a great deal from not having the UK involved. This has nothing to do with GDP growth rates or similar neo-liberal hog’s wash. They need you for your experience in responsible governance. Forget economics. The Europeans, well at least the French and Germans, are fools.


Nobody suggests that the EU wouldn't lose a great deal when the UK leaves the bloc. But the EU isn't forcing the UK to leave, the UK are choosing to leave. There is a big difference between the two. I suspect if the UK did decide to reverse their decision, they might even be embraced and all would be forgiven and forgotten in Europe. But even though attitudes of Brexit are changing within the UK, it hasn't been enough for the government to re-evaluate their position. It appears we just want to sail the ship into the iceberg no matter what because we decided to sail westward at launch.
User avatar
By JohnRawls
#14859432
@ingliz
@B0ycey
@foxdemon
@Decky

The damage has been done already to the EU and Britain. The only way Brexit will be cancelled is by Britain agreeing to not impede further integration. Under those conditions of course we will forgive and forget. Even if Britain will want to stop Brexit at some point, there are new realities that will need to be addressed. As it is, nobody really wants Britain as part of the EU because they have been the problem child of EU for quite some time. We have bended the rules so much for Britain, yet they started Brexit anyways.

Technically Britain can cancel Brexit by itself but i doubt it will be that simple. :|
Almost everybody understand that cancelling Brexit will mean that Britain will again try to bend the rules and impede developments in the EU. Majority of the EU politicians do not want this.
By Atlantis
#14859448
JohnRawls wrote:The damage has been done already to the EU and Britain.


I don't see any damage to the EU. Quite on the contrary, approval ratings are up across the Union, the economy is doing very well, many projects including military cooperation and the fight against tax evasion, blocked by the UK, are finally making some progress. Last night I saw a TV debate with senior German politicians. All, from virtually every major party, agreed that Brexit had given the EU a new boost. So, this isn't a fringe opinion.

I hope the Brits don't have second thoughts about Art. 50 before March 2019. If they come back after that, they'll have to become a normal member without any special privileges.

The single market will become a little smaller. It's still one of the biggest and most prosperous in the world and there are a number of countries in line to join. And if the Brits want as close a relation as they say they want, they'll have to accept EU regulations and become a passive member like Norway or Switzerland or Turkey, all of which are associated with the single market without having any say in its decision-making processes. That would be a perfect arrangement.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 328

Since you keep insisting on pretending that the I[…]

Commercial foreclosures increase 97% from last ye[…]

People tend to forget that the French now have a […]

It is easy to tell the tunnel was made of pre fab[…]