BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴

1…4243454748…2110

Comments

  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Bobbinogs wrote:
    mrfpb wrote:
    We joined NATO as a co-operative defence organisation, and got a co-operative defence organisation.

    We joined the EEC as a trading community and got a club of Commissioners determined to pursue a dream of ever closer integration into a single European state with a single currency. The two things are very different. Remain don't want the superstate or Euro anymore than Leave do. We want a co-op of trade and possibly environmental/climate controls, but want to retain our distinct identity in partnership with our European neighbours.
    .

    I think those are really good statements that cover where we are. I guess the problem is what staying in will achieve, as in, can we stay in something where we want something so very different to (seemingly) everyone else? As Europe appears to edge towards the superstate ideal (whether we like it or not) at which point do we put the brake on...and will the brake be just on us or on the diesel that is the EU? Is now a good time to say "Do you know what, we don't actually want to end up where everyone else is going, can you stop the EU bus as we want to get off"?

    The subject of a Superstate or a United States of Europe is something we covered a few pages back. Bizarrely it is about the only thing we came close to agreeing on. All the major power brokers have conceded this is not going to happen.
  • Bobbinogs
    Bobbinogs Posts: 4,841
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    ...

    The subject of a Superstate or a United States of Europe is something we covered a few pages back...

    To be fair, in the 67 pages of debate we have probably covered off most things including the sex appeal of Nicola Sturgeon. Some things I remember, some things I try to forget!
  • mrfpb
    mrfpb Posts: 4,569
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Bobbinogs wrote:
    mrfpb wrote:
    We joined NATO as a co-operative defence organisation, and got a co-operative defence organisation.

    We joined the EEC as a trading community and got a club of Commissioners determined to pursue a dream of ever closer integration into a single European state with a single currency. The two things are very different. Remain don't want the superstate or Euro anymore than Leave do. We want a co-op of trade and possibly environmental/climate controls, but want to retain our distinct identity in partnership with our European neighbours.
    .

    I think those are really good statements that cover where we are. I guess the problem is what staying in will achieve, as in, can we stay in something where we want something so very different to (seemingly) everyone else? As Europe appears to edge towards the superstate ideal (whether we like it or not) at which point do we put the brake on...and will the brake be just on us or on the diesel that is the EU? Is now a good time to say "Do you know what, we don't actually want to end up where everyone else is going, can you stop the EU bus as we want to get off"?

    The subject of a Superstate or a United States of Europe is something we covered a few pages back. Bizarrely it is about the only thing we came close to agreeing on. All the major power brokers have conceded this is not going to happen.

    It was around here: viewtopic.php?f=40088&t=13028650&start=1140#p19892770

    But there isn't yet a consensus, more a slow powershift away from the federalists towards the co-operatists (is that a word? It is now!). Looking at Tusk's statement yesterday he seems to have gone from the voice of reason to voice of Project Fear in just a few months. There wasn't a general will to change when we did our negotiation, so I don't see genuine reform ahead for quite a few years. I can't quantify that "quite a few years" but it will be a difficult task and I think we have better things to spend our energy on.
  • veronese68
    veronese68 Posts: 27,814
    Bobbinogs wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    ...

    The subject of a Superstate or a United States of Europe is something we covered a few pages back...

    To be fair, in the 67 pages of debate we have probably covered off most things including the sex appeal of Nicola Sturgeon. Some things I remember, some things I try to forget!
    Did you have to bring that up again? Most of us are appalled again, a certain fan of Belgian beer maybe not so much.
    Kinesis Pro6
    Marin Nail Trail
    Cotic Solaris
  • BelgianBeerGeek
    BelgianBeerGeek Posts: 5,226
    Veronese68 wrote:
    Bobbinogs wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    ...

    The subject of a Superstate or a United States of Europe is something we covered a few pages back...

    To be fair, in the 67 pages of debate we have probably covered off most things including the sex appeal of Nicola Sturgeon. Some things I remember, some things I try to forget!
    Did you have to bring that up again? Most of us are appalled again, a certain fan of Belgian beer maybe not so much.
    :lol: Apply that mind bleach, chaps.
    Ecrasez l’infame
  • veronese68
    veronese68 Posts: 27,814
    You see, the merest mention of Sturgeon and up he pops. :shock:
    Kinesis Pro6
    Marin Nail Trail
    Cotic Solaris
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,327
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    The subject of a Superstate or a United States of Europe is something we covered a few pages back. Bizarrely it is about the only thing we came close to agreeing on. All the major power brokers have conceded this is not going to happen.
    Possibly. Trouble is it was the plan and I think it will rear it's head again in the future.They are currently working on an Energy Union as an example. Currency, laws, energy........What's next? I don't trust them. Any of them. On all sides.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    mrfpb wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Bobbinogs wrote:
    mrfpb wrote:
    We joined NATO as a co-operative defence organisation, and got a co-operative defence organisation.

    We joined the EEC as a trading community and got a club of Commissioners determined to pursue a dream of ever closer integration into a single European state with a single currency. The two things are very different. Remain don't want the superstate or Euro anymore than Leave do. We want a co-op of trade and possibly environmental/climate controls, but want to retain our distinct identity in partnership with our European neighbours.
    .

    I think those are really good statements that cover where we are. I guess the problem is what staying in will achieve, as in, can we stay in something where we want something so very different to (seemingly) everyone else? As Europe appears to edge towards the superstate ideal (whether we like it or not) at which point do we put the brake on...and will the brake be just on us or on the diesel that is the EU? Is now a good time to say "Do you know what, we don't actually want to end up where everyone else is going, can you stop the EU bus as we want to get off"?

    The subject of a Superstate or a United States of Europe is something we covered a few pages back. Bizarrely it is about the only thing we came close to agreeing on. All the major power brokers have conceded this is not going to happen.

    It was around here: viewtopic.php?f=40088&t=13028650&start=1140#p19892770

    But there isn't yet a consensus, more a slow powershift away from the federalists towards the co-operatists (is that a word? It is now!). Looking at Tusk's statement yesterday he seems to have gone from the voice of reason to voice of Project Fear in just a few months. There wasn't a general will to change when we did our negotiation, so I don't see genuine reform ahead for quite a few years. I can't quantify that "quite a few years" but it will be a difficult task and I think we have better things to spend our energy on.

    that is close to us agreeing... Coopster and I had to move to another thread to agree in private.

    Postby mrfpb » Sun Jun 12, 2016 4:51 pm

    I read it as Junker is despairing and resorting to insulting newer member states who disagree with his European dream. Tusk is acknowledging that member states don't want full integration.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    PBlakeney wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    The subject of a Superstate or a United States of Europe is something we covered a few pages back. Bizarrely it is about the only thing we came close to agreeing on. All the major power brokers have conceded this is not going to happen.
    Possibly. Trouble is it was the plan and I think it will rear it's head again in the future.They are currently working on an Energy Union as an example. Currency, laws, energy........What's next? I don't trust them. Any of them. On all sides.

    What will they think of next!!!
    A European Energy Union will ensure that Europe has secure, affordable and climate-friendly energy. Wiser energy use while fighting climate change is both a spur for new jobs and growth and an investment in Europe's future.

    Best we leave and pay the French/Chinese to build a nuclear power station to provide us with the world's most expensive power
  • mrfpb
    mrfpb Posts: 4,569
    My postal ballot was waiting when I got home.
  • coopster_the_1st
    coopster_the_1st Posts: 5,158
    mamba80 wrote:
    i would ask you what is the Leaves plan B, if the economy tanks, the £ falls through the floor and companies start to relocate? or any combination.

    Like you say the referendum being a complicated mix of things, so is the above question.

    It's difficult to put a view forward what a 'plan B' would look like as this would be down to the whoever is the chancellor and BoE(C&BoE) at the time. These two parties have been hugely irresponsible in talking down a leave situation as markets are all about confidence and how much trust is there going to be if on 22nd June the C&BoE are predicting armageddon and on 24th June they have to now present confidence in the UK economy. They have shown a lack of responsibility by what they have said and their actions are more of a risk upon a Brexit vote rather than the actual action itself!

    As had been agreed in the Irish discussions there will still be trade on 24th June whether we remain or leave and the same is for all the other EU countries.

    The great positive of having a floating currency is that is acts as a balance to flows of capital in or out of the country. If in the scenario companies start to relocate the £ is likely to drop. This will mean it will be cheaper for foreign companies to invest in the UK and more expensive for further companies to relocate. At some point this balance will be found but on 24th June the UK skills will not change, we will still have great people working here producing profits for their employers.

    I don't foresee the economic armegeddon that is being predicted. After initial volatility I think it will have a similar effect to having a change of government after a general election. The economic risk comes from being talked down rather than the actual action itself :(
  • coopster_the_1st
    coopster_the_1st Posts: 5,158
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    PBlakeney wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    The subject of a Superstate or a United States of Europe is something we covered a few pages back. Bizarrely it is about the only thing we came close to agreeing on. All the major power brokers have conceded this is not going to happen.
    Possibly. Trouble is it was the plan and I think it will rear it's head again in the future.They are currently working on an Energy Union as an example. Currency, laws, energy........What's next? I don't trust them. Any of them. On all sides.

    What will they think of next!!!
    A European Energy Union will ensure that Europe has secure, affordable and climate-friendly energy. Wiser energy use while fighting climate change is both a spur for new jobs and growth and an investment in Europe's future.

    Best we leave and pay the French/Chinese to build a nuclear power station to provide us with the world's most expensive power

    The trouble is as PBlakeney points out is trust. We have to trust that they will play with a straight bat and with 28 individual interests I cannot see that happening. There are numerous examples of where the EU have taken or tried to take from the UK e.g. Ford Transit plant in Southampton, London as the centre of Finance, UK Fishing industry, etc

    We do well and then are constantly fighting off those that are supposed to be on our side from trying to take it from us.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Financial markets are more about uncertainty so the irresponsible thing was calling the referendum. What has been said since is irrelevant.

    Produce a reputable source to back up your claim that a post Brexit currency crisis will result in greater foreign direct investment.

    Again show me a reputable source to explain why you think it will be no worse than a General Election?
  • Bobbinogs
    Bobbinogs Posts: 4,841
    mrfpb wrote:
    My postal ballot was waiting when I got home.

    No problem, just give it to me and I will post it for you ;-)
  • coopster_the_1st
    coopster_the_1st Posts: 5,158
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Financial markets are more about uncertainty so the irresponsible thing was calling the referendum. What has been said since is irrelevant.

    Produce a reputable source to back up your claim that a post Brexit currency crisis will result in greater foreign direct investment.

    Again show me a reputable source to explain why you think it will be no worse than a General Election?

    The Bank of Japan could say one of many things that would crash stock markets world wide but don't as they promote trust and confidence in the world wide economy. To say what the BoE and Chancellor have said is irrelevant is idiotic. They should be promoting independence and producing positive messages to calm the markets for both scenarios. They did not talk down the actions they were taking in the banking crisis!

    I have no problem with the IFS, OECD, etc making their predictions but those at the financial controls of our economy should be neutral and acting responsibly in the countries interest not talking down one side for political gain.

    The PWC report said that at 2030 a remain vote will mean the economy will have grown by 41% but under a brexit vote we will have grown by 39%. I think that comes within the influence of a general election when you are looking that far out.
  • orraloon
    orraloon Posts: 13,227
    ^ "The PWC report said..."

    I assure you as a former PWC consultant back in the day, PWC can make stuff up with the best of them. :lol:
  • coopster_the_1st
    coopster_the_1st Posts: 5,158
    orraloon wrote:
    ^ "The PWC report said..."

    I assure you as a former PWC consultant back in the day, PWC can make stuff up with the best of them. :lol:

    Well who would have thought that? An ex-employee confirms what a large majority of the public already know that all those with a vested interest will make stuff up to suit their views.

    That's what happens when you start with the conclusion you want and work back from there.
  • mr_goo
    mr_goo Posts: 3,770
    Veronese68 wrote:
    Mr Goo wrote:
    Never gonna talk me around to voting for an unelected government (EU Commission).
    But the commission is not a government, the commission does not make and pass laws. Do you know how many civil servants help make up the British parliament? All unelected bureaucrats.

    Come off it. Don't start a comparison between UK civil servants and the EU Commission. It just doesn't wash.
    Everyone knows that the driving force and power of the EU is the Commission. The EU parliament and MEPs are there to implement what the commission demands.
    Always be yourself, unless you can be Aaron Rodgers....Then always be Aaron Rodgers.
  • darkhairedlord
    darkhairedlord Posts: 7,180
    Backcasting?
  • mr_goo
    mr_goo Posts: 3,770
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    PBlakeney wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    The subject of a Superstate or a United States of Europe is something we covered a few pages back. Bizarrely it is about the only thing we came close to agreeing on. All the major power brokers have conceded this is not going to happen.
    Possibly. Trouble is it was the plan and I think it will rear it's head again in the future.They are currently working on an Energy Union as an example. Currency, laws, energy........What's next? I don't trust them. Any of them. On all sides.

    What will they think of next!!!
    A European Energy Union will ensure that Europe has secure, affordable and climate-friendly energy. Wiser energy use while fighting climate change is both a spur for new jobs and growth and an investment in Europe's future.

    Best we leave and pay the French/Chinese to build a nuclear power station to provide us with the world's most expensive power

    The trouble is as PBlakeney points out is trust. We have to trust that they will play with a straight bat and with 28 individual interests I cannot see that happening. There are numerous examples of where the EU have taken or tried to take from the UK e.g. Ford Transit plant in Southampton, London as the centre of Finance, UK Fishing industry, etc

    We do well and then are constantly fighting off those that are supposed to be on our side from trying to take it from us.

    Not forgetting our very depleted armed forces. I'm sure I have read about the sharing of military assets. Which is not much of a step away from a European military force.
    Always be yourself, unless you can be Aaron Rodgers....Then always be Aaron Rodgers.
  • orraloon
    orraloon Posts: 13,227
    21m7rkh.jpg

    Have fun.
  • orraloon
    orraloon Posts: 13,227
    From perusing today's contributions, see the Superstate canard has flown back in again.

    No chance. In spite of what some EU officials might dream, no European country will agree. Populations will not accept such and therefore European politicians will go with their wishes, being politicians and that.

    Dutch dislike the Germans, Flemish Belgians dislike the French, indeed Flemish and Walloon Belgians hate each other, nobody likes the French, most of Southern Europe hates the Germans, who in turn think Southern Europeans are all lazy xxxxers, and so on and on.

    One big superstate? My ar5e.
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,327
    orraloon wrote:
    From perusing today's contributions, see the Superstate canard has flown back in again.

    No chance. In spite of what some EU officials might dream, no European country will agree. Populations will not accept such and therefore European politicians will go with their wishes, being politicians and that.

    Dutch dislike the Germans, Flemish Belgians dislike the French, indeed Flemish and Walloon Belgians hate each other, nobody likes the French, most of Southern Europe hates the Germans, who in turn think Southern Europeans are all lazy xxxxers, and so on and on.

    One big superstate? My ar5e.
    Lets run with that for a while then.
    If any one of the 28 Countries can veto anything then how is anything ever going to be decided? It'll fall apart.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • ballysmate
    ballysmate Posts: 15,930
    mamba80 wrote:
    mrfpb wrote:
    We joined NATO as a co-operative defence organisation, and got a co-operative defence organisation.

    We joined the EEC as a trading community and got a club of Commissioners determined to pursue a dream of ever closer integration into a single European state with a single currency. The two things are very different. Remain don't want the superstate or Euro anymore than Leave do. We want a co-op of trade and possibly environmental/climate controls, but want to retain our distinct identity in partnership with our European neighbours.

    We want to be a good neighbour in Europe, We don't want to live in an open plan house with everyone in the European avenue.

    not wishing to side track but how many people in the UK would be happy going to War, if russia stepped in and "protected" its Russian speaking minority in the Baltic states?
    Or maybe going in with much aligned Turkey if it were to shoot down a few more MIG/Sukios and Russia retaliated?

    Our membership of NATO has consequences far beyond a euro super state.

    Euro commissioners can want what they like but the electorate of Europe do not want a federal super state, so it wont happen.

    Or the EU courting Ukraine and being somewhat responsible for the sh1t going on there and have to fall back on NATO alliances to cover their ass? But yes, I agree, membership of military alliances bring responsibilities.

    The dream of the EU is political union and again I agree that the people are less than keen. Mind you, the Euro didn't and doesn't enjoy universal popular support did it?
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,327
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    What will they think of next!!!
    A European Energy Union will ensure that Europe has secure, affordable and climate-friendly energy. Wiser energy use while fighting climate change is both a spur for new jobs and growth and an investment in Europe's future.
    Common currency, common laws, common parliament, common energy, common army, common investment........
    See where this is heading?
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • orraloon
    orraloon Posts: 13,227
    Ballysmate wrote:

    The dream of the EU is political union and again I agree that the people are less than keen. Mind you, the Euro didn't and doesn't enjoy universal popular support did it?

    At the time when the Euro came in, around 2000 of thereabouts, where I was working my peers where French, Italian, Spanish and German. Herr Deutschlander was insistent that had the German people had a say, they would have kept the D-Mark. But they didn't have a say. Politicians eh?

    Wonder how a vote, a referendum even, would go if held today in Germany about keep Euro or revert to D-Mark.

    I would correct your statement above: the dream of a certain proportion of EU centrists is political union. However, no chance. There is no way that any nation in the EU is going to go with that. Quite the opposite: Scotland, Catalunya? Yugoslavia didn't last long plus ended in tears.
  • ballysmate
    ballysmate Posts: 15,930
    I get that people like Mamba think we shouldn't have a say on membership and bemoans the holding of a referendum, saying there was no interest holding one. But more people voted for one trick pony, UKIP than Green & Libdem combined, plus it was in the Tory manifesto so it wasn't sneaked in was it? Perhaps they would feel differently if the polls showed a healthy remain majority. I suppose it would be claimed it was a good opportunity to put the question to bed once and for all if that were the case.
    I have already voted but the people on here who think that the EU is the Elysian Fields must wonder why perhaps 51% of the country can't see it. The answer perhaps is as Mamba said, the EU Commissioners want a federal Europe but the people don't.
    One of Cameron's opt outs was not to be included in ever closer political union... I wonder what the EU goal could be?
  • mamba80
    mamba80 Posts: 5,032
    Ballysmate wrote:
    I get that people like Mamba think we shouldn't have a say on membership and bemoans the holding of a referendum, saying there was no interest holding one. But more people voted for one trick pony, UKIP than Green & Libdem combined, plus it was in the Tory manifesto so it wasn't sneaked in was it? Perhaps they would feel differently if the polls showed a healthy remain majority. I suppose it would be claimed it was a good opportunity to put the question to bed once and for all if that were the case.
    I have already voted but the people on here who think that the EU is the Elysian Fields must wonder why perhaps 51% of the country can't see it. The answer perhaps is as Mamba said, the EU Commissioners want a federal Europe but the people don't.
    One of Cameron's opt outs was not to be included in ever closer political union... I wonder what the EU goal could be?


    yep people did vote for ukip but i m pretty sure they didnt win too many MPs either (none) before or at the GE (one) and im fairly sure you are not a fan of PR ?

    you know as well as i do, Bally, that the vote was given to win over ukip voters to go Tory and to keep the far right tories on side, fair play i suppose if it were a less important bribe but should leaving prove to be a disaster, what then? where is the contingency? there is none and it ll be the hard working british worker who DC is so fond of sucking up too, who will suffer and already, many millions of Brits going abroad this summer are going to lose out, inc me i might add :(

    EU goal is simple to avoid war (they of course sometime go about it in the wrong way) always has been, always will be and a 1000 years of history shows that europe is only too keen to fight.
  • mrfpb
    mrfpb Posts: 4,569
    In he end it was Labour who lost to UKIP - the tory voters had plenty of Eurosceptic candidates to vote for in their own party. Would UKIP had got those votes if Labour had offered a referendum? We don't know at the end of the day, but UKIP got as many votes as SNP didn't they, that's a good chunk of the popular vote without the corresponding MPs.
  • ballysmate
    ballysmate Posts: 15,930
    As mrfpb says, an awful lot of those 5m+ UKIP voters were poached from Labour. Islington Labour took their voters for granted and sometimes for mugs.
    I still think we will vote to stay in but whatever the result we will never know if the alternate vote would have been better or worse for us will we?

Categories