The EU: In, out, shake it all about.... (76 Viewers)

[Astute]

And right on cue,

And right on cue, here's the ranty man from the pub, completely ignoring those who've been trained and have years of experience to make such predicitions.

Sure, they may not pan out.

But to ignore the experts is downright idiotic.

Yet those experts that say that the EU is in trouble are rubbished.

I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong. We don't know for sure. But on here there is a lot of bigging up one lot of 'experts' and calling others clueless. We should either listen to all of them or ignore all of them. But that isn't about what this thread has turned into.

 

---

[Deleted member 5849]

You are correct....although you meant it as a joke.

Those same people you refer to missed the last two recessions. They got it wrong on what would happen if we voted leave. They didn't even see the banking crash coming and they are supposed to be experts in the field. But we are still supposed to know that they are right.....

You're provong my point.

People with access to the facts, with appropriate training, people who... know what they're doing.

Let's ignore them, and decide we all know best, because occasionally, prediciting things is not an exact science.

Frankly, it's ludicrous and nonsensical to throw out all predicitions based on 'a-ha'. You wouldn't decide you wanted the pissed old ranty bugger as your brain surgeon, after all.

It's a negative regressive call to authority, and it's utterly foolish.

 

[Astute]

You do realise lots of programming work went in to making sure those problems didn't happen, (yes planes falling out of the sky was an exaggeration).

There has been a lot of exaggerations from both sides. And none have happened so far.

 

[Astute]

Following this process as closely as possible. You?

Me? I have been following them not negotiating so far.

 

[clint van damme]

Me? I have been following them not negotiating so far.

What would you do if you were negotiating with a party that was tearing themselves apart. That was instigating votes of no confidence in the person leading the process?

This fuck up is all on the Tories mate.

 

[skybluetony176]

Of course you will end this now. Because it is clearly an anti UK rant and stick up for the EU whatever.

How about having a look at your anti UK rant in detail?

We are monsters because we allow horse racing. It is at least as bad as bull fighting you say. And it is even worse because some horses go for horse meat.

Defend the EU as usual then.

Do the other countries in the EU have horse racing?

How much horse meat is eaten in the UK?

How much is eaten in the other countries of the EU? Yes that is where the market for horse meat is. But strangely enough you never mentioned it once.

Why do you have to constantly attack the UK? This has nothing to do with Brexit. But you think you can make us sound barbaric and the other countries in the EU are saints. But even on this subject they are at least as bad as us. Many are a lot worse.

So you call me a moron for calling you out yet again. Well done.

Jesus Christ you don’t read anything. Not me end it, the jockeyless horse ending it. Try reading it again but slower.

How can pointing out you’re a moron for thinking tha horses must like horse racing because they carry on running when the jockey falls of be an anti U.K. rant? It’s an international sport for starters, including in Europe.

Horse racing is grotesque. I’ve never said it’s as bad as bull fighting so stop twisting and putting words in my mouth.

Don’t starting with your childlike mentality of saying it’s ok to eat one type of meat but not another because they eat it as common practice on the continent. Eating horse meat is exactly the same as eating cows meat. Two animals slaughtered for consumption. It begins and ends there.

I haven’t attacked the U.K. I’ve attacked you for saying that horses love horse racing. You’ve twisted it to something else as per usual.

 

[Astute]

You're provong my point.

People with access to the facts, with appropriate training, people who... know what they're doing.

Let's ignore them, and decide we all know best, because occasionally, prediciting things is not an exact science.

Frankly, it's ludicrous and nonsensical to throw out all predicitions based on 'a-ha'. You wouldn't decide you wanted the pissed old ranty bugger as your brain surgeon, after all.

It's a negative regressive call to authority, and it's utterly foolish.

So why do any of them that say anything not good about the EU get rubbished? Why don't you pull anyone up for doing such? Because you would pull anyone up for publishing those saying bad things on behalf of the UK. Just like now.

As I said we should listen to all if any at all. Otherwise we only get half of the story.

 

[Astute]

What would you do if you were negotiating with a party that was tearing themselves apart. That was instigating votes of no confidence in the person leading the process?

This fuck up is all on the Tories mate.

This was always going to be the problem of having a pro EU organising a leave deal. Deep down she doesn't want to do it. There is a lack of trust in her all round. Remainers see her as a traitor. Leavers don't believe she wants to make a deal. The opposition leader who has always wanted out of the EU now says he wants us in. The EU sees massive divisions in the UK. And they have taken full advantage.

 

[Astute]

Jesus Christ you don’t read anything. Not me end it, the jockeyless horse ending it. Try reading it again but slower.

How can pointing out you’re a moron for thinking tha horses must like horse racing because they carry on running when the jockey falls of be an anti U.K. rant? It’s an international sport for starters, including in Europe.

Horse racing is grotesque. I’ve never said it’s as bad as bull fighting so stop twisting and putting words in my mouth.

Don’t starting with your childlike mentality of saying it’s ok to eat one type of meat but not another because they eat it as common practice on the continent. Eating horse meat is exactly the same as eating cows meat. Two animals slaughtered for consumption. It begins and ends there.

I haven’t attacked the U.K. I’ve attacked you for saying that horses love horse racing. You’ve twisted it to something else as per usual.

Bollocks as usual. You attacked the UK for horse racing, badger baiting and fox hunting. You never mentioned anyone else in the EU. You were going on about horse racing and horse meat. But never mentioned those who eat horse.

 

[ccfc92]

The most likely looking outcome is another vote really, isn't it?

Brexit was never going to happen with a weak Government and I don't believe it will happen now after all this messing around with May trying to scramble some support together.

 

[ccfc92]

This was always going to be the problem of having a pro EU organising a leave deal. Deep down she doesn't want to do it. There is a lack of trust in her all round. Remainers see her as a traitor. Leavers don't believe she wants to make a deal. The opposition leader who has always wanted out of the EU now says he wants us in. The EU sees massive divisions in the UK. And they have taken full advantage.

I still don't understand how a pro EU MP became the PM to lead us through Brexit?

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

I still don't understand how a pro EU MP became the PM to lead us through Brexit?

Michael Gove pinched Boris out of the leadership race in 2016 and Gove wasn’t popular enough to beat May. They’ve got themselves to blame.

In fairness to Theresa May, her deal isn’t that bad and has been, in my view, overly committed to Brexit. That said, she’s not drummed up support for her deal and leaving out the Labour Party in negotiations was a bad idea, in hindsight. This Brexit deal is now a partisan issue which could’ve been mitigated had Labour actually had a stake in the deal. May only has herself to blame for the complete lack of support for this deal.

 

[martcov]

Political parties all have factions within them, a change in party systems will not change that.

Our parliamentary system offers more stability than its European counterparts that use more proportional systems. Take Germany, it’s had to have enter yet another grand coalition because neither major party can go into coalition with the ‘extreme’ parties in their Bundestag since their Liberal party has collapsed.

Generally, with the last 8 years in UK politics being the exception, party’s win majorities and go about the business of Government right away without coalition building processes (which can be v lengthy in places e.g. Spain). It’s not a perfect system by any stretch of the imagination, but strong and effective government (beciase it rarely loses parliamentary votes) is a good thing, overall.

In Germany we have had 3 terms of a strong and stable coalition under 1 leader ( not going to happen in the UK ). It has held through disagreements. Merkel is the longest serving Western leader. The coalition system is working e.g. in that the greens who would have been part of the 2 big parties, can actually tell the voters what they stand for and negotiate their green wishes in the coalition talks and then fix them in the coalition contract rather than being a back bench grouping in a big party. The AfD can represent the racists on a clear program. At least you get what you voted for as representatives. The ERG would be a splinter party in Germany and not a party within a party as now.

 

[martcov]

Complete speculation, EU nationals are not going to just pack up , theyvet made lives here and there will be no obligation to leave.

A record number have just left.

 

[Grendel]

In Germany we have had 3 terms of a strong and stable coalition under 1 leader ( not going to happen in the UK ). It has held through disagreements. Merkel is the longest serving Western leader. The coalition system is working e.g. in that the greens who would have been part of the 2 big parties, can actually tell the voters what they stand for and negotiate their green wishes in the coalition talks and then fix them in the coalition contract rather than being a back bench grouping in a big party. The AfD can represent the racists on a clear program. At least you get what you voted for as representatives. The ERG would be a splinter party in Germany and not a party within a party as now.

We have had 3 term PM's and real stability from the blood stained Blair creature and Thatcher who was not too popular in these parts, Countries like Italy have been wrecked by the voting system

Anyway big CCFC fan how are you doing on my Christmas Quiz?

 

[martcov]

We have had 3 term PM's and real stability from the blood stained Blair creature and Thatcher who was not too popular in these parts, Countries like Italy have been wrecked by the voting system

Anyway big CCFC fan how are you doing on my Christmas Quiz?

I haven’t looked yet...

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

In Germany we have had 3 terms of a strong and stable coalition under 1 leader ( not going to happen in the UK ). It has held through disagreements. Merkel is the longest serving Western leader. The coalition system is working e.g. in that the greens who would have been part of the 2 big parties, can actually tell the voters what they stand for and negotiate their green wishes in the coalition talks and then fix them in the coalition contract rather than being a back bench grouping in a big party. The AfD can represent the racists on a clear program. At least you get what you voted for as representatives. The ERG would be a splinter party in Germany and not a party within a party as now.

I’m uneasy with the concept of a grand coalition. A good friend at uni is German and we spoke about its merits. The SDP membership are starting to get fed up with the grand coalitions because junior coalition partners usually suffer in elections. The CDU don’t want to enter a coalition with the AfD and likewise, the SDP don’t want to enter a coalition with die Linke. Typically, the more parties in a party system or coalition, the more unstable it tends to be.

Germany’s system is one of the better proportional systems in Europe. Others, like Italy, are a total mess. The British system is unique, but I like it, as it tends to produce strong governments.

 

[Grendel]

I haven’t looked yet...

Look tomorrow - you are part of the clue

 

[Deleted member 5849]

I’m uneasy with the concept of a grand coalition. A good friend at uni is German and we spoke about its merits. The SDP membership are starting to get fed up with the grand coalitions because junior coalition partners usually suffer in elections. The CDU don’t want to enter a coalition with the AfD and likewise, the SDP don’t want to enter a coalition with die Linke. Typically, the more parties in a party system or coalition, the more unstable it tends to be.

Germany’s system is one of the better proportional systems in Europe. Others, like Italy, are a total mess. The British system is unique, but I like it, as it tends to produce strong governments.

We could always just ditch the House of Lords for a proportional system.

 

[Grendel]

We could always just ditch the House of Lords for a proportional system.

We had a referendum on this didn't we?

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

We could always just ditch the House of Lords for a proportional system.

The House of Lords question is an interesting one. I’ve not really made my mind up on it because there’s no reforms on the table. On one hand, it’s independent and does provide an important oversight without impeding the Commons. On the other, it doesn’t have the power to hold the government to account as most second chambers too. Ultimately, I like that the government can get on with its business without the deadlock that you see in America, for example.

 

[skybluetony176]

Bollocks as usual. You attacked the UK for horse racing, badger baiting and fox hunting. You never mentioned anyone else in the EU. You were going on about horse racing and horse meat. But never mentioned those who eat horse.

I attacked horse racing and blood sport you moron not the U.K. I never mentioned anyone else in the EU because someone was trying to say that we don’t have a culture of being cruel to animals when we clearly do and it’s spread across all walks of society. That’s not the same as saying that the EU doesn’t have a problem and only we do because the whole world has a problem from dancing bears in Russia to elephant rides in Asia. You’re a moron if you think any corner of the world doesn’t have a culture of cruelty to animals because it’s clearly a worldwide phenomenon. You brought up horse meat you idiot not me so stop bullshitting. And it doesn’t matter horse, cow, pig, sheep, cat or dog. You eat any of them you’re eating a sentient being who all have an equal right not to be eaten regardless of where that is. Not eating horse meat doesn’t make us better than the French it just makes us fussier eaters.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

We had a referendum on this didn't we?

Nope.

 

[skybluetony176]

I still don't understand how a pro EU MP became the PM to lead us through Brexit?

Both Brexit Secretaries have been leavers. They’re the ones who have been leading us through Brexit.

 

[Grendel]

Nope.

For proportional representation in parliament?

 

[ccfc92]

Both Brexit Secretaries have been leavers. They’re the ones who have been leading us through Brexit.

But May is the face/head of it?

To be honest, the whole debacle of Brexit is tiresome now, which I believe would result in a victory for Remain if there is another vote.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

For proportional representation in parliament?

That was AV, which is a hybrid system of first past the post and proportional. That was for the Commons and not the Lords. For me, a hybrid system is the worse of both worlds. You don’t get strong majorities like in the current system, at the cost of having a system that isn’t even that proportionate. Can’t really blame the Lib Dem’s for forcing that referendum though because the current system does underrepresent them a lot.

Generally, Lords reform only tends to pop up briefly in Labour govts, Tories don’t tend to bother with it. But, neither party is particularly enthusiastic about it.

 

[Grendel]

That was AV, which is a hybrid system of first past the post and proportional. That was for the Commons and not the Lords.

Generally, Lords reform only tends to pop up briefly in Labour govts, Tories don’t tend to bother with it. But, neither party is particularly enthusiastic about it.

I was referring to the commons and actually what I was really referring to was that strangely some referendums are just abided by and acted on

 

[Sick Boy]

This was always going to be the problem of having a pro EU organising a leave deal. Deep down she doesn't want to do it. There is a lack of trust in her all round. Remainers see her as a traitor. Leavers don't believe she wants to make a deal. The opposition leader who has always wanted out of the EU now says he wants us in. The EU sees massive divisions in the UK. And they have taken full advantage.

Remainers she her as a traitor? Was is this, a playground?

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

I was referring to the commons and actually what I was really referring to was that strangely some referendums are just abided by and acted on

That referendum was only called because it was part of the Conservative and Lib Dem coalition. The Conservatives (or Labour) we’re never enthusiastic about this potential reform and certainly wouldn’t have called a referendum themselves.

Governments tend to respect the result of referendums, as its generally in their interest to do so. But, referendums aren’t binding to parliament.

 

[skybluetony176]

But May is the face/head of it?

To be honest, the whole debacle of Brexit is tiresome now, which I believe would result in a victory for Remain if there is another vote.

It’s funny how they keep getting away with it Scot free though when they’ve been a major cog in the wheel. Davis especially. He’s been undermining in own work for weeks now trying to have digs at aspects of the deal that he negotiated and accepted while in the job as if he was never any part of it. May even told him so in Parliament the other week during PMQ in reply to a question he asked regarding Brexit she simply answered “that the right honourable gentleman already knows the answer to his question because it is he who negotiated it” (or words to that effect) and then sat down. Davis didn’t get up in reply instead choosing to sheepishly pretend to be writing something down without even looking up.

Whatever she’s culpable of so are they. Especially Davis.

 

[Grendel]

That referendum was only called because it was part of the Conservative and Lib Dem coalition. The Conservatives (or Labour) we’re never enthusiastic about this potential reform and certainly wouldn’t have called a referendum themselves.

Governments tend to respect the result of referendums, as its generally in their interest to do so. But, referendums aren’t binding to parliament.

Can you read back to me the commitment the government made in the state sponsored leaflet regarding the Brexit referendum regarding implementation?

This argument is fallacious

 

[dutchman]

You should know, that occasionally experts' predictions don't pan out, so therefore we should ignore those who have the expertise and tools to make predictions, in favour of the ranty bloke down the pub.

It's the new way, sadly.

Tell me something, if these 'experts' are so clever, why aren't they making a fortune for themselves instead of working for someone else for a fixed wage?

 

[Sick Boy]

Can you read back to me the commitment the government made in the state sponsored leaflet regarding the Brexit referendum regarding implementation?

This argument is fallacious

It’s a fair point. However, the issue now is that those wishing for a complete separation have put forward no viable and long term solution for the issue with the border in Ireland. I am with you on moving to the EEA model and taking it from there though and seeing where the country ends up.

Is it what I think is best for the country, no it isn’t.

But I do believe it would be a compromise between the two sides and we then try and move on together.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Can you read back to me the commitment the government made in the state sponsored leaflet regarding the Brexit referendum regarding implementation?

This argument is fallacious

Yes, the government is choosing to commit to Brexit, but, technically the result of a referendum is not binding to the government. There’s a fundamental difference to following a referendum result and a referendum being legally binding. Referendums are not legally binding, this is a fact, not opinion.

So, you’re right, this is a fallacious argument because you’re conflating a government committment to a referendum and the legalities of a referendum.

Ireland held a referendum which rejected the Lisbon Treaty in 2008, only to have another vote which reversed the decision in 2009. The Greek government ignored its referendum on the bailout in 2016.

To relate this to Brexit, if the government cannot follow through with the referendum result because it cannot pass the deal through Parliament. Which, by the way, isn’t even a hypothetical situation anymore. What is the next step?

I’ve laid out what is the more likely outcome of said scenario. Now it’s your turn.