Yeah yeah. Could! Might! Maybe!Once settled down being out of the EU could be a massive advantage.
Read what it says.
Yes the EU are to start talks befire we can because of EU rules. But different EU countries want different things. That will always be the problem when all members have to agree. So they can have a 2 year head start but not get very far in this time.
More like what if.Yeah yeah. Could! Might! Maybe!
If you read the article I linked it does also explain why.
Are you trying to say that Merkel and Germany has no say?You seem to have misunderstood how the EU works. Apparently it’s a dictatorship led by Merkel. She’s says how it will be and everyone else has to agree.
Correct, they're nothing like.I think Dart was saying no to the assertion that EU membership and WTO membership were somehow comparable
Are you trying to say that Merkel and Germany has no say?
She has a very big say. We have hardly any say.No, he didn’t say that, nor do say that, I when I say Merkel is not running the EU. She is not running the EU, but she does have some say. Just as we used to have some say being a major economy and having a large population. There are still 26 other countries who together have far more say than even a large country like Germany. Britain leaving has nudged a bit more „say“ in Germany‘s direction though.
Although this is an old article it’s very relevant and even truer today
Is Germany too powerful for Europe?
She has a very big say. We have hardly any say.
So you are saying that although we have poured billions of pounds in to the EU each year we have less of a say because we didn't join the Euro?She has more say economically because of the Euro which we didn’t want to join.
Although this is an old article it’s very relevant and even truer today
Is Germany too powerful for Europe?
It is actually. Especially the bit about petty nationalism and how Britain is totally different in it’s outlook. Britain just doesn’t get it. Germany does actually want Europe to be more equal and successful- based on it’s own experience. Being in the Euro, and having the Euro based over 60% on the successful DM has given it economic power over weaker economies. France, Italy and Britain are , or were, in the case of Britain the biggest counter balances. Even Germans didn’t want to lose Britain though, exactly because they don’t want to be an empire.
Anyway I am now in Estonia for a couple of days. A modern internet country that has benefited from the EU and who now use the Euro. Infrastructure improvements being financed by the EU. They like beer and cider here and there is a good range of British drinks on Sale. Am off to the Big Ben English pub tonight.
Pop next door to Latvia.
I was over there a couple of months ago, and quite literally nearly every person I spoke to (without invitation) was bashing the EU down to the ground, and saying how much it had fucked up their country.
I imagine Estonia isn't far off that either!
So you are saying that although we have poured billions of pounds in to the EU each year we have less of a say because we didn't join the Euro?
So do you think it is OK that we put billions into the EU each year but had other countries that had a bigger say who put less money in?Grendel‘s article explains how that works. We have 73 MEPs in the parliament and along with France, Germany and Italy had more say than most. We have less say on Eurozobe matters because we are not in it.
We get you Mart.Up until now no one has mentioned the EU. The guys I met up with last night invited me to drinks all night. They are Estonian and work in Finnland. They said we earn the most money here and paid my bar bill. Tonight is my mate‘s birthday Party in the Big Ben pub. Let’s see how many people come and tell me how bad the EU is.
So do you think it is OK that we put billions into the EU each year but had other countries that had a bigger say who put less money in?
The EU is becoming a monster. They want to make trade deals with the rest of the world. But all 27 countries will have to agree. Not all 27 countries want the same. So some countries will be pressurised into making an agreement, they will be bribed with more loans into agreeing, those who have a bigger say.....although all countries are supposed to have the same say....will outvote those who want something different or deals won't happen. And the more countries that join the EU the harder agreements will be to make.
We get you Mart.
You live in the EU. You will live in the EU after the UK leaves. You saw that 1 in 8 votes went to the racist party. You said it was nothing. The racist vote is gaining momentum in the EU. But to you it isn't a problem. There is always an excuse. Yet every vote for Ukip in the UK was bad. Every country in the EU is equal. But some are more equal than others. You seem to think it is OK.
And since our vote to leave the EU I have had people mention how bad things are in their country when I have visited. A few weeks ago when I was in Greece was the worse. They are destitute. Many are working about 16 hours a day 7 days a week just to survive. Yet you only meet people who praise the EU and have never had it better.
Make your mind up.I don’t think many countries had a bigger say than us.
The EU is not becoming a monster. The system of the majority overriding the minority is called democracy- or at least when you are in the majority. The system of doing deals to get things passed is the usual way of doing things.
I don’t see what the problem is. It won’t be affecting you anyway.
Make your mind up.
Do countries have a bigger say than us because they are in the Euro or not?
So the majority outvoting the rest is called democracy. But not when it means leaving the EU it seems.
You named countries that have more of a say than us because they are in the Euro. Now you are saying that you don't know.Who has a bigger say in what? Eurozone Germany. The rest of legislation I don’t know which one country has the most influentce. The number of MEPs per country is connected to population. Which should mean that we France, Germany and Itaky have most influence, but the MEPs themselves belong to various political groups, so I don’t get what you are trying to say. I would like you to explain the level of a country‘s influence, and how it is determined. ( no Sun, Mail, Express quotes please - just factual quotes ).
The majority ourvoting the minority is democracy. Never denied it. Holding people to account for wrong decisions belongs just as much as voting to democracy. That’s why we have parliamentary opposition parties. Seems some don’t like bad referendum decisions being held to account though.
You named countries that have more of a say than us because they are in the Euro. Now you are saying that you don't know.
Bad referendum decisions being held to account? Do you mean those who are moaning about the result?
It wasn't a bad referendum decision just because it wasn't the result you wanted. We won't know if it was good or bad for years. It wasn't bad just because the EU are acting like idiots.
Was this supposed to be funny?No doubt whatever way it goes, you will claim to have always backed it.
Was this supposed to be funny?
So what or who have I backed then?
To me there is nobody worth backing.
No matter what anyone says Corbyn has no charisma. I am saying that as a lifelong Labour voter and union member.
May is a remainer who is supposed to be leading us leaving. That isn't good.
The LibDems are finished for a long time at least. They jumped into bed with the opposition.
The EU has got too big to have a common currency. It has too many people who wants what is best for them and not the people who they serve. They are looking into a massive tax dodge. But the person involved and now one of the most powerful people in the EU is still in place. The poorer countries in the EU are getting poorer.
So who or what is there to back?
Why investigate someone who has stood down from a country that wants to leave the EU for a tax dodge when they are investigating the tax dodge that Luxembourg have done that is costing EU countries countless billions in lost tax revenues yet the person who was in charge of Luxembourg is now in charge of the EU.What‘s your take on the EU investigating Cameron allowing certain companies in the U.K. a loop hole to dodge taxes in 2013?
Why investigate someone who has stood down from a country that wants to leave the EU for a tax dodge when they are investigating the tax dodge that Luxembourg have done that is costing EU countries countless billions in lost tax revenues yet the person who was in charge of Luxembourg is now in charge of the EU.
They should both be treated the same. I wonder why they are not though
What‘s your take on the EU investigating Cameron allowing certain companies in the U.K. a loop hole to dodge taxes in 2013?
Yet again make your mind up.It’s the country that is being investigated, not Cameron the person.
Yet again make your mind up.
So what is your take on the EU investigating Luxembourg but leaving Juncker with full power?
Juncker had been the Luxembourg PM for a long time before they started the tax dodge. He would have at least known all about it. Being the PM the odds are he had a big hand in it.Legally they are two separate entities.
It’s the country that is being investigated, not Cameron the person.
Juncker had been the Luxembourg PM for a long time before they started the tax dodge. He would have at least known all about it. Being the PM the odds are he had a big hand in it.
So how are they separate?
Wasn’t this ignited when the ultimate snout in the trough non entity Rumpy Pumpy was one of the presidents the Eu waste money on? Is he still getting £190,000 a year of taxpayers money for doing nothing (not that he ever did anything anyway)?
A man so tight he used a fleet of Eu funded limousines to take his family on holiday.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?