The EU: In, out, shake it all about.... (48 Viewers)

[Astute]

You’re argument is completely moronic. If we’re not going to lose anything you adopt all areas of EU law. If you want to improve something you still do that and then use this as your starting point if for no other reason than economics. This is the cheapest way of doing it. If you don’t want to maintain a standard you abandon it and that then becomes your dropping off point. It’s basic common sense. Sorry it’s beyond you.

Me moronic? Do you need to lend a mirror?

We have adopted all areas of EU laws. We didn't have any choice. What you are going on about is not EU law. I have tried to explain to you. But you don't seem to have the capability to understand. So as usual you go down the insulting route.

 

---

[skybluetony176]

It isn't me contradicting myself.

You constantly go on about us not keeping up with the EU charter when we leave. But what is one?

I have said what one is. It is for countries in the EU. It is not for countries outside the EU. When we leave the EU we won't be in the EU. But you either don't understand this or you are just point scoring.

We want something bespoke but we don’t want to cherry pick is a contradiction in terms. Unless you want something completely opposite to EU law in which case we’re heading for human rights policies something more akin to Saudi Arabia. I would think even you’d struggle to argue that wouldn’t be a climb down, although I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see you try. You’re firmly in the brexit at any cost camp.

 

[skybluetony176]

Me moronic? Do you need to lend a mirror?

We have adopted all areas of EU laws. We didn't have any choice. What you are going on about is not EU law. I have tried to explain to you. But you don't seem to have the capability to understand. So as usual you go down the insulting route.

I don’t need to lend a mirror but if you need one just ask. I’m more than happy to lend you one.

 

[Astute]

We want something bespoke but we don’t want to cherry pick is a contradiction in terms. Unless you want something completely opposite to EU law in which case we’re heading for human rights policies something more akin to Saudi Arabia. I would think even you’d struggle to argue that wouldn’t be a climb down, although I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see you try. You’re firmly in the brexit at any cost camp.

You are firmly in the point scoring camp.

We won't be bound by future EU laws. But if we continued to keep EU legislation how long would it be before it contradicts our own laws.

I have tried my best to explain how it works to you. I can't comprehend how you don't understand.

 

[Grendel]

You are cherry picking. You are saying we absorb EU law into our law, but reject something covering the rights of people without power or wealth.

Why do all parties who have an ideology based on increased workers rights want to leave the EU?

 

[skybluetony176]

Why do all parties who have an ideology based on increased workers rights want to leave the EU?

Labour tried to block the abandonment of the charter by the government. Leaving the EU doesn’t require the abandonment of any EU legislation. In fact the repeal bill sets out to transfer EU legislation into U.K. legislation. Them two points make your question irrelevant and a distraction from the point. Surprise. Astute doesn’t want cherry picking, you’d think he would be against this wouldn’t you?

 

[Grendel]

Labour tried to block the abandonment of the charter by the government. Leaving the EU doesn’t require the abandonment of any EU legislation. In fact the repeal bill sets out to transfer EU legislation into U.K. legislation. Them two points make your question irrelevant and a distraction from the point. Surprise. Astute doesn’t want cherry picking, you’d think he would be against this wouldn’t you?

The Labour Party if Corbyn has his way would want to want complete ambandonment but has to pacify members.

I’m not talking about labour anyway

 

[skybluetony176]

The Labour Party if Corbyn has his way would want to want complete ambandonment but has to pacify members.

I’m not talking about labour anyway

Says who? You.

If you’re not talking about Labour anyway you’re not talking about all parties who have an ideology based on increased workers rights. In fact you’re leaving the main party with those principles out so you’re diluting you’re own point before you even start.

 

[Astute]

Says who? You.

If you’re not talking about Labour anyway you’re not talking about all parties who have an ideology based on increased workers rights. In fact you’re leaving the main party with those principles out so you’re diluting you’re own point before you even start.

Corbyn has always wanted out of the EU. Do you really think that he would want to be bound to rules made after leaving that would have nothing to do with us as we wouldn't be in the EU?

 

[Astute]

Says who? You.

If you’re not talking about Labour anyway you’re not talking about all parties who have an ideology based on increased workers rights. In fact you’re leaving the main party with those principles out so you’re diluting you’re own point before you even start.

If you were either honest or you understood what you are talking about you would have been searching the net for more mud to throw from a different direction by now.

 

[Grendel]

Says who? You.

If you’re not talking about Labour anyway you’re not talking about all parties who have an ideology based on increased workers rights. In fact you’re leaving the main party with those principles out so you’re diluting you’re own point before you even start.

The Labour Party has to appeal to a broad spectrum

The communist party, the socialist party and the SWP do not.

 

[skybluetony176]

Corbyn has always wanted out of the EU. Do you really think that he would want to be bound to rules made after leaving that would have nothing to do with us as we wouldn't be in the EU?

Further proof you don’t read anything.

 

[skybluetony176]

The Labour Party has to appeal to a broad spectrum

The communist party, the socialist party and the SWP do not.

Snigger. That’s your “all”. Can they even muster a councillor amongst them. Comedy gold. Anyway, I’ll amuse you. Where have “all” of them backed an abandonment of the charter and it being dropped from post brexit British law?

 

[skybluetony176]

If you were either honest or you understood what you are talking about you would have been searching the net for more mud to throw from a different direction by now.

There’s that many directions you could throw mud from I must admit I struggle to keep up. Besides you’d only accuse me of only seeing the bad in everything if I did. Oh wait...

 

[Grendel]

Snigger. That’s your “all”. Can they even muster a councillor amongst them. Comedy gold. Anyway, I’ll amuse you. Where have “all” of them backed an abandonment of the charter and it being dropped from post brexit British law?

Well here’s the general principal Tony I’m the attached. Essential socialist parties view EU worker rights as a con and a minimum standard we wouldn’t go below anyway.

I fail to see what your point is on their popularity- it’s a case of ideology - the main parties are not ideologically based as need support of all classes - the likes of the socialist parties and national front and EDL are true representations of left and right ideolological thinking.

Why socialists should support a British exit

 

[Grendel]

The Eu charter is about as worthwhile as the Beano anyway

 

[Astute]

Further proof you don’t read anything.

Further proof you don't understand anything or just pretend that you are thick.

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

Further proof you don't understand anything or just pretend that you are thick.

You voted remain but you are criticising the EU? That's not allowed.

Get out.

 

[skybluetony176]

Well here’s the general principal Tony I’m the attached. Essential socialist parties view EU worker rights as a con and a minimum standard we wouldn’t go below anyway.

I fail to see what your point is on their popularity- it’s a case of ideology - the main parties are not ideologically based as need support of all classes - the likes of the socialist parties and national front and EDL are true representations of left and right ideolological thinking.

Why socialists should support a British exit

So again where’s your proof they would abandon it. They want to better it is what they’re saying. Unless you want to worsen it there’s no logic in not adopting initially and using that as a base to start from. If you want to lose some of people’s rights abandon it and start again from the very bottom.

If you fail to see the point of their popularity then maybe you should have asked the question of the Monster Raving Looney Party. It would be equally relevant. Also all political parties are ideological. Some are just more mainstream than the others.

 

[skybluetony176]

Further proof you don't understand anything or just pretend that you are thick.

Ha ha. Pretending to be thick. As opposed to actually being thick? Tell me again how the EU is a continent.

 

[skybluetony176]

The Eu charter is about as worthwhile as the Beano anyway

It’s the backbone of current U.K. law on all areas.

 

[Grendel]

It’s the backbone of current U.K. law on all areas.

Sorry Tony I forget to add quotes - that’s the view of the last Labour government

 

[skybluetony176]

Sorry Tony I forget to add quotes - that’s the view of the last Labour government

Oh, it’s a quote. Funny you didn’t add a link.

 

[Astute]

Ha ha. Pretending to be thick. As opposed to actually being thick? Tell me again how the EU is a continent.

You compared the whole of the EU to single countries. If you can twist the truth I can point out the size of the EU.

 

[skybluetony176]

You compared the whole of the EU to single countries. If you can twist the truth I can point out the size of the EU.

I compared as a trading block. Which it is. It isn’t a continent, which is what you described it as.

 

[Astute]

It’s the backbone of current U.K. law on all areas.

I have explained to you how the EU charter isn't law. Yet you still pretend not to know.

So when do you want to start with a truthful debate?

Or we can go back on to your favourite House of Lords where they get money off the EU and don't have to declare it. And in return they have to back the EU.

Or have you stopped mentioning them for a reason?

 

[Astute]

I compared as a trading block. Which it is. It isn’t a continent, which is what you described it as.

Bullshit. You compared it with single countries on sales to India.

 

[Grendel]

Oh, it’s a quote. Funny you didn’t add a link.

If you insist

European summit Charter on rights 'no more binding than the Beano'

 

[Astute]

If you insist

European summit Charter on rights 'no more binding than the Beano'

I wonder how Tony will continue to say it is law. He has tried his best so far considering that I explained it to him.

 

[skybluetony176]

I wonder how Tony will continue to say it is law. He has tried his best so far considering that I explained it to him.

I actually said backbone not law itself. But then we already know you don’t read anything. It was who said it I was interested in, I never denied it had been made. Just don’t recall it and was interested who said it. I also made the point earlier in the thread (again, no surprise you missed it) that most U.K. law on human rights is there to support EU law. So like I said, the backbone.

 

[skybluetony176]

Bullshit. You compared it with single countries on sales to India.

You do know other countries view the EU as a single trading block? It’s one of the major arguments for Brexit from the leave campaign. We want to take back control and all that. When India does a trade deal with the EU no member states will be exempt from that deal. It will be a single deal for the block, not one deal for Spain, another for Poland, another for France etc etc.

 

[Astute]

I actually said backbone not law itself. But then we already know you don’t read anything. It was who said it I was interested in, I never denied it had been made. Just don’t recall it and was interested who said it. I also made the point earlier in the thread (again, no surprise you missed it) that most U.K. law on human rights is there to support EU law. So like I said, the backbone.

Backbone?

So only just mentioning after lots of times saying that it is law makes it OK to chat bullshit? I wouldn't have tried explaining it to You if what you are saying is the truth. But you are happy to tell blatant lies to try and make a point and then tell more blatant lies to try and cover your tracks.

 

[skybluetony176]

Backbone?

So only just mentioning after lots of times saying that it is law makes it OK to chat bullshit? I wouldn't have tried explaining it to You if what you are saying is the truth. But you are happy to tell blatant lies to try and make a point and then tell more blatant lies to try and cover your tracks.

Only just? I first made the point about UK law propping up EU law almost 24 hours ago. I first used the word backbone almost 4 hours ago. Further proof again that you read nothing. What “blatant lies” have I told?

 

[Grendel]

Where have “all” of them backed an abandonment of the charter and it being dropped from post brexit British law?

Only just? I first made the point about UK law propping up EU law almost 24 hours ago. I first used the word backbone almost 4 hours ago. Further proof again that you read nothing. What “blatant lies” have I told?

Top quote was 4 hours ago Tony

 

[Astute]

Only just? I first made the point about UK law propping up EU law almost 24 hours ago. I first used the word backbone almost 4 hours ago. Further proof again that you read nothing. What “blatant lies” have I told?

And you mentioned it for the first time 4 hours ago?

So if you keep chatting shite and then mention it in a different way a day or two later it must all be ignored other than the ine comment you point out to everyone?

And back to the House of Lords. So they want what is best for everyone like you keep saying yet they get paid milliins between them each year yet don't have to declare a penny. And for this they must defend the EU and do what they can for the EU. And once we leave the EU the payments will stop. And how about the freedom of information act question that wasn't answered on the subject as there is no need to answer the question as the EU has said they don't have to declare what they get off them. But we do know parts like Mandelson gets 33k a year off them and Neil Kinnock gets nearly 100k a year. Yet they are not in it for themselves?

Sounds like a Tony plot.