Brexit

[Starter]

Hard to believe there is no discussion on here about the upcoming vote. Especially considering the large percentage of members from the "island".

[steveaki13]

I vote by post so I voted about 2 weeks ago. It has turned into a really nasty campaign IMO. Each side calling the others haters etc.... No need for that. If you cant argue your side without excepting someone elses right to a different opinion then it doesnt say much.

I personally think the final result will be remain in the EU by something like 54% to 46%

[steveaki13]

What kind of news is it making across Europe and the wider world guys? Its all you see on the news here as you would expect.

[Starter]

From here it's being called a toss up. No clear majority either way. Personally, I can see valid points on both sides. It'll be an important vote either way and European history will be changed.

Probably wouldn't have gotten this far if the solvent countries had been more active earlier in reining in the excesses of the countries who don't have a clue about fiscal responsibility. IMO of course.

[zako85]

I am far from being an expert in EU or British politics and economy, but the brexit referendum seems strange to me because UK is already detached from most of the EU's monetary troubles in one important way: the UK retains its separate currency, the British pound, and therefore UK is in charge of its central baking policy. If the roots of disaffection with the EU are not of monetary/central banking nature, then what is it?

[zako85]

Probably wouldn't have gotten this far if the solvent countries had been more active earlier in reining in the excesses of the countries who don't have a clue about fiscal responsibility. IMO of course.

Just wait until Ukraine, with its corrupt oligarchical political system and broken economy, joins the EU. That day, the current day "troubles" will seem like the golden age of EU.

[Starter]

Just wait until Ukraine, with its corrupt oligarchical political system and broken economy, joins the EU. That day, the current day "troubles" will seem like the golden age of EU.
You have a clear picture.

[steveaki13]

It sadly appears that many people voting to leave are angry with the level of migration from Europe and see leaving as a way to stop free movement of people. That is seemly also the only thing that pro EU campaigners think that Leavers have a problem with.

There is suggest Economic pros to EU but also negatives being cited. Some people suggest the UK would have more freedom to seek trade and negotiate deals around the world. I am not expert to know how much difference that makes.

People say that they feel that voting for Members of Parliament here only for many laws and deals to be made by the EU is not what they want.

Some think that what started as a trade organisation is now becoming a United states of Europe.

Some people just want the UK to just be completely free and independent in its ideas and direction in future.

Some plain think it has always been and always will be a bad idea to be a member and if you think it may not work then they will vote to get out now.

Whatever they seem to think the vote will be very close. All these above points are pointing out why some want to leave from what I have heard. The opposites are largely true for those in the Remain camp.

The worst thing for me is the assumption by leavers that pro campaigners are all scared to leave or pro the State of Europe. While Pro people only class leavers as haters.

There has been far to much mud slinging and name calling in this.

Sent from my GT-I9301I using Tapatalk

[Starter]

There has been far to much mud slinging and name calling in this. Sent from my GT-I9301I using Tapatalk
Sounds just like our current presidential campaign.

Your, and much of the rest of Europe's, problem is the large numbers of immigrants. Immigrants are a good thing for most countries up to a point. When the quantity of people coming in exceeds the ability of the host country to assimilate them, good feelings toward the immigrants will not ensue. You also wind up with too many people not working. That's not a knock at the immigrants, many want to work but have issues with language and needed skills. Add in the immigrants who can't find a job to the numbers of native born who either can't find a job or don't want a job - exacerbated by the global recession - and you have a substantial percent on the dole. Tax paying citizens get tired of this real fast.

Now throw in the large quantities of money going to keep places like Greece afloat and it makes one wonder why it's taken this long for a credible opposition to rise up and insist on change. No matter what side you are on you have to admit there is a valid point for the folks who want to leave. Perhaps its out weighed by reasons to stay, still there is lots of room for debate.

[donKey jote]

Your, and much of the rest of Europe's, problem is the large numbers of immigrants.
With respect... bollocks! :andrea:

(I'm also an immigrant, and before anybody tries, I'm sick of hearing the old "Oh but I don't mean you" argument)

[MrJan]

The irony is that the majority of our immigration doesn't come from Europe, so we actually already have 'control' over that. Also if we're to have any kind of trade deal with the EU (if we leave) then it will almost certainly include allowing flow of labour....which will put us pretty much where we are now.

I think another big thing that makes people want to leave is that they feel they're being dictated to by laws from European bureaucrats who weren't elected...which isn't the case (although laws are proposed by unelected members they have to be agreed by people who have been elected...which is pretty much the same as the House of Lords system we have in the UK anyway). Also many of the people that are voting to Exit can't actually name any of the laws they supposedly don't like, or name ones that can be easily debunked. A good example was this http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/insurance/motorinsurance/11493891/Youll-need-100-car-insurance-for-lawnmowers-says-EU.html
Only if you actually read into it there is a clause which says that member states can add their own exclusions, as long as they notify the EU. Another big talking point is economics and the supposed way that we give billions to the EU, which overlooks the benefits we get in return (not leas the trade deal).

As Steveaki says it's been an unpleasant campaign, truthfully I don't think any of them really know and both sides have used a lot of spin, more than you seem to get in normal election campaigns. The in fighting within parties is interesting also, and might have repercussions, personally I wish politics was more like that though. Too often you hear ministers just giving the party line rather than their own opinion.

Anyway, hopefully we make the right choice. As you may gather I'm quite strongly in one camp, and I'm genuinely worried about what could happen, but I'm intrigued by the outcome either way.

[MrJan]

Your, and much of the rest of Europe's, problem is the large numbers of immigrants. Immigrants are a good thing for most countries up to a point. When the quantity of people coming in exceeds the ability of the host country to assimilate them, good feelings toward the immigrants will not ensue. You also wind up with too many people not working. That's not a knock at the immigrants, many want to work but have issues with language and needed skills. Add in the immigrants who can't find a job to the numbers of native born who either can't find a job or don't want a job - exacerbated by the global recession - and you have a substantial percent on the dole. Tax paying citizens get tired of this real fast.

Not sure about your country, but IME there are many immigrants who are better skilled and harder working than the British. The people scrounging benefit are generally 'English', spend most of their day smoking and watching 50" TVs.

[Big Ben]

Probably wouldn't have gotten this far if the solvent countries had been more active earlier in reining in the excesses of the countries who don't have a clue about fiscal responsibility. IMO of course.

Not that I'm trying to justify what some incompetent politicians have done with the money but that view is a little too simplistic. There were other forces that made money move from frugal Germany and others like that to the more easy going Southern Europeans. For instance, a country like Spain found itself in trouble even if they were rather fiscally responsible.

The problem UK is having with UE is the free movement of people. The source of all problems in UK are the Poles, Romanians and the other Eastern Europeans. If they can get rid of them they're golden. Heaven on earth.

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

[gadjo_dilo]

Nice post Steve. By reading it through the lines I think that you voted to stay with us.

BTW, it's bloody hilarious that the country that was the biggest colonial empire has issues with immigrants.

[Starter]

With respect... bollocks! :andrea:

(I'm also an immigrant, and before anybody tries, I'm sick of hearing the old "Oh but I don't mean you" argument)
Nice cherry picking of only part of my statement. Do you work for either the Trump or Hillary campaigns? :D

[Big Ben]

Well... what can one say? The sheer stupidity of humankind still baffles me. What's next? Trump president?

[EightGear]

Crazy Brits, what are they even thinking? A voluntary vote to screw their country, that must be a first.

[steveaki13]

Why does everyone everywhere I see be negative? OK so its going to be tough and not ideal, but its what we have and we can still be a successful country. It just wont be as part of the EU. We are not going to become a 3rd world nation. In 10 years, 50 years or 100 years it may be the best decision. If the EU fails.

However it could be a bad decision that see's us struggle and wish we hadnt left.

Whatever I think to many just condemn. We will be OK. It will just be different. We must be positive, take it on the chin and make it work the best we can.

[MrJan]

There are a couple of reasons that I'm negative. The first is that I liked being part of the EU, it made sense. Secondly I think that this is a huge gamble that will almost certainly (in the short term at least) see our economy suffer. Thirdly I think it could lead to instability within the EU and I don't think that's good either.

But mainly in upset because I think people have voted emotionally rather than listening to facts. So much of both campaigns were spin but already we've had Farage announcing that the figure quoted as going to the NHS each week was wrong and a mistake.

[Big Ben]

I spent the last 10 minutes trying to change my username on this forum with no results. Can't we do that anymore? I'm starting to dislike the one I have right now. This may sound out of topic but it isn't :laugh:

[steveaki13]

We get it. You want to change your name cos it's English.

Sent from my GT-I9301I using Tapatalk

[steveaki13]

I agree Mr Jan that many have voted emotionally. I would say there are no Facts though.

We might be hugely successful in 50 years. We might falter terribly.

Or the EU might fail completely in 30 years with or without us. Or it might see everyone be rich.

No facts because no one can know what the future holds. Decision is made. We need to move on and make it work.

I don't quite get why people think we don't want to be friends with Europe. I think it's more that the people don't agree with how the EU is working.

Just my of opinion

Sent from my GT-I9301I using Tapatalk

[Big Ben]

"Bland reflected that the local verdict seemed to be the comfortable and probably age-long one of attributing every tragic occurrence to unspecified foreigners" from Dead man's folly by Agatha Christie. I came across it the other day and thought how this sort of sums up Britain's attitude towards everyone else.

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

[Big Ben]

I don't quite get why people think we don't want to be friends with Europe. I think it's more that the people don't agree with how the EU is working.

Just my of opinion

Sent from my GT-I9301I using Tapatalk

This duplicity becomes a little tiresome. We love the Europe, it's just that everything that's wrong in UK is because of Europe. But we love it.

I think it's more about how people are stupid. Most people don't even have a clue how EU works. This is just how that Farage clown put it, it's all about immigration.

[Francis44]

Important day today. I think most of the british dont have a grasp on how huge the consequences of this decision will be.

I am afraid this will be the start of the end of the EU, it may take 10 or 15 years but Im positive the project will start to loose even more legs, and Europe will again become a bunch of countries forcing different directions, fighting to thrive with there small economies, living on past glory without having any importance on this twenty first century World, just like the UK.
Secretly the US rejoice.

Just a bit sad to feel however that if Immigration wasn't a problem the voting would be so different, even though I think the EU is at fault for poor decision making.

[janneppi]

Exit 52% - 48% Remain.

It will be interesting what kind of process this is going to be, I kind of hope the exit treaty will be such that it's going to hurt UK's business with EU.

[Big Ben]

I hope there isn't going to be any special treaty between UK and EU now, where they get to cherry pick what they want and what not, the way some people think it will happen. If they still want access to the single market they must take all of it. And if UE members have to respect certain rules to be part of it, so should Britain. Of course that will mean Britain would be pretty much like an EU member, only without voting rights.

It would also be good for everyone for Britain to leave fast now.

[MrJan]

I agree Mr Jan that many have voted emotionally. I would say there are no Facts though.

What I really meant is that people have been pulled in by lies and mis-truths. For example I know several people who have commented about Turkey becoming a member and there being more people eligible to move to the UK. The fact is that they have only completed 1 of the 35 chapters required to join the EU in the last decade (since applying in 2005). https://fullfact.org/europe/turkey-likely-join-eu/

Likewise the "£350 million per week to NHS" line, when the fact was that it would never be that figure and it would never all go to the NHS (especially when the forefront of the Leave campaign are selling off the NHS anyway).

I'm hugely disappointed this morning. I've even surprised myself by being worried about Cameron resigning, mainly because it seems to me that two likely candidates are Boris and Gove, the latter of which is a c**t. The only brightside I can see is that at least Osborne might have to fall on his sword too.

[Big Ben]

The global village idiot expressed his delight with the result. So when you get the approval of someone like Trump, you are definitely doing something wrong.

[Starter]

Well... what can one say? The sheer stupidity of humankind still baffles me. What's next? Trump president?
Bite your tongue!

[Starter]

This is a good thing for the EU because it will force them to seriously reevaluate policys and directions. That's a reevaluation that almost certainly would not have happened without the vote.

I think most of you are looking at too short a term. You need to consider the long run. You've only been part of the EU for what, 30 or so years? That's a minor blip in history. There will be some short term disruption then things will settle down. In the long run an independent country can find a better path for itself or possibly rejoin the EU somewhere down the road after they clean up their act. Perhaps a closer alliance with Asia? (We might even let you apply to become a state. :eek: ) Anything is possible and being all negative serves no purpose but to make yourself feel bad.

[gadjo_dilo]

There will be some short term disruption then things will settle down. In the long run an independent country can find a better path for itself or possibly rejoin the EU somewhere down the road after they clean up their act. What????
Is EU a sort of a game? First you're a member who imposed your conditions to join, then you're unhappy, take your toys and leave causing trouble for the others, but then you might come back when your muscles want it. No sir! Farewell and leave us alone.

[MrJan]

@ Starter - You clearly have very little grasp on the nature of the EU or politics on this side of the world. As gadjo says, there won't be any crawling back to the EU (certainly not in any economical fashion) and this has far bigger repercussions for the EU than them just looking at policies but could lead to more countries leaving and an instability which could even result in the EU ceasing to exist.


Incidentally I think it's cute that an American felt the need to talk about history :p: ;)

[Starter]

@ Starter - You clearly have very little grasp on the nature of the EU or politics on this side of the world. As gadjo says, there won't be any crawling back to the EU (certainly not in any economical fashion) and this has far bigger repercussions for the EU than them just looking at policies but could lead to more countries leaving and an instability which could even result in the EU ceasing to exist.
I doubt that, if there ever were a "regrouping", that it would be crawling back. It would be mutually beneficial or it wouldn't happen. Of course it has huge implications for the EU, duh.

Much of Europe has had a free ride and is a little too sassy. Think of what would happen (it's not going to happen, but think about it if it did) should the US decide to pull back all economic aid and it's military presence from Europe. You'll be up close and personal with Mr. Putin.


Incidentally I think it's cute that an American felt the need to talk about history :p: ;)
The advantage of living over here is that I get to run my mouth about you guys just as many of you felt free to express your opinions about American issues not so long ago. With just as much accuracy and depth of understanding too. ;)

Of course we are all perfectly qualified to speak on these issues because we are the highly educated and trained expert diplomats which all the nations of the world only wish they had access to. They should hire all of us posters on this forum. We'd set them straight in no time.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

I'm slightly ashamed to be British right now.

People have clearly voted for something that they have no idea about. This can be summed up by what happened in Sunderland.

The towns economy is built around the Nissan plant, employing nearly 7000 people. 80% of what is made there is exported to the EU. Yet 60% of people from this area voted to leave.

Seriously, what is wrong with people? Why has it become fashionable to be anti-intellectual.

Or is it just because people hate foreigners.

[steveaki13]

Despite what I voted. I still get angry that there is such bile at those who vote to leave.

Maybe they truly believe that the EU will fail or the a United states of Europe is coming or that the UKs future is better away from the EU.

Why is everyone so anti peoples choice. Democracy gives people the right to decide and the right to get things wrong in your eyes and right in others. We should now be accepting the decision and moving on to try and build a new direction.

Also why is it a feeling that people hate Europe? We will still want to buy their goods and they will still want to buy ours. Leaving the EU means not liking the organisation, the running of it or just the principle. It doesnt mean not wanting to be friends.

Its like wanting to stay friends but buying your own house. lol

[Brown, Jon Brow]

Despite what I voted. I still get angry that there is such bile at those who vote to leave.

Maybe they truly believe that the EU will fail or the a United states of Europe is coming or that the UKs future is better away from the EU.

Why is everyone so anti peoples choice. Democracy gives people the right to decide and the right to get things wrong in your eyes and right in others. We should now be accepting the decision and moving on to try and build a new direction.

Also why is it a feeling that people hate Europe? We will still want to buy their goods and they will still want to buy ours. Leaving the EU means not liking the organisation, the running of it or just the principle. It doesnt mean not wanting to be friends.

Its like wanting to stay friends but buying your own house. lol

https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13533011_10154315044252206_5170039018922545410_n.j pg?oh=9950b875ca041b0cacd974f751173f91&oe=57F2F5B7

Direct-democracy (i.e referendum) only result in populism winning.

[steveaki13]

So whats the answer? Dictatorship?

I think if you stand by democracy you cant demand people turn out to vote in all sorts of elections and when they do. Say hang on. It didnt go the way we want so we should take the right away.... thats bonkers.

If you give rich, poor, educated and uneducated the right to vote. You except the decision and move on. Not moan and bitch about it.

IMO.
Democracy is bigger than what we as individuals think is right.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

So whats the answer? Dictatorship?

I think if you stand by democracy you cant demand people turn out to vote in all sorts of elections and when they do. Say hang on. It didnt go the way we want so we should take the right away.... thats bonkers.

If you give rich, poor, educated and uneducated the right to vote. You except the decision and move on. Not moan and bitch about it.

IMO.
Democracy is bigger than what we as individuals think is right.

Direct democracy is not the same as Parliamentary Democracy.

[gadjo_dilo]

Democracy gives people the right to decide and the right to get things wrong in your eyes and right in others.
That's what scares me. That average people with no competence in a certain field are called to take decisions.


Also why is it a feeling that people hate Europe? We will still want to buy their goods and they will still want to buy ours. Leaving the EU means not liking the organisation, the running of it or just the principle. It doesnt mean not wanting to be friends. Real friendship is not related to a pragmatic attitude. It might require loyalty and sacrifices. I generally appreciate your positive attitude but I don't believe that stupid cliche of we divorced but we're still best friends. :p

Nobody ever forced UK to join EU in the first place, that's why I dislike yesterday's choice.

[Starter]

Direct-democracy (i.e referendum) only result in populism winning.
That's a pretty snobbish and elitist attitude you're expressing. As is "shut up, big brother knows what is good for you, you're too stupid to know anything yourself". The vote is done so learn to live with it.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

Nobody ever forced UK to join EU in the first place, that's why I dislike yesterday's choice.

Not quite true. The UK voted to join the EEC, before the EU was created.

[gadjo_dilo]

The vote is done so learn to live with it.

But the result was very tight. It would have been easier to deal with it if one of the sides had a large majority. But as it is it' s almost half/half and the frustration of those who lost may be understood. BTW, in case of perfect equality what would have happened? Deciding the result on penalties? :p

[Brown, Jon Brow]

But the result was very tight. It would have been easier to deal with it if one of the sides had a large majority. But as it is it' s almost half/half and the frustration of those who lost may be understood. BTW, in case of perfect equality what would have happened? Deciding the result on penalties? :p

If it went to penalties then the Germans would win....:confused:

http://www.soccerstyle24.it/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Southgate-Moller-Euro-96-595x420.jpg

[Big Ben]

I hope that something good for the EU will come out of this. I never though that the EU is perfect so there's definitely place for improvements. Maybe now they'll have some motivation to make some reforms. Of course, the Leave campaign was not as much focused on the real problems as they were on all sorts of rubbish, false facts and figures and myths about the EU membership.

There is definitely the downside, mostly economic, for both UK and EU about this split but I think there's something good in it too. Britain was already barely in. They weren't really a constructive force in EU. More like the opposite. They were always the exception, always negative, always special, always opting out. I certainly won't miss their condescending attitude.

[MrJan]

But the result was very tight.

You'd also get a different number of votes if you had a 'do over' today, partly because of those that threw away their vote and partly because of idiots like this bloke http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/24/man-who-voted-for-leave-says-he-thought-his-vote-wouldnt-count-wins-moron-of-the-year-award-5964450/

[Big Ben]

You'd also get a different number of votes if you had a 'do over' today, partly because of those that threw away their vote and partly because of idiots like this bloke http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/24/man-who-voted-for-leave-says-he-thought-his-vote-wouldnt-count-wins-moron-of-the-year-award-5964450/

What better argument one can have against this sort of 'direct democracy' than this guy. He voted to leave because he thought remain will win. It's so funny and sad at the same time.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

That's a pretty snobbish and elitist attitude you're expressing. As is "shut up, big brother knows what is good for you, you're too stupid to know anything yourself". The vote is done so learn to live with it.

If that's how I come across then so be it. I apologise if you don't like it.

As part of my degree I studied the 'Economics of European Integration' so I believe I was probably better informed on this debate than many other people. I know this is elitist, but I believe it to be true.

If people voted 'leave' from a well reasoned opinion then I don't have a problem. That's how democracy should work. But I have a dreadful feeling in my stomach that many people have voted leave on the back of lies, myths and misinformation.

[steveaki13]

As part of my degree I studied the 'Economics of European Integration' so I believe I was probably better informed on this debate than many other people. I know this is elitist, but I believe it to be true.



Your vote only counts once like everyone elses though. Sadly your extra knowledge could only have been any use if you campaigned actively and informed others of what you saw.

[steveaki13]

Real friendship is not related to a pragmatic attitude. It might require loyalty and sacrifices. I generally appreciate your positive attitude but I don't believe that stupid cliche of we divorced but we're still best friends. :p



Countries should not be run with that emotion though. It should always be how does each party get the best from the current situation. It would aid both sides to remain trading partners and allow movement of peoples. Which wont stop despite some Leave voters wanting it and Remain voters stating thats what will happen.

[Big Ben]

It would aid both sides to remain trading partners and allow movement of peoples. Which wont stop despite some Leave voters wanting it and Remain voters stating thats what will happen.

If that happens what would UK actually leave? Besides leaving the decisions entirely to the other countries to make. Then they would be right to complain they have lost their independence. I'm not sure what would they leave then to get it back.

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

[Lousada]

I hope that something good for the EU will come out of this. I never though that the EU is perfect so there's definitely place for improvements. Maybe now they'll have some motivation to make some reforms. Of course, the Leave campaign was not as much focused on the real problems as they were on all sorts of rubbish, false facts and figures and myths about the EU membership.

There is definitely the downside, mostly economic, for both UK and EU about this split but I think there's something good in it too. Britain was already barely in. They weren't really a constructive force in EU. More like the opposite. They were always the exception, always negative, always special, always opting out. I certainly won't miss their condescending attitude.

This is a big opportunity for the eastern countries to take more control in the EU. The EU has always been a balance between France and Germany, or between north and south. Even though the UK was never a very active member they were very important for Germany and the northern camp. Brexit leaves a very big hole in Northwestern politics in the EU. I wonder if now the whole focus of the EU moves eastwards, literally turning their backs on London.

[Starter]

As part of my degree I studied the 'Economics of European Integration' so I believe I was probably better informed on this debate than many other people. I know this is elitist, but I believe it to be true.
I apologize if you felt I was attacking you specifically, that was not my intent.

I have a built in suspicion when "authorities" tell me something is true or untrue. I don't reject it out of hand, but do give it extra scrutiny. It's unfortunate that in too many instances skepticism is well warranted.

[gadjo_dilo]

Your vote only counts once like everyone elses though..
In Absurdistan it's a bit different. Citizens travel by bus from an election station to another in a sort of election tourism that allow them to vote on suplimentary lists. Also we find out that people who died a long time ago have currently voted. And many many other types of election frauds. :p

[Rollo]

Britain was already barely in. They weren't really a constructive force in EU. More like the opposite. They were always the exception, always negative, always special, always opting out. I certainly won't miss their condescending attitude.

We 'had' to break the whole thing [the EEC] up, so we had to get inside. We tried to break it up from the outside, but that wouldn't work. Now that we're inside we can make a complete pig's breakfast of the whole thing: set the Germans against the French, the French against the Italians, the Italians against the Dutch... The Foreign Office is terribly pleased; it's just like old times.
- Sir Humphrey Appleby, Yes Minister.

[Garry Walker]

As part of my degree I studied the 'Economics of European Integration' so I believe I was probably better informed on this debate than many other people. I know this is elitist, but I believe it to be true.

Oh wow. It is funny how people who have taken a course in uni think they are experts or that they somehow suddenly so well informed on the topic. This is not an attack on you, but a general thing I have noticed in life. Life experience counts far more than few worthless courses taken in uni, but it takes people a while to understand that. It is also why so many older people see young people as arrogant, who haven't paid their dues in life, yet consider themselves to know it all.

Anyway, I was surprised by this decision of brits, I expected it to close but the other way round, with Remain winning over Leave. Obviously a shock to the system and now is the time for EU to make some conclusions based on this. Can we keep on going the same way as we have done so far or is it time to think and make some changes. No matter how you try to paint it - that people who voted for Brexit are morons etc - you cannot deny that something like 15 million brits voted for "leave". That is a huge amount and shows that many people are unhappy with EU, that people are unhappy with the elite. That people are unhappy with bureacracy, immigration, economy and so on (Let's be honest, these are huge issues now and absolutley no one can deny that). Obviously, some of them were manipulated by lies and misinformation, but wasn't the same for people voting "remain"? We know well enough that most people are morons and easily swayed by propaganda and in this case, we know that there were enough morons on both sides.
As I said, this is the time for EU to rethink their policies.

As for myself, I absolutely detest the EU and the amount of useless EU officers working in Brussels, whose daily jobs consist of talking, drinking coffee and doing 25 minutes of work as slowly as possible. And I could keep on going what else I detest about EU. But sadly, the alternative is even worse. So, if I was british, I would have probably voted for "remain".

What I do find funny though, is that people who voted for "independence" of UK, might have directly contributed to the actual end of the empire.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

Oh wow. It is funny how people who have taken a course in uni think they are experts or that they somehow suddenly so well informed on the topic. This is not an attack on you, but a general thing I have noticed in life. Life experience counts far more than few worthless courses taken in uni, but it takes people a while to understand that. It is also why so many older people see young people as arrogant, who haven't paid their dues in life, yet consider themselves to know it all.

Anyway, I was surprised by this decision of brits, I expected it to close but the other way round, with Remain winning over Leave. Obviously a shock to the system and now is the time for EU to make some conclusions based on this. Can we keep on going the same way as we have done so far or is it time to think and make some changes. No matter how you try to paint it - that people who voted for Brexit are morons etc - you cannot deny that something like 15 million brits voted for "leave". That is a huge amount and shows that many people are unhappy with EU, that people are unhappy with the elite. That people are unhappy with bureacracy, immigration, economy and so on (Let's be honest, these are huge issues now and absolutley no one can deny that). Obviously, some of them were manipulated by lies and misinformation, but wasn't the same for people voting "remain"? We know well enough that most people are morons and easily swayed by propaganda and in this case, we know that there were enough morons on both sides.
As I said, this is the time for EU to rethink their policies.

As for myself, I absolutely detest the EU and the amount of useless EU officers working in Brussels, whose daily jobs consist of talking, drinking coffee and doing 25 minutes of work as slowly as possible. And I could keep on going what else I detest about EU. But sadly, the alternative is even worse. So, if I was british, I would have probably voted for "remain".

What I do find funny though, is that people who voted for "independence" of UK, might have directly contributed to the actual end of the empire.

Gary, I agree with you on almost everything here.

I too hate arrogant graduates who think they know everything. But my frustration comes from people who vote without any clue about what the EU is or what it is they are voting for. It just seems insane to me.

The most recent comment I saw on social media that made me cringe:

'If people loved the EU so much why don't they go and live there instead'

Erm...we can't now. Not freely.

I actually dislike a lot about the EU as well. But I worry now that the UK is playing a game that we can't win. I worry for my brother who is a sheep farmer and now has no idea what is income is going to be. And I hate that people who call me a traitor for voting remain may have ruined my country by voting leave.

Positives? Potentially lower property prices as a first time buyer. I work in the seafood industry, which might have the freedom to rival Norway now.

[gadjo_dilo]

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160625/2eea07d710c743993378b260d339b125.jpg


:angel:

[henners88]

This is definitely the most challenging period in my lifetime. I can't believe there are people out there that voted leave and are now regretting it! You should have done your homework.

What really made me cringe was when 'Good Morning Britain' interviewed Nigel Farage and asked him if £350m a week was going to now go purely to the NHS. Of course it's not you silly people! The EU have funded and been instrumental in building many projects through grants. The money we no longer donate will have to be fairly distributed.

I voted Remain.

[steveaki13]

People are completely stupid if they voted and are regretting it after 1 day..... blatant not researching or knowing what you want.

[Rudy Tamasz]

Hopefully our British friends will soon understand that the world still needs them a lot and trade and other relations will continue. I guess everybody will be positively surprised to see how much can be accomplished on a bilateral basis without going through international bureaucracy.

[Big Ben]

And if anyone has any doubts just look at Belarus how much they have accomplished.


Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

[steveaki13]

And if anyone has any doubts just look at Belarus how much they have accomplished.


Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

Thats not a nice thing to say. :(

[zako85]

My sources in London are saying that immigrants and the EU citizens are being loaded into cattle cars at the Waterloo station as we speak.

[Rudy Tamasz]

Thats not a nice thing to say. :(
Give him a credit where it's due, Steveaki. It's a killing argument, isn't it? He got me. ;)

Sent from my Lenovo P70-A using Tapatalk

[Big Ben]

Thats not a nice thing to say. :(

Couldn't help it. I have one more. This is the same guy that was gloating around here how he prospers in a war zone. I respect nothing more than the 'words of wisdom' of a guy that prospers on other people's misery and is quite proud of it.

[gadjo_dilo]

But Benny....
Our country has forces in that war zone. Aren't you proud of it? :confused:

They die like heroes there, they're decorated post mortem, but we both know they were there for money.

[Rudy Tamasz]

She's right, I served right next to Romanians, just for the record. I believe I also contributed to the rebuilding of that poor country by doing a civilian job there. At least the locals said thank you to me.

Sent from my Lenovo P70-A using Tapatalk

[Rollo]

As for myself, I absolutely detest the EU and the amount of useless EU officers working in Brussels, whose daily jobs consist of talking, drinking coffee and doing 25 minutes of work as slowly as possible. And I could keep on going what else I detest about EU. But sadly, the alternative is even worse.


The alternative IS even worse - 1914-1918 and 1939-1945.

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cmsUpload/Treaty%20constituting%20the%20European%20Coal%20an d%20Steel%20Community.pdf
CONSIDERING that world peace may be safeguarded only by creative efforts equal to the dangers
which menace it;


RESOLVED to substitute for historic rivalries a fusion of their essential interests; to establish, by
creating an economic community, the foundation of a broad and independent community among
peoples long divided by bloody conflicts; and to lay the bases of institutions capable of giving
direction to their future common destiny;

- Treaty constituting the European Coal and Steel Community (1951).

http://europa.eu/about-eu/eu-history/1945-1959/index_en.htm
The European Union is set up with the aim of ending the frequent and bloody wars between neighbours, which culminated in the Second World War. As of 1950, the European Coal and Steel Community begins to unite European countries economically and politically in order to secure lasting peace.

- The history of the European Union: 1945 - 1959, from the "About the EU" page.

I'd rather useless EU officers talking, drinking coffee and doing 25 minutes of work as slowly as possible, than those same people working in nativist offices apart from each other, working out how to kill their neighbours as efficiently as possible.

The European Union is incompetent and impotent and deliberately so. The EU was designed as a make work exercise for precisely the same reason that the United States decided to send twelve clowns to the moon.

[Starter]

The alternative IS even worse - 1914-1918 and 1939-1945.

The European Union is incompetent and impotent and deliberately so. The EU was designed as a make work exercise for precisely the same reason that the United States decided to send twelve clowns to the moon.
1) i see you are sure that the future of humanity is firmly wedded to the Earth. Good luck with that.
2) Canada, Mexico and the US. Haven't had a war between these countries in well over a hundred years. How come we can do it but Europe can't?

[janvanvurpa]

1) i see you are sure that the future of humanity is firmly wedded to the Earth. Good luck with that.
2) Canada, Mexico and the US. Haven't had a war between these countries in well over a hundred years. How come we can do it but Europe can't?


We do however kill each other domestically at rates and in sheer numbers approaching brush wars.....all for the glory of drugs and booze and coke and honor...

South of us we've cozied up to men who have done the killing for us. We've taught their militarys and police how to torture and kill for decades down at Fort Brag, we give or sell them arms they cannot afford to help them kill their own people quicker and easier...

As for Canada, why would we fight with them when they have been the largest source of capital investment in Merikuh and are so complaint with us...INTERTWINED ECONOMIES...
duh.

[Rudy Tamasz]

The alternative IS even worse - 1914-1918 and 1939-1945.

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cmsUpload/Treaty%20constituting%20the%20European%20Coal%20an d%20Steel%20Community.pdf
CONSIDERING that world peace may be safeguarded only by creative efforts equal to the dangers
which menace it;


RESOLVED to substitute for historic rivalries a fusion of their essential interests; to establish, by
creating an economic community, the foundation of a broad and independent community among
peoples long divided by bloody conflicts; and to lay the bases of institutions capable of giving
direction to their future common destiny;

- Treaty constituting the European Coal and Steel Community (1951).

http://europa.eu/about-eu/eu-history/1945-1959/index_en.htm
The European Union is set up with the aim of ending the frequent and bloody wars between neighbours, which culminated in the Second World War. As of 1950, the European Coal and Steel Community begins to unite European countries economically and politically in order to secure lasting peace.

- The history of the European Union: 1945 - 1959, from the "About the EU" page.

I'd rather useless EU officers talking, drinking coffee and doing 25 minutes of work as slowly as possible, than those same people working in nativist offices apart from each other, working out how to kill their neighbours as efficiently as possible.

The European Union is incompetent and impotent and deliberately so. The EU was designed as a make work exercise for precisely the same reason that the United States decided to send twelve clowns to the moon.
So you are happy to live in a superstate, which is finely crafted to be the next worst thing after the Third Reich?

Gees, I thought we have it bad here...

Sent from my Lenovo P70-A using Tapatalk

[Big Ben]

yeah... the EU is the fourth reich. that's exactly how it is :rolleyes: Nothing gets past you. the brexit was fueled by xenophobia because the EU cooking another holocaust :rolleyes:. That makes perfect sense. Look at the bright side. If WW3 is on the way you will be making the big bucks again.

[donKey jote]

A democratic Suprastate, yes, bring it on. The sooner the better. One can certainly be Hannoverian, a lower Saxon, a German and a Eu-citizen for example, they're not mutually exclusive.


Quite what your intention is bringing up the third Reich, I don't know. Worthy of the Farage campaign :rolleyes:

[Rudy Tamasz]

Ben, you can forward your sarcastic remarks to Rollo, as I was just coming to terms with his vision of the rationale behind the establishment of the EU.

You also need to finally grow up and learn to accept things, which happen despite your whims.

Sent from my Lenovo P70-A using Tapatalk

[Rudy Tamasz]

A democratic Suprastate, yes, bring it on. The sooner the better. One can certainly be Hannoverian, a lower Saxon, a German and a Eu-citizen for example, they're not mutually exclusive.


Quite what your intention is bringing up the third Reich, I don't know. Worthy of the Farage campaign :rolleyes:
It was not me who brought up the Third Reich and WWII. I just used this point to expose the flaws of this simplistic and, may I say, short-sighted thinking which only envisages two options: either EU or the total war and destruction.

Yeah, BTW, EU has a stellar record of stopping wars, doesn't it? For, instance, the war in Bosnia was stopped in Dayton, which is an EU residence in the suburbs of Brussels.

Sent from my Lenovo P70-A using Tapatalk

[Big Ben]

The war in Bosnia was fought between EU members :rolleyes:

[Rudy Tamasz]

In its backyard by the countries some of which have recently joined EU and some aspire to do so.

And then EU did all the peacemaking.

Just with a little-little help from those reactionary Yanks...

Sent from my Lenovo P70-A using Tapatalk

[steveaki13]

Even if Donkey likes the idea of a super state. It doesn't mean every nation has to agree and except being part of it. Britain hasn't so we should all now except where we are, grow up and come up with what's best for both parties.

Surely the EU will be better off now. We never committed fully so you can get on with the super state.

Sent from my GT-I9301I using Tapatalk

[gadjo_dilo]

Even if Donkey likes the idea of a super state. It doesn't mean every nation has to agree and except being part of it. Britain hasn't so we should all now except where we are, grow up and come up with what's best for both parties.
Heyyyy....UK voluntarely agreed to join EU, nobody ever set a gun to its head to force their entry. You know very well what you were doing from the very start. Leaving it today might be the will of majority but in my opinion it`s a lack of fair play.


Surely the EU will be better off now. We never committed fully so you can get on with the super state.


Nahhh......EU without UK will be like this forum without Steve. :angel:

P.S. I think the latest replies on this thread are based on big misunderstandings of the authors. I blame it on the fact that for many of us English is not the first language.

[donKey jote]

Even if Donkey likes the idea of a super state. It doesn't mean every nation has to agree and except being part of it. Britain hasn't so we should all now except where we are, grow up and come up with what's best for both parties.

Surely the EU will be better off now. We never committed fully so you can get on with the super state.

Sent from my GT-I9301I using Tapatalk
suprastate, not superstate :andrea:
but you have a point, of course, just like Scotland or Catalonia may also whinge about superstates... what's the trouble with being both Scottish and British, or Catalan and Spanish?
Why must they be mutually exclusive?
... Other than to score a few jingo points and rouse the rabble, on either "side"...

[Starter]

We do however kill each other domestically at rates and in sheer numbers approaching brush wars.....all for the glory of drugs and booze and coke and honor...
True enough, but that's not country to country conflict.


South of us we've cozied up to men who have done the killing for us. We've taught their militarys and police how to torture and kill for decades down at Fort Brag, we give or sell them arms they cannot afford to help them kill their own people quicker and easier...
How far south are you talking? I said Mexico and, while there is a lot of killing there, it's not by the government or supported by the US government. It is though the rawest form of unrestricted capitalism you can think of.


As for Canada, why would we fight with them when they have been the largest source of capital investment in Merikuh and are so complaint with us...INTERTWINED ECONOMIES...
duh.
Exactly and that should be the model for Europe. Merge economies but keep political issues separate.

[Big Ben]

Exactly and that should be the model for Europe. Merge economies but keep political issues separate.

The thing is that USA is more of a supra-state anyway. And Canada a little bit too.

[Starter]

The thing is that USA is more of a supra-state anyway. And Canada a little bit too.
Actually I misspoke. I meant keep open trade, not merge economies. The US model, states (sovereign countries in Europe) and a national government (European Union) will never work for long in Europe. Free trade alliances ala North America make much more sense. And keep all else separate.

[steveaki13]

Heyyyy....UK voluntarely agreed to join EU, nobody ever set a gun to its head to force their entry. You know very well what you were doing from the very start. Leaving it today might be the will of majority but in my opinion it`s a lack of fair play.
.

Thats my point. We joined something which has changed beyond all recognition. We joined thinking it would be only a trading organisation, but now its something so much more. Its like saying come to my birthday party, then after a couple of hours I say we are going to lay a patio. Not what we signed up for.

(I am not old enough to know exactly how people felt at the time, but this sums up what many feel I think)

[Bagwan]

Is this a way to open a real discussion about what a new EU , including GB , could look like ?

[Starter]

Is this a way to open a real discussion about what a new EU , including GB , could look like ?
That would be a new thread.

[Franky]

We joined something which has changed beyond all recognition. We joined thinking it would be only a trading organisation, but now its something so much more. Its like saying come to my birthday party, then after a couple of hours I say we are going to lay a patio. Not what we signed up for.

That logic would be valid, if UK did not have any say in any of the decision making.

[steveaki13]

That logic would be valid, if UK did not have any say in any of the decision making.

The normal working people didnt really did they and they are the ones that have voted to leave. All a lot of them see is the start of a European super state. Which many dont want. There is no point saying they are wrong. Thats what the feel and maybe why some of them voted that way. Plus the UK never committed fully to it by having lots of special let offs, so obviously couldnt change it and didnt want to commit to the future.

[Bagwan]

That would be a new thread.

Certainly , we could discuss it , too , but I meant to ask if perhaps the parties involved directly might see fit to discuss what is wrong with the agreement , especially now that one of them has asked for a divorce .

Article 50 has not been put forward yet .
There is no deadline , and there is lots of time for talking about making it better .

[Rudy Tamasz]

That logic would be valid, if UK did not have any say in any of the decision making.

That's the whole problem with EU: it is not transparent and nobody can figure out who has how much say in the decision making. Vertically, it is an elitist project. Horizontally, the authority is distributed very unevenly between individual countries and central bodies. It was only a matter of time before voters would express their discontent. They already did a few times rejecting the Lisbon Treaty, but the politicians shoved it down their throats anyway. And the inevitable happened.

Similar problems buried the Soviet Union. A lot of people are nostalgic, but most don't miss it.

[gadjo_dilo]

Similar problems buried the Soviet Union. A lot of people are nostalgic, but most don't miss it.

The difference is that the most of the former states of Soviet Union never "joined" by their own will and request.

[Big Ben]

The normal working people didnt really did they and they are the ones that have voted to leave. All a lot of them see is the start of a European super state. Which many dont want. There is no point saying they are wrong. Thats what the feel and maybe why some of them voted that way. Plus the UK never committed fully to it by having lots of special let offs, so obviously couldnt change it and didnt want to commit to the future.

The EU is very slow as it is with the way it works. Having 28 nations that have to constantly agree on everything makes every decision taking process painfully slow. To fix that we would have to make the ever closer union something more than a simple stated intention. Some reforms are needed but I believe that's the right direction. The unelected European bureucrats argument is mainly BS. Most governments are made of unelected bureaucrats. You can't just elect people for every little office. Is the British PM directly elected for that job? Will Boris Johnson be? But even electing people for more offices would be a step in the ever closer union direction and that's exactly what the English don't want. So it is again that duplicitous attitude, complaining about one thing and being totally against any solutions at the same time while not really coming up with any solutions of their own.

Now the English have voted to leave so good for them. I'm afraid however that this will end up being the same circus as ever with the UK, causing a lot of trouble without acting in the end. It's probably the main reason why so many decided to go for the 'go already' stance.

I'm afraid the result of this referendum can be explained by this sort of attitude from the remain side, Steve. Yeah, I vote remain, but I don't know... the EU is bad, I understand why we want to leave but I vote remain.. I don't really know why. It's just that I am a little afraid. But maybe we're better off out anyway. I don't know. I'll vote remain but I'm good either way. I know that "The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt" but in the end I guess the ones who voted out wanted more to leave than the one's who voted in wanted to remain.

[Big Ben]

The difference is that the most of the former states of Soviet Union never "joined" by their own will and request.

Oh well, what can one say when someone's comparing EU with the third reich and the soviet union? Those comparisons are so stupid it's better to just ignore them.

[Rudy Tamasz]

Oh well, what can one say when someone's comparing EU with the third reich and the soviet union? Those comparisons are so stupid it's better to just ignore them.

"Ignore" is the word that best describes your thinking, Ben. It is a common point in the discourse of the Europhiles saying that this type of integration kept the nativist instincts in check and prevented Europe from another outbreak of violence, clearly referring to WWII. The frame of reference for these people is WWII. For me the frame of reference is the pre-Masstricht and pre-Lisbon state of things. You can continue referring to the distant past. You can even bring up dinosaurs and how better off we are without them thanks to the great Brussels. I prefer thinking about the present and future.

[Rollo]

I prefer thinking about the present and future.

What about the possibility of the currency going kaput (because Greece lied to get into it; like it did with the Latin monetary union) and the rise of naitivism fueling outright conflict.


It is a common point in the discourse of the Europhiles saying that this type of integration kept the nativist instincts in check and prevented Europe from another outbreak of violence, clearly referring to WWII.

And 1871.
And 1848.
And 1803.
And 1792.
And 1756.
And 1740.
And 1727.

You can continue referring to the distant past. You don't want that distant past rearing its head again and again and again. The European Coal and Steel Community, then the European Economic Community and then the EU proper is precisely about clogging up the wheels of European "diplomacy" so that people in board rooms and great halls don't fling people's sons into each other at great speed and bloodshed.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4b/Santayana_on_history.jpg

[jens]

The difference with Soviet Union is very clear.

In Soviet Union - a) they forced an economic system, which was inefficient; b) they forced it with violence; c) they brought the overall living levels down. The whole Eastern Europe, the former communist bloc, is lagging well behind the Western Europe in economy and life standards in many areas.

The EU has its problems, but the key factors are positive - a) it actually increases the competitiveness of economy with less trade barriers and more freedom; b) it has instilled peace instead of violence between nations and ideologies.

No system will ever be free of problems. If there is a complex governing system, there also IS bureaucracy. There is no way around it. Of course we can debate about the details - how it should exactly be managed, or how big the EU should be - i.e whether it should include the likes of Greece.

But Europe is better off with EU, rather than without it. Also interesting to ponder is that once upon a time UK actually decided to join EU. It was in the 70s. And the reason back then was precisely because their economy was lagging behind France, Germany, and others, and they wanted to be more competitive. What will be different this time around, when they are on their own? We'll see I guess...

[steveaki13]

Regardless of all this. Surely if any country/person/company join an organisation they have the option to leave surely?

[donKey jote]

Of course. Article 50. Who's delaying you, surely not unelected EU politicians? :andrea:

[gadjo_dilo]

https://youtu.be/37iHSwA1SwE

[Rudy Tamasz]

What about the possibility of the currency going kaput (because Greece lied to get into it; like it did with the Latin monetary union) and the rise of naitivism fueling outright conflict.



And 1871.
And 1848.
And 1803.
And 1792.
And 1756.
And 1740.
And 1727.

You can continue referring to the distant past. You don't want that distant past rearing its head again and again and again. The European Coal and Steel Community, then the European Economic Community and then the EU proper is precisely about clogging up the wheels of European "diplomacy" so that people in board rooms and great halls don't fling people's sons into each other at great speed and bloodshed.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4b/Santayana_on_history.jpg

Yeah, like the adages actually teach anybody anything. Especially effectively they deter bad guys from doing bad things.

You are also wrong on the rest of your points. From 1945 to 1991 Europe had no major wars simply because it was divided between the Western and Eastern blocs. Everybody knew that a wrong step would lead to a global war. That is why both sides tolerated the other side crushing dissent in their own ranks. Starting 1970s they used OSCE for easing tensions. When the Eastern bloc collapsed and EU had a chance to become a benevolent hegemon of Europe, it failed. It didn't do much to handle the Yugoslavian crisis. In fact, some EU members fanned the war by taking sides. The handling of the current refugee crisis was downright disastrous.

[janvanvurpa]

The difference with Soviet Union is very clear.

In Soviet Union - a) they forced an economic system, which was inefficient; b) they forced it with violence; c) they brought the overall living levels down. The whole Eastern Europe, the former communist bloc, is lagging well behind the Western Europe in economy and life standards in many areas.

The EU has its problems, but the key factors are positive - a) it actually increases the competitiveness of economy with less trade barriers and more freedom; b) it has instilled peace instead of violence between nations and ideologies.

No system will ever be free of problems. If there is a complex governing system, there also IS bureaucracy. There is no way around it. Of course we can debate about the details - how it should exactly be managed, or how big the EU should be - i.e whether it should include the likes of Greece.

But Europe is better off with EU, rather than without it. Also interesting to ponder is that once upon a time UK actually decided to join EU. It was in the 70s. And the reason back then was precisely because their economy was lagging behind France, Germany, and others, and they wanted to be more competitive. What will be different this time around, when they are on their own? We'll see I guess...

OK but just one point should be stressed.Not apologizing for the Soviet system especially after Stalin and the Bureaucrats triumphed after Lenin's death.
But you say "a) they forced an economic system, which was inefficient; b) they forced it with violence; c) they brought the overall living levels down."

Inefficient compared to what? We can't measure other country except by their own local conditions, and so the only thing to compare the Soviet system is to what it grew out of: Czarist Russia.
So inefficient compared to what they had previously?

Soviet system was unimaginably brutal..So was its immediate predecessors... It was exploitative. But less than its immediate predecessors.
I am not apologizing for it.. And as a lifetime anti-imperialist of course I am aware of the fate that the Estii and Letts and Lituanians and later the rest of the so called "East Bloc" suffered.. I worked with so many people from the old "East Bloc" who had left and were like me working in heavy industry in Sweden...Painfully aware that I could go "home" (where ever that was) and that they could not--for what seemed like forever (who could see 20 years ahead?)

So no apology for the methods the gangsters in the Politburo used..
But hard to buy everything was all bad and inefficient*, after all it is a rule of nature that is a situation is intolerable to a certain number of a population they will rise up and overthrow the system---exactly as finally began in Gdansk and spread all over.



* a look at literacy, life span, general health, education, etc shows--compared to previously.

[Rollo]

You are also wrong on the rest of your points. From 1945 to 1991 Europe had no major wars simply because it was divided between the Western and Eastern blocs.

You haven't studied history have you?

None of those wars that I listed really involved Western and Eastern against each other. They were all about Western European powers fighting other Western European powers. Starting with the European Coal and Steel Union, it was about tying up Western Europe.

If the EU wasn't about that, then where is the war between West Germany and France in 1973? History never ran down that path.

[gadjo_dilo]

Sorry guys, I admit from the start I'm bad at history and politics, not to mention that I'm natural born dumb. Reading the threads above I understand that EU was created to prevent possible wars and assure stability in the area. But aren't these states NATO members? Doesn't this exclude a possible war between them?

PS. Please, don't jump down my throat. I already know I'm dumb.

[gadjo_dilo]

Inefficient compared to what? We can't measure other country except by their own local conditions, and so the only thing to compare the Soviet system is to wha it grew out of: Czarist Russia.
So inefficient compared to what they had previously?

.
I don't know what Jens means but I'd like to share my views on the inefficient socialist economy we had in my own country. I won't use comparisons, esp. in the last century things evolved too fast and it's difficult to predict what would have happened if the regime hadn't been changed.
It's more about how the economy went. First of all, it wasn't a market economy and supply and demand or free competition weren't its rules. It developed on plans on different periods of time, plans that were completely unrealistic and pointless. The results were also a bit swelled and only on the paper. The technologies were old, the costs high ( but with a very low level of salaries that didn't stimulate work, because everybody was guaranteed a working place), a lot of products weren't demanded but we continued to produce them ( they were in the plan! ), branches of industry were developed although we hadn't resources to sustain them. The slogans that governed that period were "we work at the Working in Vain Cooperative' and " we pretend to work, they pretend to pay us". Add to all these the Communist Party involvment in the economy - you don't do the plan, you're contrarevolutionary, you have to overpass the plan, etc.

If I look back, I admit we still built a lot of things in that period, much more than we achieve today. But it was more because the state ( the only ownership form ) used a cheap working mass that was forced to work, sometimes in the condition of industrial revolution stage. However I shall always claim that that type of economy was meant to fail because of its inefficiency.


But hard to buy everything was all bad and inefficient*, after all it is a rule of nature that is a situation is intolerable to a certain number of a population they will rise up and overthrow the system---exactly as finally began in Gdansk and spread all over.
The state also created a fearful repressive force, not to mention that the Russian forces in the neighbourhood could get to Absurdist an in a few hours. There were attempts in Hungary and Czechoslovakia and you know how they ended. The system failed only when the approval came after the Malta meeting.

[jens]

Sorry guys, I admit from the start I'm bad at history and politics, not to mention that I'm natural born dumb. Reading the threads above I understand that EU was created to prevent possible wars and assure stability in the area. But aren't these states NATO members? Doesn't this exclude a possible war between them?

PS. Please, don't jump down my throat. I already know I'm dumb.

Heh. :)

The explanation I'd give to it is that to go into war, you need to gear economy ready into 'war' mode as well. However, if economies are closely tied, there is less incentive and less opportunity to prepare yourself for "war economy". The heavy industry areas, i.e Ruhr in Germany, are busy working on other projects.

I remember this was the argument right after WWII. Top politicians said "let's unite the economies of France and Germany, so that it would be impossible for them to have a go at each other again."

NATO helps, but together with a unified economy system it gives sort of a 'double protection'.

[gadjo_dilo]

I always saw only the economic reasons behind the EU. ....:confused:
When we joined I never thought that Hungary will stop to dream about a certain part of us.....

[jens]

I always saw only the economic reasons behind the EU. ....:confused:
When we joined I never thought that Hungary will stop to dream about a certain part of us.....

Economy actually is the main reason. :)

Hungary - or at least some people there - may dream, but will they actually do it? Or they'd see that "this part of Romania" is completely open in everyday life anyway - you can go freely there, do business, whatever, you don't need to 'occupy' it. :)

[Rudy Tamasz]

You haven't studied history have you?

None of those wars that I listed really involved Western and Eastern against each other. They were all about Western European powers fighting other Western European powers. Starting with the European Coal and Steel Union, it was about tying up Western Europe.

If the EU wasn't about that, then where is the war between West Germany and France in 1973? History never ran down that path.
Never been strong at history, so the rest of the post is just my speculation. Let's go back to 1973 and imagine what might have happened. The u.s. is stuck up to its neck in Vietnam. India and Pakistan fight over Bangladesh. Arabs try to pay Israel back for 1967. And all of a sudden Germany raises the issue of Alsace. Hmm, says Politburo, what a nice chance! All types of leftist activists on the Soviet payroll both in Germany and France start vocally protesting the revanchist plans of disguised Nazis. In the worst case scenario, the Soviet Union gets a good opportunity to invade Germany, in the best case scenario, the governments of involved Western countries fall like flies. That's why another war between France and Germany did not happen. Maybe EU had something to do with it, but before 1989 everything else was just a side show to the Soviet - American rivalry.

Speaking of earlier times, the situation in Europe was the result of the balance of power between a few leading countries at least since the treaty of Westphalia. Some dropped out of the club like Denmark, Sweden and Poland, some joined it later like Prussia. Everything depended on whether they could peacefully figure out their differences or not. In the process they fought their battles from Lisbon to Moscow. For instance we in Belarus have as many battlefields of the Napoleonic wars and WWI as they have in Flanders.

I can understand though that from your island it is difficult to see anything farther than Rhine. It gets misty 'round Lorelei, doesn't it?

Sent from my Lenovo P70-A using Tapatalk

[Rollo]

I can understand though that from your island it is difficult to see anything farther than Rhine. It gets misty 'round Lorelei, doesn't it?

From the island that I live on, I can see that my country has gone to all sorts of crazy wars that it didn't need to; which is really dumb because it takes forever to get anywhere.

In the election that we had on Saturday, just the Federal Division of Durack if it was a country, would be the 17th biggest country in the world.

[Big Ben]

Oops, wrong prejudice mate :laugh:

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

[donKey jote]

http://i63.tinypic.com/a4shat.jpg

[odykas]

Boris Johnson appointed British foreign minister
No joke :laugh:

https://wharferj.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/boris-zip-line.jpg

[donKey jote]

Dis mayed :-/

[Big Ben]

Bite your tongue!

Nooooooooooooooooooooooo

[Big Ben]

British parliament rejects the brexit deal. Apparently it doesn't fit the mass delusion behind the brexit: we'll divorce and just be **** buddies

[donKey jote]

Bunch of donkeys!!!

[Big Ben]

Then, because they are so unhappy with May's deal, they vote she should stay and keep up the unsatisfactory job.

[Zeakiwi]

One our lime-light seekers has been over your way.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/110070719/jacinda-ardern-expresses-admiration-for-uk-pm-but-says-a-nodeal-brexit-would-be-very-very-difficult.

Too bad she cannot be more like her mentor Helen Clark and go hiking in the Norwegian snow at this time of year.

[Venswithe1996]

I was asked to write a short essay on Brexit at my university. As for me, the situation remains quite complicated. I am a bit worried about this stuff, but try to make my peace with Brexit. It's extemely hard to write an essay on the topic though. Probably I should have asked a writing service to do it. Anyway, any thoughts about how and when will this story end?

[Mark]

I was asked to write a short essay on Brexit at my university. As for me, the situation remains quite complicated. I am a bit worried about this stuff, but try to make my peace with Brexit. It's extemely hard to write an essay on the topic though. Probably I should have asked a writing service to do it. Anyway, any thoughts about how and when will this story end?

If you write that it's shit and everyone who supports it is an idiot. At least you can't get marked down for not being accurate.

[Jag_Warrior]

If you write that it's shit and everyone who supports it is an idiot. At least you can't get marked down for not being accurate.

What's your opinion of Boris, Mark?

[donKey jote]

“An over-promoted rubber bath toy with a little gang of masturbatory prefects” :arrows: