The EU: In, out, shake it all about.... (11 Viewers)

Forums New posts

As of right now, how are thinking of voting? In or out

  • Remain

    Votes: 23 37.1%

  • Leave

    Votes: 35 56.5%

  • Undecided

    Votes: 3 4.8%

  • Not registered or not intention to vote

    Votes: 1 1.6%
  • Total voters
    62
  • Poll closed .
Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
SkyblueBazza said:
Hmmm...a bit like the people that were banging on about Thatcher ruining communities by closing mines...now banging on about climate-change?

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

But she wasn't doing it for that reason. She was doing it because she wanted everyone working in finance and services and moving to the SE. She didn't do it because she had massive environmental concerns - that's just a by-product that makes her decision seem less shitty. She could've closed the mines and set up manufacturing/R&D etc on sustainable renewable energy to replace those jobs. She didn't, because she didn't give a fuck.

Personally I felt it was the right thing to close the mines, even at the time. It was a finite resource and not particularly efficient. What was completely unacceptable was not putting in place any kind of plan to replace those jobs in those coal regions with those in industries she wanted to promote. They were all created in London/SE.
 
S

SkyblueBazza

Well-Known Member
Sky_Blue_Dreamer said:
But she wasn't doing it for that reason. She was doing it because she wanted everyone working in finance and services and moving to the SE. She didn't do it because she had massive environmental concerns - that's just a by-product that makes her decision seem less shitty. She could've closed the mines and set up manufacturing/R&D etc on sustainable renewable energy to replace those jobs. She didn't, because she didn't give a fuck.

Personally I felt it was the right thing to close the mines, even at the time. It was a finite resource and not particularly efficient. What was completely unacceptable was not putting in place any kind of plan to replace those jobs in those coal regions with those in industries she wanted to promote. They were all created in London/SE.
Click to expand...
The reasons are irrelevant. What I am saying is that I strongly suspect that those of mindset predisposed to rant about the destruction of commumities are of the same/similar mindset of those predisposed to rant about the destruction of the environment. Just demonstrating a grand hypocrisy.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 
skybluetony176

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
SkyblueBazza said:
The reasons are irrelevant. What I am saying is that I strongly suspect that those of mindset predisposed to rant about the destruction of commumities are of the same/similar mindset of those predisposed to rant about the destruction of the environment. Just demonstrating a grand hypocrisy.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Climate change just wasn’t a phrase you heard at the time of the miner strikes. It’s maybe just possible that people were unaware of climate change at the time and been educated later in life to have an opinion on it. Not sure how that is hypocrisy.
 
NorthernWisdom

NorthernWisdom

Well-Known Member
Sky_Blue_Dreamer said:
But she wasn't doing it for that reason. She was doing it because she wanted everyone working in finance and services and moving to the SE. She didn't do it because she had massive environmental concerns - that's just a by-product that makes her decision seem less shitty. She could've closed the mines and set up manufacturing/R&D etc on sustainable renewable energy to replace those jobs. She didn't, because she didn't give a fuck.

Personally I felt it was the right thing to close the mines, even at the time. It was a finite resource and not particularly efficient. What was completely unacceptable was not putting in place any kind of plan to replace those jobs in those coal regions with those in industries she wanted to promote. They were all created in London/SE.
Click to expand...
It was also unacceptable to close them but import coal from Poland instead
 
M

martcov

Well-Known Member
NorthernWisdom said:
It was also unacceptable to close them but import coal from Poland instead
Click to expand...

It was political. Take the power from the mining unions who had blackmailed the country and caused the 3 day week.

Nothing to do with climate change whatsoever. Pointless people trying to equate it with the same people „banging on“ about climate change.
 
Astute

Astute

Well-Known Member
skybluetony176 said:
I’ll never understand why people who voted leave didn’t understand what parliamentary democracy is. It was always going to be like this, the ones whinging about it is the ones who voted for it. Go figure.
Click to expand...
That means you and Mart definitely voted for it.
 
Astute

Astute

Well-Known Member
SkyblueBazza said:
If the said army has an opt-out on going to war it renders it as laughable as some of the other contentious shite the EU produces.

Think Ukraine - had they been in the EU when part-occupied (Crimea) by Russia - how strongly on a scale of 1-10 do you believe the EU army would 've been deployed to reclaim it?

I think they would still be talking about what action to take...so 1!!!

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
There are many reasons why thise on here that say an EU army would be a good thing don't want to talk about it.
 
Astute

Astute

Well-Known Member
skybluetony176 said:
I don’t think I’ve moaned about parliamentary sovereignty. Feel free to point out where if you like and I’ll happily concede the point.
Click to expand...
Yeah it would be cool to look through over 1,000 pages when at work.

So you have never whinged when it has gone against what you say you want? Because you whinge all the time. But if something looks good for the EU or bad for the UK you celebrate.
 
skybluetony176

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
Astute said:
Yeah it would be cool to look through over 1,000 pages when at work.

So you have never whinged when it has gone against what you say you want? Because you whinge all the time. But if something looks good for the EU or bad for the UK you celebrate.
Click to expand...

That’s a no then. I haven’t. Your apology will be accepted with good grace.
 
M

martcov

Well-Known Member
westcountry_skyblue said:
Thatcher vs Scargill,No contest he was out of his depth.
Click to expand...

In one year in a UK magazine ( I cannot remember which one ), Scargill was named "man of the year" and Thatcher "woman of the year". I was driving through the DDR ( East Germany ) and their state radio announced that Scargill, a worker's leader, was man of the year in the UK, but didn't mention Thatcher being woman of the year. It was a tough contest and people died.
 
S

SkyblueBazza

Well-Known Member
"She secured 383 votes to 327 against, said David Sassoli, speaker of the assembly. The threshold was 374.
With 52% support, von der Leyen’s victory..." (Reuters) should have Mart, Tony & Clint leading calls for a second vote to overturn or confirm her appointment as what the European Parliament really want!?


Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 
shmmeee

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
SkyblueBazza said:
Hmmm...a bit like the people that were banging on about Thatcher ruining communities by closing mines...now banging on about climate-change?

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Oh dear. another conspiracy theorist.

Can we go back and shoot Tim Berners-Lee please? He’s got a lot to answer for.
 
S

SkyblueBazza

Well-Known Member
shmmeee said:
Oh dear. another conspiracy theorist.

Can we go back and shoot Tim Berners-Lee please? He’s got a lot to answer for.
Click to expand...
There is no conspiracy. They have relentlessly pursued & led calls (on here) for a second referendum because 52% is not a big enough margin to action the result given that Brexit will in their opinion massively & negatively impact the lives of 60-70million people.
Von der Leyen's track record has provided many considerable concern...& she could massively & negatively impact the lives of 700million people!

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 
M

martcov

Well-Known Member
SkyblueBazza said:
"She secured 383 votes to 327 against, said David Sassoli, speaker of the assembly. The threshold was 374.
With 52% support, von der Leyen’s victory..." (Reuters) should have Mart, Tony & Clint leading calls for a second vote to overturn or confirm her appointment as what the European Parliament really want!?


Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

No. The people who voted for VderL had cross examined her and asked for their demands to be met in many meetings she had with the leaders of the party groupings. They knew what she is considering for her program and they will have another chance to vote in October when she has got her team together and more details on her policies. The confirmatory vote.

They are not relying on Banks, Wigmore, Farage, the Mail, the Express,the Sun, the Telegraph and various politicians like RM, IDS, Bone, Lilly to provide them with information ( coupled with foreign influence on SM ).

They made a relatively informed decision. And they still have the chance to vote on her team in October. Nothing like the flawed referendum.
 
M

martcov

Well-Known Member
SkyblueBazza said:
There is no conspiracy. They have relentlessly pursued & led calls (on here) for a second referendum because 52% is not a big enough margin to action the result given that Brexit will in their opinion massively & negatively impact the lives of 60-70million people.
Von der Leyen's track record has provided many considerable concern...& she could massively & negatively impact the lives of 700million people!

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

VdL is there for 5 years before the next election. Brexit is stupid idea which could damage the country for generations.

The people who voted in the referendum did not have the chance to negotiate with the people carrying it out, be told what the workable plan was, or to reject one form of leave to have it replaced by another option.

A totally different vote. Maybe our parliament should have done as the EU. Give someone the job of negotiating a deal taking into account of people’s ideas, put it to the EU, reach a deal and then have it ratified by the UK parliament, or rejected and then try again until an acceptable game plan is ratified. Then hold a confirmatory referendum. Then trigger article 50, with an agreed deal in place to take effect immediately after the referendum. In other words have the arguments, and a signed deal before leaving.
 
dutchman

dutchman

Well-Known Member
martcov said:
No. The people who voted for VderL had cross examined her and asked for their demands to be met in many meetings she had with the leaders of the party groupings. They knew what she is considering for her program and they will have another chance to vote in October when she has got her team together and more details on her policies. The confirmatory vote.
Click to expand...

You don't think she'll be confirmed in October then?
 
C

CCFCSteve

Well-Known Member
martcov said:
VdL is there for 5 years before the next election. Brexit is stupid idea which could damage the country for generations.

The people who voted in the referendum did not have the chance to negotiate with the people carrying it out, be told what the workable plan was, or to reject one form of leave to have it replaced by another option.

A totally different vote. Maybe our parliament should have done as the EU. Give someone the job of negotiating a deal taking into account of people’s ideas, put it to the EU, reach a deal and then have it ratified by the UK parliament, or rejected and then try again until an acceptable game plan is ratified. Then hold a confirmatory referendum. Then trigger article 50, with an agreed deal in place to take effect immediately after the referendum. In other words have the arguments, and a signed deal before leaving.
Click to expand...

I appreciate the above appears sensible in theory, however, it never would’ve happened as the EU have never wanted us to leave. They would never offer a sensible deal pre confirmatory referendum as there’s no incentive for them to.

Also, from memory the EU refused to even discuss ‘a deal’ until we triggered Article 50, then they said until we had resolved citizens rights (always going to be straight forward), the divorce bill and the northern island backstop (far less straight forward) they wouldn’t discuss a trade deal

Unfortunately whilst this may have given the EU leverage in the negotiations, it’s made an even greater mess of an already messy situation.

If the trade deal could have been discussed in conjunction with the other issues it may have simplified matters (whilst Davis may have been incompetent as a Brexit secretary - partly his own doing, partly due to Mays involvement - he pushed hard for this but was ignored)

It may well have meant the backstop would have been irrelevant/redundant as the trade agreement would have incorporated any border requirements and/or solutions

Barnier is no doubt an excellent negotiator (far better than our useless lot), however, a lot of the issues arising now are due to the sequencing of discussions and events which were dictated by the EU.
 
Last edited:
Alan Dugdales Moustache

Alan Dugdales Moustache

Well-Known Member
martcov said:
If the EU army had been in Ukraine and the EU army had been in NATO, Putin would not have been in the Ukraine. The question is irrelevant. Noticed that he hasn’t invaded Estonia or Latvia?
Click to expand...
That's just your opinion. Its not a fact. Prove otherwise.
 
chiefdave

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
SkyblueBazza said:
"She secured 383 votes to 327 against, said David Sassoli, speaker of the assembly. The threshold was 374.
With 52% support, von der Leyen’s victory..." (Reuters) should have Mart, Tony & Clint leading calls for a second vote to overturn or confirm her appointment as what the European Parliament really want!?
Click to expand...
Screenshot 2019-07-17 at 18.37.09.png
 
Alan Dugdales Moustache

Alan Dugdales Moustache

Well-Known Member
martcov said:
Explain. The vast majority of scientists and most governments are banging on about climate change. You can see it happening without having to ask a scientist. More CO2 in the air = warming.

We are producing huge amounts of CO2. Hmmm...

The people denying it think that Trump is clever, that Brexit is a good idea and that all Muslims are bad people... and big up Farage, the BXP and/ or UKIP. Why is that?
Click to expand...
You have proof that all Brexit voters like Trump and think all Muslims are bad. Show some evidence .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 6 (members: 0, guests: 6)
Top