• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics

glorygloryeze said:
That's my issue; it is melding the countries within the EU into ONE country by default and relegating the different countries within the zone into regions.
Click to expand...

It's not though, it was agreed by nation states and we had a veto. There are plenty of British citizens that do very well out of it on the continent and relatively few Europeans taking advantage here.
 
milo said:
It's not though, it was agreed by nation states and we had a veto. There are plenty of British citizens that do very well out of it on the continent and relatively few Europeans taking advantage here.
Click to expand...

For a UK citizen to be able to work in, say Austria, and be immediately entitled to whatever benefits that local workers in Austria are entitled to is to me the same as a worker originally from London going to work in Glasgow or Cardiff. It turns all the countries into sub-regions.
Yes, it is a choice of a country to veto, but then look at all the consequences built into doing that (as we have seen with this whole Brexit referendum situation).

It would make more sense if all the systems of employment and tax revenue were the same but they are not (most if not all countries naturally have different government and economic histories that have evolved over time depending on what has happened in the countries to shape them). But this rule whereby to have a common market you must have totally free movement within plus commonality in worker benefit entitlement from day one is what ultimately forces the common market into one unified European nation state (by proxy).

I don't see why we don't have common market trading rules with preferential movement for citizens within the zone, but without movement by citizens within the zone having to be totally 'free'/'uncontrolled'
 
milo said:
I think that there is a lot in this article that you'd agree with @scaramanga

https://euobserver.com/opinion/136009
Click to expand...
Very good article. I'd go a little further and suggest that the EU's current mess is the inevitable conclusion of taking democracy further away from individual voters. People need to know that their representative has to care about their opinion. Whether that representative agrees or not, people need to know that each vote has value.

That is not and cannot be the case with a system like that of the EU. The further removed a politician is from individual voters, the more perfect their application of democracy has to be. In the case of the EU, the opposite is happening. The less elected the leaders, the more they feel the need to do their own will regardless of the will of the people.
 
glorygloryeze said:
Not inevitable at all (unless you want more wars, some racial groups wiped out etc), but thanks for the entertainment anyway:)
Click to expand...

yeah, the whole point of that is there won't be any wars as we'll have realised we aren't actually different

a single racial group is the logical evolution of the human race
 
glorygloryeze said:
For a UK citizen to be able to work in, say Austria, and be immediately entitled to whatever benefits that local workers in Austria are entitled to is to me the same as a worker originally from London going to work in Glasgow or Cardiff. It turns all the countries into sub-regions.
Yes, it is a choice of a country to veto, but then look at all the consequences built into doing that (as we have seen with this whole Brexit referendum situation).

It would make more sense if all the systems of employment and tax revenue were the same but they are not (most if not all countries naturally have different government and economic histories that have evolved over time depending on what has happened in the countries to shape them). But this rule whereby to have a common market you must have totally free movement within plus commonality in worker benefit entitlement from day one is what ultimately forces the common market into one unified European nation state (by proxy).

I don't see why we don't have common market trading rules with preferential movement for citizens within the zone, but without movement by citizens within the zone having to be totally 'free'/'uncontrolled'
Click to expand...

Personally, I see the ability to live and work in other countries as a good thing.

It is down to the nation state to regulate their country as they see fit and there is plenty of scope for putting measure in place to stop migrants moving to take advantage of more generous benefits systems, if they see fit. There are moves towards tax harmonisation throughout Europe but they have not got very far, in part down to the UK and Irish governments. Benefits obviously need to vary across the continent because the cost of living varies so much but the fact of the matter is that British benefits are not generous by continental standards (when adjusted for cost of living).

The people moving to the UK have been done so overwhelmingly to find work (with the bonus of improving their English). Most come here for a short while and then go back, some obviously settle. Few claim benefits and even fewer come here with that intention. All this has happened whilst the UK has had record levels of employment, so they are clearly not taking jobs from British workers. Evidence of wage suppression being caused by migrants is limited and the immigrants are generally better skilled than the indigenous workers. This has been a good thing for the UK economy.
 
scaramanga said:
Very good article. I'd go a little further and suggest that the EU's current mess is the inevitable conclusion of taking democracy further away from individual voters. People need to know that their representative has to care about their opinion. Whether that representative agrees or not, people need to know that each vote has value.

That is not and cannot be the case with a system like that of the EU. The further removed a politician is from individual voters, the more perfect their application of democracy has to be. In the case of the EU, the opposite is happening. The less elected the leaders, the more they feel the need to do their own will regardless of the will of the people.
Click to expand...

The problem is that the measures you could conceivable put in place to address that would be opposed by Eurosceptics as being a move to further integration and national governments would also block it because it could undermine them.

I think that in the UK, at least, a large part of the problems are because the print media is very anti-EU and the government has consistently pitted themselves against it for domestic gain. The mistruths have stuck and impossible to counter now. As a country, I think that we need to grow up and stop seeing everything through the prism of the second world war.
 
glorygloryeze said:
For a UK citizen to be able to work in, say Austria, and be immediately entitled to whatever benefits that local workers in Austria are entitled to is to me the same as a worker originally from London going to work in Glasgow or Cardiff. It turns all the countries into sub-regions.
Yes, it is a choice of a country to veto, but then look at all the consequences built into doing that (as we have seen with this whole Brexit referendum situation).

It would make more sense if all the systems of employment and tax revenue were the same but they are not (most if not all countries naturally have different government and economic histories that have evolved over time depending on what has happened in the countries to shape them). But this rule whereby to have a common market you must have totally free movement within plus commonality in worker benefit entitlement from day one is what ultimately forces the common market into one unified European nation state (by proxy).

I don't see why we don't have common market trading rules with preferential movement for citizens within the zone, but without movement by citizens within the zone having to be totally 'free'/'uncontrolled'
Click to expand...

You ideally want movement for highly skilled workers (and university students), which benefits the whole country.

What you don't want is movement for unskilled workers, because all that effectively does is import the sweatshop, for the benefit of big company shareholders, and at the expense of the local working classes

So a work permit system
 
Gutter Boy said:
You ideally want movement for highly skilled workers (and university students), which benefits the whole country.

What you don't want is movement for unskilled workers, because all that effectively does is import the sweatshop, for the benefit of big company shareholders, and at the expense of the local working classes

So a work permit system
Click to expand...

I think that is over simplified. What employers want and the economy needs are willing workers and a flexible market. We are near full employment, if we do not fill vacancies with immigrants, then many of them will stay unfilled, which is bad for business and the economy.

What we need to do is create better quality jobs in the parts of the country where there aren't many. That has nothing to do with the EU or immigration, although the country being poorer may make that harder.

The idea of work permits amuses me, especially when they are frequently proposed by people who complain about bureaucracy.
 
glorygloryeze said:
That's my issue; it is melding the countries within the EU into ONE country by default and relegating the different countries within the zone into regions.
Click to expand...
We all have different welfare, that's one of the problems. So they are not through the front or back door melding all countries into one, or should I say not with this mandate
 
galeforce said:
yeah, the whole point of that is there won't be any wars as we'll have realised we aren't actually different

a single racial group is the logical evolution of the human race
Click to expand...

No. Humans are inherently tribal. Nation states are about the biggest tribe you can get where there's still a sense of shared origins. Until aliens provide 'the other', there will be no global identity. And bonds to the new world will stop Europe ever becoming Christendom (pitted against the Caliphate) again.

Humans know co-operation is usually the best way prosper, but the second resources are squeezed, they fracture and compete
 
Gutter Boy said:
Isn't Canada Plus cake and eat it? Sovereignty, no tariffs and no freedom of movement
Click to expand...

But the early lines say:

Manufacturing relatively straight forward.
Services harder.

We need services and the Canada deal doesn't cover that. Without some form of freedom of movement, we will end up paying more for access. We'll also need someone to regulate disputes, it we reject the legal mechanisms in place, we will need to pay for something else.
 
milo said:
I think that is over simplified. What employers want and the economy needs are willing workers and a flexible market. We are near full employment, if we do not fill vacancies with immigrants, then many of them will stay unfilled, which is bad for business and the economy.

What we need to do is create better quality jobs in the parts of the country where there aren't many. That has nothing to do with the EU or immigration, although the country being poorer may make that harder.

The idea of work permits amuses me, especially when they are frequently proposed by people who complain about bureaucracy.
Click to expand...

Only if the goal is an ever expanding population and the continued economic and social surpression of all but the first world.

Work permits are easy if you keep the criteria simple. Something like one of: 1) university degree from a top 200 university, 2) considered internationally-excellent in a named profession (with appropriate testimonies), 3) £100,000 cash in the bank (with appropriate audit trail re legally acquired).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back