Politics, politics, politics

[Danishfurniturelover]

Time to set out a bright bold positive new vision for the uk.

We should be looking to get 100 per cent of our energy from our own country and from renewables.

Creative a massive drive in verticle farming.

Really strongly back the northern power house.

Look for stronger ties with our commonwealth partners and offer tax breaks to companies dealing with them.

I would give an amnesty to asslym seekers in this country all a million of them, save a lot of money and then in future only accept refugees from UN camps not people trying to get into the country illegally.

Get james bond the real life one to take out juncker and his cronies and deal a peace loving way with national leaders.

Impose tougher sanctions on Russia(though putin might be needed to help us destroy the EU) and also the Saudis.

Ban all religion being taught in schools, great that being gay is not a crime anymore but teaching children to believe on fairytales means we are still in the dark ages.

There i think that would be a good start.

 

[milo]

...meanwhile in Damian Green's office

 

[Baleforce]

man wastes time on internet at work

pictures at 10

 

[milo]

They don't know what they are doing

http://www.itv.com/news/2017-11-30/why-the-pm-will-have-to-repeal-her-own-eu-withdrawal-bill/

As I was saying

https://twitter.com/x/status/936538212285255680

 

[SpurMeUp]

You are more charitable than me. I think that during the campaign they tried to be all things to all people and told voters they could have things that were mutually exclusive. After the referendum they switched position and claimed that anything but the most extreme Brexit (that was never put to the people) would be to ignore the "will of the people". Our weak Prime Minister, in an attempt to appease a handful of lunatic backbenchers, adopted this position and boxed herself and the country into a corner.

No doubt UKIP tried everything they could. It was their one big shot. Should probably credit them, they achieved their aim.

But I don’t believe they had a blue print of post Brexit Britain, going on record saying the ‘Norway model’ was likely. I don’t think they were purposeful lies, just the limit of how far they’d modelled things. A sign of how little they - and we - had been able to think through the issues. And who knows I’m sure May would like to deliver a Norway like model if the EU would let us get away with no free movement. When it became clear we couldn’t have our cake and eat it (with immigration), we had to ‘double down’ the bad bet (bad imo) and follow a harder Brexit.

Despite that, UKIP and Leave were undoubtedly the better prepared. They understood the key issues before the vote while Remain never found a strategy.

Leave understood that by the end of the campaign the UK had to be talking about immigration and not the economy. The reason they knew this so clearly, is they ran extensive focus groups and really got on top of the issues. Remain...there wasn’t a plan or a clear message.




Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app

 

[the dza]

Just do the phucking Norway option and be done with it; no influence over EU rules, access to single market, easy transition, still technically exit the EU, will of the people etc. Both leavers and remainers will be left with lots to be unhappy about, so it's the perfect compromise.

 

[glorygloryeze]

Do you have one example of how the EU impacts you day to day? Abstract assertions of dictatorship are absurd.

Are they really? The likes of Juncker have a lot of power in the EU; when did the citizens of the UK or other EU countries provide him with his power? Also, if we later get unhappy with his leadership, how do we vote him out? If we cannot, is that not a de facto dictatorship?

The EU was built out of the ashes of Nazi tyranny and dictatorship. Please provide some real examples of what the EU does.

The EU was indeed built on the ashes of Nazi tyranny; But i bet Hitler would be proud of the way the EU has succeeded in creating a Supersate by the backdoor; Hitler tried to do so using soldiers...An example of what the EU does? How about the EU directive that prohibits renationalisation of rail companies? Now why is that the EU's business how a country runs it's railways? If the UK vote in Corbyn it may be because most beleive that may be a good thing for the country. There are lots of arguments to say the renationalisation of the railways is NOT good for a countries economic point of view. Well it is up to an individual country's government to decide what would be best. This trading union that the EU claim to be shoild not be setting such rules - unless of course they are acting as they see themselves to be: a Euopean Supersate. As a voter in the UK, it should be for me and my fellow votes, be they left-leaning, right-wing, economically liberal etc to ultimately have a say in that and NOT the likes of Juncker and the EU.

Is cleaner European air a bad thing? Is regulation of exploitative businesses and consumer rights a bad thing? A ceiling on phone roaming charges?

Of course none of those things are bad thing, but you talk as though an individual national government can't work to enact those things. Do you think we'd not have clean toilets without the EU as well?

An ability to shape global trade regulations. At its core is a Customs Union not a Dictatorship [emoji23]

If you still maintain the EU is the Death Star can you outline how it adversely affects you or others directly?

As above, if the EU was simply a trading area and nothing much more than that i suspect ,most would have voted to remain. But the fact the EU insists on Freedom of Movement - a stepping stone towards turning the EU area into one Nation, one Superstate - as a condition of being part of this trading union says it all. I am not a plumber, but no doubt freedom of movement rule has effected many who simply can't compete on costs with plumbers from other parts if the EU who can charge much lower prices if they share their bedsits with up to ten others thereby having far fewer overheads etc. As @Gutter Boy and others have often said it's a form of importing the 'sweatshop' plus disincentivises local investment in skills and training development; i mean why would you ever when you can just employ ready-made and cheaper workers from the other ends of the EU which pay lower wages than what ours would be and who wouldn't need training.
Rather than taking on global corporations, the EU if anything gives them more conditions to thrive, often at the expense of local democracy

 

[glorygloryeze]

Nah mate. It's You that is embarrassingly not being able to to grasp a very simple concepts that do not fit inside your understanding... or maybe you are trolling

Sigh...let me try again.... I'm not saying that you voted for Brexit because of Russian digital propaganda. I'm not saying that anyone on this forum did... or any spurs fan did...

But it did have a influence on some people that is without question. As soon as something written/created deceminated by a cyber agent is shared or even liked it's had an influence. That influence maybe to just reinforce existing views... or tilt views a certain way.

So there was unquestionably some influence.

Now on to your claim about there always being certain influences on the way people vote. Yes of course. But digital propaganda the way the Russians are doing it, is different. The way social media works, the ability to quite frankly almost psychologically profile INDVIDUALS from your target audience (When advertising) and then be given a list of who reacted and how. Couple this with the before mentioned affect of people you 'know' having more of an ability to influence you or your opinions then those that are separated from us in some way, the 'elite' for example.

And what you have is a very new phenomenon. The power of which, we don't fully understand yet.

But what I know from utilsing facebook advertising coupled with a slithering of an understanding of psychology is, it's powerful and it works. And if I can work that out from a studio in east London then Putin who is smarter, has invested millions into this would be doing this in a lot better and more complicated way than I could ever imagine.

Now I know why he is doing it. I kind of respect him for doing it. because with a fraction of the budget of what it would normally take he has subverted western Democracy that is without question... The only questions are

To what extent?
What we going to do about it?

Only just been able to take the time to respond on this; as i say it's laughable if you think that Russian 'bots' have more influence than equivalents build and developed by the US, UK and other major players in the 'West'. In fact, that you are worrying about how much Russian 'bots' influence your views and voting patterns in the West says a lot more about how good those 'Western bots' really are: bullseye!

 

[SpurMeUp]

@glorygloryeze the one example you’ve given about how the EU affects you is that the EU would stop the nationalisation of railways.

I’d like a nationalised rail service too! So do the French and Germans clearly as they HAVE NATIONALISED rail services NOW! [emoji23]

The state also owns the energy suppliers etc so I’m not sure what your on about?


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app

 

[monkeybarry]

Just do the phucking Norway option and be done with it; no influence over EU rules, access to single market, easy transition, still technically exit the EU, will of the people etc. Both leavers and remainers will be left with lots to be unhappy about, so it's the perfect compromise.

Take back control by relinquishing all control - that actually sounds like the perfect Brexit definition

 

[glorygloryeze]

@glorygloryeze the one example you’ve given about how the EU affects you is that the EU would stop the nationalisation of railways.

I’d like a nationalised rail service too! So do the French and Germans clearly as they HAVE NATIONALISED rail services NOW! [emoji23]

The state also owns the energy suppliers etc so I’m not sure what your on about?


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app

Well as i say there are EU directives that exists that specifically make nationalisation of railways problematic if Labour got into power and wanted to do that. See this article: https://www.newstatesman.com/politi...at-no-one-will-tell-you-we-cant-while-were-eu
and also see the EU'S policy on creating an internal rail market: https://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/rail/market_en

The main point is that this should not be for the EU to try and dictate to individual nation states. Again, it's the EU acting as a quasi-Supersate and it won't stop with Transport and Railways policy...

 

[SpurMeUp]

Well as i say there are EU directives that exists that specifically make nationalisation of railways problematic if Labour got into power and wanted to do that. See this article: https://www.newstatesman.com/politi...at-no-one-will-tell-you-we-cant-while-were-eu
and also see the EU'S policy on creating an internal rail market: https://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/rail/market_en

The main point is that this should not be for the EU to try and dictate to individual nation states. Again, it's the EU acting as a quasi-Supersate and it won't stop with Transport and Railways policy...

I take you’re point about British born working people being undercut by cheap labourers etc who are willing to work hard and get less pay. Anyone who drives a bus and hasn’t had a pay rise for x years has a very valid grievance with the EU. But you have to look at our own governments too. Our government CHOSE not to veto free movement for the new EU countries. Meaning Romanians etc came here when they weren’t allowed into Germany. The UK also chose not to register migrants or send any back that were out of work or ask all migrants to register. But yes, it is unfair on working people when they are undercut by cheap eu labor.

The rest: the EU stops nationalisation of state utilities or the EU is a dictatorship is simply not true. We have national elections and a parliament that controls things and most big eu nations have state owned railways. The EU can’t become federal as not every country wants that, and each has a veto.

Things like controlling Air Pollution, or phone roaming costs or biz practice controls could NOT be done by nation states by themselves. Pollution travels across boarders, we don’t control phone companies in other countries, and the UK cant impose laws on the single market. What the UK has done is influence and control a lot from within the EU however. Something we’ll miss when we’re out.




Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app

 

[DTA]

Only just been able to take the time to respond on this; as i say it's laughable if you think that Russian 'bots' have more influence than equivalents build and developed by the US, UK and other major players in the 'West'. In fact, that you are worrying about how much Russian 'bots' influence your views and voting patterns in the West says a lot more about how good those 'Western bots' really are: bullseye!

Bots as a term is inadequate and misleading to describe what the Russians have done. But as to your point of there being other influencers, of course and some of them like momentum use similar tactics to the Russians.... But they are not being funded by a hostile foreign government are they? If you think they are show me even a smidgen of proof.

 

[milo]

No doubt UKIP tried everything they could. It was their one big shot. Should probably credit them, they achieved their aim.

But I don’t believe they had a blue print of post Brexit Britain, going on record saying the ‘Norway model’ was likely. I don’t think they were purposeful lies, just the limit of how far they’d modelled things. A sign of how little they - and we - had been able to think through the issues. And who knows I’m sure May would like to deliver a Norway like model if the EU would let us get away with no free movement. When it became clear we couldn’t have our cake and eat it (with immigration), we had to ‘double down’ the bad bet (bad imo) and follow a harder Brexit.

Despite that, UKIP and Leave were undoubtedly the better prepared. They understood the key issues before the vote while Remain never found a strategy.

Leave understood that by the end of the campaign the UK had to be talking about immigration and not the economy. The reason they knew this so clearly, is they ran extensive focus groups and really got on top of the issues. Remain...there wasn’t a plan or a clear message.




Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app

I agree that Leave ran the better campaign. It was based on emotion and successfully sold a vision of the future. Remain were left defending the status quo lead by a Prime Minister who refused to attack his own side.

I think that a Norway time deal with some control over immigration could have been achieved but most of those controls are ones that we could have had in place anyway. This would have solved most of our immediate problems such as Northern Ireland, just in time supply chains and the passporting of services. I still think that it is the government's aim to get here but to call it something else. Based on May's red lines, we are heading for CETA unless she does more u-turns. CETA would be a disaster for us.

 

[milo]

Well as i say there are EU directives that exists that specifically make nationalisation of railways problematic if Labour got into power and wanted to do that. See this article: https://www.newstatesman.com/politi...at-no-one-will-tell-you-we-cant-while-were-eu
and also see the EU'S policy on creating an internal rail market: https://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/rail/market_en

The main point is that this should not be for the EU to try and dictate to individual nation states. Again, it's the EU acting as a quasi-Supersate and it won't stop with Transport and Railways policy...

You'll see that the New Statesman article is reporting something that Kate Hoey said. That should be enough to tell you that it is wrong.

There is nothing in European law to stop us nationalising services

https://www.anothereurope.org/lets-be-clear-nationalisation-is-not-against-eu-law/

 

[milo]

Are they really? The likes of Juncker have a lot of power in the EU; when did the citizens of the UK or other EU countries provide him with his power? Also, if we later get unhappy with his leadership, how do we vote him out? If we cannot, is that not a de facto dictatorship?

How do voters get rid of Jeremy Haywood? If you cannot, is it a de facto dictatorship?

 

[milo]

As @Gutter Boy and others have often said it's a form of importing the 'sweatshop' plus disincentivises local investment in skills and training development; i mean why would you ever when you can just employ ready-made and cheaper workers from the other ends of the EU which pay lower wages than what ours would be and who wouldn't need training.

Education is largely in the hands of the State and if our workforce is insufficiently skilled to do the jobs that are available, then that is where the blame lies. The market argument that GB uses does not apply here either.

Of course, it is not true. We are virtually at full employment. The is no evidence that it suppresses wages of high and medium skilled workers and the impact on low skilled workers is relatively small

https://fullfact.org/immigration/immigration-and-jobs-labour-market-effects-immigration/

and certainly far less than a decade of stalled growth and productivity. The cost on jobs and growth of removing this workforce though would be high.

 

[Gutter Boy]

Just do the phucking Norway option and be done with it; no influence over EU rules, access to single market, easy transition, still technically exit the EU, will of the people etc. Both leavers and remainers will be left with lots to be unhappy about, so it's the perfect compromise.

CETA would be much better. Access to 91% of the single market, no FoM or other interference with our governance. The only people that tinkles off is the bankers.

 

[Gutter Boy]

I agree that Leave ran the better campaign. It was based on emotion and successfully sold a vision of the future. Remain were left defending the status quo lead by a Prime Minister who refused to attack his own side.

I think that a Norway time deal with some control over immigration could have been achieved but most of those controls are ones that we could have had in place anyway. This would have solved most of our immediate problems such as Northern Ireland, just in time supply chains and the passporting of services. I still think that it is the government's aim to get here but to call it something else. Based on May's red lines, we are heading for CETA unless she does more u-turns. CETA would be a disaster for us.

The Leave campaign had 40 years of momentum, including boiling resentment about the lies of the first referendum and the Maastricht sell-out. No one has ever loved the EU, just tolerated it, so no one could muster emotion for that cause (save maybe Clegg).

 

[Gutter Boy]

How do voters get rid of Jeremy Haywood? If you cannot, is it a de facto dictatorship?

The problem is the power balance

I wouldn't have so much issue with the EU if it was run by the Council. A co-operation between 28 national governments. The problem is the Commission runs the show, and they are unaccountable ideologically-driven priests. The Parliament is too big to be effective and has no power in the system anyway.

Abolish the Commissions and the trappings of statehood (FoM, schengen, eurozone) and I could be persuaded by the concept of an EU