|
Post by Big Lin on Jan 16, 2010 21:43:47 GMT
What do people think about the European Union?
Is it broadly in our best interests to stay in, should we try to reform it, or should we just get out?
I'd be very interested in hearing members' opinions on this subject.
(I guess most people can guess what mine are!)
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jan 17, 2010 0:18:29 GMT
..corrupt and undemorcratic moving to the totalitarian
|
|
|
Post by june on Jan 17, 2010 0:24:32 GMT
I love being part of Europe - and think we really need to commit, either be in and driving or, get out.
What I do not want is being half assed about it - as were were under the Tories. If we think France and Germany have too much say - stop moaning and get stuck in and change it or remove your self altogether.
What I abhor is all the ills of GB being paced that the door of the EU when actually its weak Government, not the EU at fault.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jan 17, 2010 10:11:09 GMT
"" I love being part of Europe -"" may i ask why..and as you love it what particular benefits has it brought for you ??how has it improved your life..well being...to love some thing it has to have given/allowed/made you happy not being nasty just interested
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jan 17, 2010 10:12:52 GMT
""What I abhor is all the ills of GB being paced that the door of the EU when actually its weak Government, not the EU at fault."" 6billion a year and rising would not have solved our problems but is certainly a drain on resources which are getting increasingly tight
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Jan 17, 2010 14:08:55 GMT
the irrefutable FACT is that there is NOTHING good that can be said about the european union. the simple reality is that the world is comprised of 195+ totally separate and distinct nations. there is NO one world, which is the imbecillic premise of the eu. the abject lie of trade would be amusing if it were so stupid. the common market was more than sufficient to deal with trade between the nations of europe. the abjectly stupid notion that some central authority should have ANY say whatsoever in the internal affairs of a sovereign nation is ridiculous on its face
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jan 17, 2010 15:21:47 GMT
If the European Union was only interested in developing European economic interests as Canada and the US are doing i'd be fine with it. In reality the EU's putting a stranglehood on free speech.
I know a lot of people don't like political talk show hosts such as Rush Limbaugh and Ed Schultz. The EU political police would silence people like these or have them brought to court for "thought crimes". In Germany for instance news coverage is always done without any anti PC commentaries.
|
|
|
Post by Ben Lomond on Jan 17, 2010 16:25:28 GMT
We could be "IN" Europe, but at the same time run our own affairs. We do not have to part of the United States of Europe to enjoy free trade, and good relations with our neighbours. We do NOT have to pay Europe 7 billions a year for the privilege of being run by unelected commissioners in Brussels. They reckon that some 80% of rules and regulations now originate in Brussels, and as EU law takes precedence over our own national law, we have to adopt them. The whole point is that the nations of Europe are not like the states in the US. They are as disparate as chalk and cheese. To try and weld them into some superstate is nonsensical, and only seems to benefit the new ruling class of civil servants serving the monster (and my God, there are a lot of them). The original concept was for a common market, with free trade, and that was how it was sold to the British public in the only referendum we had on joining. The politicians lied to us then, but that's what politicians do, I guess. I will repeat a challenge I have made in other debates on this subject. Can anyone name ONE substantial benefit that membership confers on the UK that we could not equally enjoy as members of a loosely knit common market; and that is worth 7 billions a year into the bargain? Anyone? ?
|
|
|
Post by Ben Lomond on Jan 17, 2010 16:31:36 GMT
Incidentally, do you Americans realise that the accounts of the European Union have NOT been approved by their auditors for the past sixteen years? The whole thing is riddled with corruption, and they spend 40% of a huge budget on subsidising small and inefficient farmers under the common agricultural policy, and in so doing keep prices artificially high. But as it chiefly benefits France, a founder member, it is never reformed, although many attempts have been made. Greece, Portugal, Spain, Italy, and Ireland are just about bankrupt, and in a hell of a financial mess. But as members of the Euro, they can neither reduce interest rates unilaterally, nor can they consider a devaluation.
Sooner or later the whole edifice will implode, as members find that they cannot afford to remain shackled to it. Roll on the day!
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Jan 17, 2010 17:41:24 GMT
The whole point is that the nations of Europe are not like the states in the US. They are as disparate as chalk and cheese.? Actually, not really. Historically, economically, philisophically, and in so many other ways the European states (especially the Western ones) are very much alike - virtually indistinguishable by the rest of the world. The main difference is that we speak different languages. And that's a big one. But essentially, compared to the rest of the world, we are pretty similar in thought and values. But, because we speak different languages and have strong nationalistic tendencies, we can't just become a full federation like the USA. Although the EU is the only entity in the world which will ever be strong and rich enough to be a counterpoint to the USA in global politics. The current structures are wrong and corrupt, and I won't defend them. But the idea of the EU is essentially right, once we get our heads round the fact that we DO speak different languages and ARE nationalistic, so it has to be a loose federation. We haven't got it right yet, but I predict that by 2050 or 2010 the EU will be vastly different from the way it is today, and very much loved and valued by the citizens in its various member states. I regard the EU as a work in progress.
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Jan 17, 2010 17:43:09 GMT
AMENDMENT: When I say the EU is the only entity in the world which will ever be strong enough to be a global counterpoint to the USA I am wrong. China is definitely showing potential to reach that stage well before the EU, and India has to be worth watching too, particularly if it reaches the stage where surrounding small nations become client states. But deffo China.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Jan 17, 2010 18:14:32 GMT
We could be "IN" Europe, but at the same time run our own affairs. We do not have to part of the United States of Europe to enjoy free trade, and good relations with our neighbours. We do NOT have to pay Europe 7 billions a year for the privilege of being run by unelected commissioners in Brussels. They reckon that some 80% of rules and regulations now originate in Brussels, and as EU law takes precedence over our own national law, we have to adopt them. The whole point is that the nations of Europe are not like the states in the US. They are as disparate as chalk and cheese. To try and weld them into some superstate is nonsensical, and only seems to benefit the new ruling class of civil servants serving the monster (and my God, there are a lot of them). The original concept was for a common market, with free trade, and that was how it was sold to the British public in the only referendum we had on joining. The politicians lied to us then, but that's what politicians do, I guess. I will repeat a challenge I have made in other debates on this subject. Can anyone name ONE substantial benefit that membership confers on the UK that we could not equally enjoy as members of a loosely knit common market; and that is worth 7 billions a year into the bargain? Anyone? ? that's the whole point. you ALREADY HAD the european common market, which was more than sufficient
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Jan 17, 2010 18:36:37 GMT
The whole point is that the nations of Europe are not like the states in the US. They are as disparate as chalk and cheese.? Actually, not really. Historically, economically, philisophically, and in so many other ways the European states (especially the Western ones) are very much alike - virtually indistinguishable by the rest of the world. The main difference is that we speak different languages. And that's a big one. But essentially, compared to the rest of the world, we are pretty similar in thought and values. But, because we speak different languages and have strong nationalistic tendencies, we can't just become a full federation like the USA. Although the EU is the only entity in the world which will ever be strong and rich enough to be a counterpoint to the USA in global politics. The current structures are wrong and corrupt, and I won't defend them. But the idea of the EU is essentially right, once we get our heads round the fact that we DO speak different languages and ARE nationalistic, so it has to be a loose federation. We haven't got it right yet, but I predict that by 2050 or 2010 the EU will be vastly different from the way it is today, and very much loved and valued by the citizens in its various member states. I regard the EU as a work in progress. huh uh hon. the PRIMARY precept behind the european union is to have a central government, stripping every nation of its sovereignty. that is the ONLY purpose for the euro. there is also the imbecillic idea that each member state, since there are no longer any countries, has to go to brussels to settle disputes with other member states, instead of just declaring war and settling it like gentlemen. the simple reality is that there is not a single thing good that can be said for the european union
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Jan 17, 2010 18:55:33 GMT
Actually, not really. Historically, economically, philisophically, and in so many other ways the European states (especially the Western ones) are very much alike - virtually indistinguishable by the rest of the world. The main difference is that we speak different languages. And that's a big one. But essentially, compared to the rest of the world, we are pretty similar in thought and values. But, because we speak different languages and have strong nationalistic tendencies, we can't just become a full federation like the USA. Although the EU is the only entity in the world which will ever be strong and rich enough to be a counterpoint to the USA in global politics. The current structures are wrong and corrupt, and I won't defend them. But the idea of the EU is essentially right, once we get our heads round the fact that we DO speak different languages and ARE nationalistic, so it has to be a loose federation. We haven't got it right yet, but I predict that by 2050 or 2010 the EU will be vastly different from the way it is today, and very much loved and valued by the citizens in its various member states. I regard the EU as a work in progress. huh uh hon. the PRIMARY precept behind the european union is to have a central government, stripping every nation of its sovereignty. that is the ONLY purpose for the euro. there is also the imbecillic idea that each member state, since there are no longer any countries, has to go to brussels to settle disputes with other member states, instead of just declaring war and settling it like gentlemen. the simple reality is that there is not a single thing good that can be said for the european union But surely that's the same as the power of the states in the union in the USA? I can see why Americans would get upset, however, at the idea of a powerful and coherent EU. Unfortunately our current EU is not coherent - or honest. There are lots of good things that can be said about the EU, such as the ending of border controls for internal travllers, the right to move and live where I want within a far wider area, etc. But, as I say, I do not defend the current constructs and procedures of the current EU.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jan 17, 2010 19:55:05 GMT
""But surely that's the same as the power of the states in the union in the USA?"" no...the USA started from scratch...and people went to the states because they actually wanted to..to make a new and better life with no prior history as an independent self governming one free state/country..same for canada..australia..newzealand ....they started fresh new country..new start where as europe is trying to meld ancient histories.... ancient grudges.. ancient ills ..languages..trying to force feed disparate peoples against in many cases their free will..and it wont work because of previous history.... its corrupt and totalitarian....much better a loose federation of independent states a common market with common interests the corruption stinks and beware any would be state that kicks off by training an army of specially trained to deal with ""civil unrest/disbedience"" and the denial of free expression and a free vote.......the apple doesnt fall far from the tree russia didnt work and that was the same idea..china eventually will have the same problems...
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jan 17, 2010 19:57:59 GMT
"" such as the ending of border controls for internal travllers, the right to move and live where I want within a far wider area, etc."" you always had the right to up sticks....it was never that hard and lack of border controls ? are bring ing various troubles and you still have to have a passport/id card do americans need passports or id to travel from maine to florida??
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Jan 19, 2010 12:40:11 GMT
huh uh hon. the PRIMARY precept behind the european union is to have a central government, stripping every nation of its sovereignty. that is the ONLY purpose for the euro. there is also the imbecillic idea that each member state, since there are no longer any countries, has to go to brussels to settle disputes with other member states, instead of just declaring war and settling it like gentlemen. the simple reality is that there is not a single thing good that can be said for the european union But surely that's the same as the power of the states in the union in the USA? I can see why Americans would get upset, however, at the idea of a powerful and coherent EU. Unfortunately our current EU is not coherent - or honest. There are lots of good things that can be said about the EU, such as the ending of border controls for internal travllers, the right to move and live where I want within a far wider area, etc. But, as I say, I do not defend the current constructs and procedures of the current EU. damm hon, it is the ending of border controls that is one of the greater evils of the eu. you have always had the right to emigrate to another country if you wished, and they would accept you. that is the whole point. NO central organization has a right controlling what ANY individual nation chooses to do. if germany decided to refuse to allow you to live there, that is their right. no numbnuts in brussels has a right to say different
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Jan 19, 2010 12:44:56 GMT
"" such as the ending of border controls for internal travllers, the right to move and live where I want within a far wider area, etc."" you always had the right to up sticks....it was never that hard and lack of border controls ? are bring ing various troubles and you still have to have a passport/id card do americans need passports or id to travel from maine to florida?? most countries have states, provinces, or whatever you want to call them. people can, and should be able to move freely throughout them. however, there is NO rational reason to allow anyone to move totally unhindered from one country to another. while it is much more lax than our border with mexico, there are restrictions in moving between the u.s. and canada.
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Jan 19, 2010 14:01:11 GMT
"" such as the ending of border controls for internal travllers, the right to move and live where I want within a far wider area, etc."" you always had the right to up sticks....it was never that hard and lack of border controls ? are bring ing various troubles and you still have to have a passport/id card do americans need passports or id to travel from maine to florida?? most countries have states, provinces, or whatever you want to call them. people can, and should be able to move freely throughout them. however, there is NO rational reason to allow anyone to move totally unhindered from one country to another. while it is much more lax than our border with mexico, there are restrictions in moving between the u.s. and canada. Jumbo, utter rot. There are many rational reasons why nation states may choose to have free movement between them or not. Free movement frees up taxpayers money that would otherwise be spent on border controls, maximises employment and leisure activities for individuals, promotes business, etc. Of course, there are also rational reasons why states may choose NOT to have free movement. As with most political questions, it's a matter of weighing up the pros and cons of each option. It's crazy to somehow claim as a moral absolute that there should be no open borders, ever, anywhere.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Jan 19, 2010 16:11:32 GMT
most countries have states, provinces, or whatever you want to call them. people can, and should be able to move freely throughout them. however, there is NO rational reason to allow anyone to move totally unhindered from one country to another. while it is much more lax than our border with mexico, there are restrictions in moving between the u.s. and canada. Jumbo, utter rot. There are many rational reasons why nation states may choose to have free movement between them or not. Free movement frees up taxpayers money that would otherwise be spent on border controls, maximises employment and leisure activities for individuals, promotes business, etc. Of course, there are also rational reasons why states may choose NOT to have free movement. As with most political questions, it's a matter of weighing up the pros and cons of each option. It's crazy to somehow claim as a moral absolute that there should be no open borders, ever, anywhere. first of all, that is NOT the case with the eu anyway. yes, if france and britain agreed to have open borders, that would be fine. what is NOT fine, and can never be fine, is a bunch of numbnuts sitting in belgium DICTATING that they have to. it is totally the province of each government, of each SEPARATE and DISTINCT country
|
|