Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TercioOfParma)
    You're aware project fear is pro remain right?
    No, project fantasy is obviously on the LEAVE side, but there are definitely fear factors added in there too from the LEAVErs: if we don't leave the migrants will bring us to our knees, if we don't leave they will make us join the euro, if we don't leave we'll end up as a federated state of the EU…

    And here you do the same thing again:

    You don't know what could happen on the continent, especially with far right parties on the rise. Look at eastern europe right now. I am not so much afraid for the here and now, I am thinking more in 50 years or so.
    This is crystal ball gazing and fear mongering. No one knows what the state of he world will be in 50 years, and projecting your fears onto that is more or less meaningless.

    The whole Holy Roman Empire for instance, the diet of augsburg's lack of inclusion of Calvinism caused all kinds of trouble. It somewhat mirrors the EU in the way there is one overriding law but nobles had de jure control within their own realms to an extent.
    And Henry VIII splitting from the Vatican didn't have repercussions?

    As for the EU as a political union, It hasn't really existed long enough for something to go spectacularly wrong, save perhaps schengen (although that is a non issue for the UK).
    It is not yet a political union, and if that were to be on the cards then UK legislation would trigger a referendum on the issue.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EuanF)
    This is another one.

    Nearly all the decisions made in the Council are done by qualified majority voting now. We're hugely outnumbered in QMV (It's why we lose 100% of the time we oppose a vote).
    So you admit, it is about not being in control.

    Maybe you get outnumbered because the rest of Europe disagrees with you? And it is the European Union. The same way say Rhode Island only gets to send a few delegates why California gets to send a huge number. Should Rhode Island feel the US is undemocratic?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EuanF)
    Malta has 15 times more representatives per capita than we do in the Council - stinks of the days before we got rid of Rotten Boroughs. True gerrymandering. (If you're interested, Malta is a more modest ten times better represented than us in the Parliament.)

    We're on the winning side a lot, yes, but when we vote against something we lose 100% of the time - that isn't an exaggeration.

    And I'm sorely dissapointed we pushed for QMV and that we got rid of our veto, but an advantage of being in a democracy is that we can unelect this government and have a new government fix the mistakes they made - not possible within the EU, however, as most of it is unelected and unaccountable to us. The EU also hates going back on what it does. Its modus operandi is creeping progress. To quote Juncker -

    "We decide on something, leave it lying around, and wait and see what happens. If no one kicks up a fuss, because most people don't understand what has been decided, we continue step by step until there is no turning back."
    Mummy, I didn't get what I wanted today at school. Boohoo
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Trumpo Trumpu)
    Well they would not be welcome in Britain I would send them back , if we do not know where they are from i would get a translator if they no comment it our military will pull the trigger
    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36328566

    Too bad the majority of your country disagrees with you.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EuanF)
    Per capita, you fool
    Try reading. Vote weighting in the Council is directly proportional to population - which means that right across the EU votes in this area are identical, per capita.

    In the European Parliament there is overrepresentation of smaller states, but this only really occurs at the lowest margins. By the Lisbon Treaty each state gets a minimum of six and a maximum of 96 seats in the EP - aside from this seat allocations are proportional to population.

    You can read some more discussion on this in the thread I pointed to previously.

    But, I have to say that I don't really see a problem with this, nor do I believe that it is not democratic, given that this situation has come about in a democratic manner (ie the governments of the member states, representing their citizens, have jointly come to this decision).

    Should the UK relinquish its seat on the UN security council, because it is over-represented?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EuanF)
    Per capita, you fool
    If you accuse someone of being a fool, it would be better if you are not in fact yourself the fool.

    What do you mean by per capita here? I would be so intrigued to know (and I mean, I have no idea).
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EuanF)
    "Therefore, the Treatygenerally prohibits State aid unless it is justified by reasons of general economic development."
    http://ec.europa.eu/competition/stat.../index_en.html
    Fortunately I know a bit more EU law than you do.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EuanF)
    No, it does hold meaning that we are always outvoted. When the EU takes a vote at the disadvantage of the UK, but at the advantage of the rest of the EU - say, they're going to sell the Crown Jewels to pay for the 1 in 10 members of the EU staff that are paid more than Cameron - we are powerless to stop them.
    That's not how it works...lol.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EuanF)
    Spoken like an art student who forgot his primary school biology. Remember what a habitat is? The species we want to fish live in our waters.
    Um, let me see, UK territorial waters, that might constitute a habitat, are bounded by the territorial waters of Ireland, Iceland, Norway, Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, Belgium, France and probably Spain and Portugal. I don't think the fish really care where the boundaries of territorial waters are placed, in a similar habitat they just swim back and forth.

    Over fishing in one area is going to affect stocks in another.

    Oh, splendid, time to go and fish all the other stocks that don't have the fish people want.
    We have the rest of the EU fishing one region. If it doesn't strike you that an entire continent fishing one range might cause population depletion you might be an idiot.
    That's why there have been conservation efforts, and quotas placed on fishing. Fish do not care where the boundaries are, nor where the boat comes from. Even if the UK had full territorial control of its fisheries there would still be quotas in place - because if there were not, and you were correct that everyone wants our fish, then UK fisherman would just fish out the supply and export it to the best paying market.

    The common fisheries is one of the main reasons Norway, Iceland, Greenland etc stayed outside the EU - their fishing industry is as important as our virtually dead one was.
    Norway does not have control over its territorial waters as far as fishing goes, it has a reciprocal arrangement with the EU.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EuanF)
    If that's what it has to be, so be it, but you're being fallacious. We've lived in a democracy for the past few hundred years and it doesn't "yo-yo". Parties find middle ground and make minor changes. If a party did make major changes, we could flip it back.
    The point you are missing is that successive governments, Labour, Coalition and Conservative, have agreed to various ongoing treaties - none of them have tried to reverse these, and they have all been democratically elected.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I will be very sad when we leave the EU as there will be no more cost effective yet attractive ladies of the night from Eastern Europe. There will only be freshers who burnt through their student loan in the first month.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EuanF)
    No, it does hold meaning that we are always outvoted.
    We are not always outvoted - more than 87% of the time the UK is on the winning side, up to 2009 we were on the winning side more than 97% of the time.

    You have not shown that your claim that when we vote against a measure we lose 100% of the time, and you have not shown that this is of any significance anyway, because it could be the case that whoever votes against a measure is on the losing side 100% of the time (since by the time it gets to a vote there is already a large degree of consensus).
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    So five pages in and no one has actually given an example of a law that the EU has made or has stopped is making that they dislike.
    Yet again were filled with lies such as 'curved bananas' and pure conjecture. The usual 'take our sovereignty back' and 'make our own laws', without telling us a single law that they'd like us to make which the EU bodies stop us from making.

    The obvious response will be 'immigration' (I forget how Britain Firstish this place gets at times) yet Michael Gove himself admitted that immigration may actually go up if we leave.

    People who think that leaving the EU will reduce immigration are deluding themselves.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    So five pages in and no one has actually given an example of a law that the EU has made or has stopped is making that they dislike.
    Not quite true. EuanF pointed out the European Commission is to challenge UK rules that impose a toll on foreign lorries. While this is true, the fact is that this has to go for review through the CJEU - ie a court has to look at the issue and decide. This doesn't mean, currently, that the UK has lost the case, just that there is a challenge:

    http://www.spiegel.de/international/...a-1089114.html

    The article above makes it clear that Germany wants a similar toll on passenger cars - and they are confident they will win against the Commission.

    EuanF also complained about the regulations surrounding products, without being specific.

    It is undoubtedly true that the UK has been in the position where it has not been able to change laws, or introduce laws, because the EU prevented it doing so. One example of this was the qualifying period of 13 weeks that the government put in place for temporary workers to earn paid holiday. The CJEU found that this was wrong, and now temporary workers qualify for holiday pay from day one of their contracts.

    However, the point of this thread was for Brexiteers to say what laws they think would be scrapped upon exit. So far we have none.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EuanF)
    On an aeroplane back to wherever they sailed in from.

    Of course we can control our borders. We have an army, and all authority derives from that.
    Ha! You remind me of the time I wrote an essay about delivering air strikes into Northern Ireland to teach the IRA a lesson. I was 14. I since grew up and discovered the world was slightly less black and white.

    Good luck in discovering the same but I wish you will with your dreams of seeing Dad's Army manning the White Cliffs.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by typonaut)
    Not quite true. EuanF pointed out the European Commission is to challenge UK rules that impose a toll on foreign lorries. While this is true, the fact is that this has to go for review through the CJEU - ie a court has to look at the issue and decide. This doesn't mean, currently, that the UK has lost the case, just that there is a challenge:

    http://www.spiegel.de/international/...a-1089114.html

    The article above makes it clear that Germany wants a similar toll on passenger cars - and they are confident they will win against the Commission.

    EuanF also complained about the regulations surrounding products, without being specific.

    It is undoubtedly true that the UK has been in the position where it has not been able to change laws, or introduce laws, because the EU prevented it doing so. One example of this was the qualifying period of 13 weeks that the government put in place for temporary workers to earn paid holiday. The CJEU found that this was wrong, and now temporary workers qualify for holiday pay from day one of their contracts.

    However, the point of this thread was for Brexiteers to say what laws they think would be scrapped upon exit. So far we have none.
    Dobrindt Maut ahahahahaha

    Yes, in fact tolls on roads is an incredibly funny topic in Germany. The minister involved is a total laughing stock now.

    Won't go into it, but the bottom line is he tried to make it so that foreigners pay a toll but Germans not. And you can't do that in the EU. What he should have done instead is be sly, introduce the toll for everyone, and over the next decade instead of raising road taxes as usual, kept them frozen. That way in some years he would have essentially achieved the same but without the fuss from the EU (Austria in particular was piping up about this).
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by typonaut)
    I'm not sure what you are asking. If you mean that we are nett contributors, and our vote should be weighted by that, then I can't see how that would work because it would mean that those who are nett beneficiaries would receive no vote.

    My general view of being a nett contributor is that it is better to be a nett contributor and have a stable Europe, than the alternative.
    Yes why not. Lets pretend we pay 25% of the eu's total budget, so we should get 25% voting influence instead of 13%. Obviously it is not representitive of nations who pay very little or no fees but fairest way to me
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by inhuman)
    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36328566

    Too bad the majority of your country disagrees with you.
    Its so we are not labelled as islamophobic . Its dine off a sample, meaning populations are randomly selected clusters so you could be asking quite a few muslims in that population , who think we should take them in. Also the naieve youth may be in the population researched-who thinks we should takr millions of immigrants and then wonders why wages are low and housing prices are extortionate
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by inhuman)
    Germany has paid most in bailouts that the UK's finance sector played a key role in.
    Germany actually benefit from the EU economically, we did in the 70's and 80's, why becauss we exported more to EU countries then we imported, if their is one thing Nazi Germany did which i agree with is self sufficiency -they still have many if there secondary sector jobs, where as in the UK , it has depleted and our main sector is tertiary.

    http://www.euractiv.com/section/euro...he-euro-study/
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Trumpo Trumpu)
    Germany actually benefit from the EU economically, we did in the 70's and 80's, why becauss we exported more to EU countries then we imported, if their is one thing Nazi Germany did which i agree with is self sufficiency -they still have many if there secondary sector jobs, where as in the UK , it has depleted and our main sector is tertiary.

    http://www.euractiv.com/section/euro...he-euro-study/
    What the actual ****?

    And rather pathetic that you would link to an article that says Germany benefits from the EURO when we are talking about the EU here. Makes you look like you can't even tell the difference between the EU and the Euro. Which makes you look completely ignorant.

    Or that when it comes to Brexit its ok to simply state "we are a net payer so we must leave" but when it comes to Germany, they are a bigger net payer, they paid most in the bailouts, but that's not ok to just say, you have to show a study that suggests they do actually still benefit. But such a study of the UK is irrelevant because "muh net payer, better leave".

    You know the main reason one should vote Remain? It's because of people like you. So blatantly ignorant people.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.