The 'No to the EU' campaign

[turbobloke]

FiF said:

PRTVR said:

anyway anybody pro EU care to comment?

Obviously not,

They may be busy finding out how to make a donation to the EU's fine dining service so they can go one more notch up the pointless spending route.

[anonymous-user]

turbobloke said:

They may be busy finding out how to make a donation to the EU's fine dining service so they can go one more notch up the pointless spending route.

Or maybe the petulant and aggressive tone of the first point made it clear there was going to be no convinving the pro-EU side and so no-one has bothered to put in a response because it'll all end in an internet slanging match anyway and no-one would win?

[turbobloke]

cookie118 said:

turbobloke said:

They may be busy finding out how to make a donation to the EU's fine dining service so they can go one more notch up the pointless spending route.

Or maybe the petulant and aggressive tone of the first point made it clear there was going to be no convinving the pro-EU side and so no-one has bothered to put in a response because it'll all end in an internet slanging match anyway and no-one would win?

There are many possibilities.

[FiF]

turbobloke said:

cookie118 said:

turbobloke said:

They may be busy finding out how to make a donation to the EU's fine dining service so they can go one more notch up the pointless spending route.

Or maybe the petulant and aggressive tone of the first point made it clear there was going to be no convinving the pro-EU side and so no-one has bothered to put in a response because it'll all end in an internet slanging match anyway and no-one would win?

There are many possibilities.

But still no substantive response other than all for it simply because somebody said a rude word.

[FiF]

So no support for the millions to be spent by the EU on fine dining tableware and diplomatic premises. Not surprising really as it's indefensible considering the austerity elsewhere.

Now what about the European Development fund which has 2 billion of UK money. Only to waste it on trapeze lessons, junkets to the Caribbean and a survey of African youngsters to find that they enjoyed "listening to music" and "dating" and watching and playing sport.

Perhaps the EU-philes are busy on their phones with low roaming charges trying to figure out positives for the campaign?

More pee taking opportunities present themselves so regularly it's difficult to keep track.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/e...

[Beati Dogu]

But but but... kept the peace since WW2, better to have a voice with the snouts in troughs than have no voice....

[anonymous-user]

Beati Dogu said:

But but but... kept the peace since WW2, better to have a voice with the snouts in troughs than have no voice....

Ironically aren't most of those snouts in the trough belonging to purple pigs given most of the UK's MEP's are UKIP?

[Beati Dogu]

MEP's what?

[PRTVR]

cookie118 said:

Beati Dogu said:

But but but... kept the peace since WW2, better to have a voice with the snouts in troughs than have no voice....

Ironically aren't most of those snouts in the trough belonging to purple pigs given most of the UK's MEP's are UKIP?

Snouts in the trough who want to be made redundant, there is a big difference.

[Bluebarge]

FiF said:

So no support for the millions to be spent by the EU on fine dining tableware and diplomatic premises. Not surprising really as it's indefensible considering the austerity elsewhere.

Now what about the European Development fund which has 2 billion of UK money. Only to waste it on trapeze lessons, junkets to the Caribbean and a survey of African youngsters to find that they enjoyed "listening to music" and "dating" and watching and playing sport.

Perhaps the EU-philes are busy on their phones with low roaming charges trying to figure out positives for the campaign?

More pee taking opportunities present themselves so regularly it's difficult to keep track.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/e...

I think this thread has long since become a ghetto for angry old men who struggle to identify a clear strategy for Britain's future that will work, or any means of making that happen, but "know what they don't like" and vent their spleen accordingly.

For every example of EU waste you could find an equivalent example of Whitehall waste (bungled IT projects, scrapped Nimrods, £65k wallpaper for the Speakers apartments, aircraft carriers without aircraft, overseas aid wasted because it has to be spent within the accounting year to meet "targets") but, oddly, that doesn't cause you to demand withdrawal from the UK.

If you could elucidate clear reasons for the UK leaving the EU, what you would replace it with and how that would be possible when our major trading partners mostly want us to stay in, how being "out" would not involve being part of the EEA and therefore pretty much "in", how long it would take to set up a workable replacement for our existing trade agreements (most commentators estimate 10 years) and how you would stem the outflow of overseas investment and jobs from the UK during that (probably 10 year) period, then it might be worth engaging you in debate.

As it is, the asinine comments, unbridled aggression and contemptible insults that litter this thread means that it really isn't worth investing any time in.

Carry on frothing.

[Einion Yrth]

Bluebarge said:

I think this thread has long since become a ghetto for angry old men who struggle to identify a clear strategy for Britain's future that will work, or any means of making that happen, but "know what they don't like" and vent their spleen accordingly.

For every example of EU waste you could find an equivalent example of Whitehall waste (bungled IT projects, scrapped Nimrods, £65k wallpaper for the Speakers apartments, aircraft carriers without aircraft, overseas aid wasted because it has to be spent within the accounting year to meet "targets") but, oddly, that doesn't cause you to demand withdrawal from the UK.

If you could elucidate clear reasons for the UK leaving the EU, what you would replace it with and how that would be possible when our major trading partners mostly want us to stay in, how being "out" would not involve being part of the EEA and therefore pretty much "in", how long it would take to set up a workable replacement for our existing trade agreements (most commentators estimate 10 years) and how you would stem the outflow of overseas investment and jobs from the UK during that (probably 10 year) period, then it might be worth engaging you in debate.

As it is, the asinine comments, unbridled aggression and contemptible insults that litter this thread means that it really isn't worth investing any time in.

Carry on frothing.

Hypocrite? Much?

[AJS-]

Bluebarge said:

I think this thread has long since become a ghetto for angry old men who struggle to identify a clear strategy for Britain's future that will work, or any means of making that happen, but "know what they don't like" and vent their spleen accordingly.

It's a bit of a false premise. Why do we need a "strategy" for the country? We have traded with other countries to varying degrees for our entire history and it's not about to stop because we withdraw from the Treaty of Rome.

I agree it would be more compelling if the Out side could put a clear vision of what we would do in major policy areas, but it would be ultimately more convincing if people could see past this wholly false idea that we need to be part of some club in order to be a successful trading nation.

[turbobloke]

Bluebarge said:

I think this thread has long since become a ghetto for angry old men who struggle to identify a clear strategy for Britain's future that will work, or any means of making that happen, but "know what they don't like" and vent their spleen accordingly.

If such people exist, rather than feature in a caricature you made up in the absemce og anything better, they can still vote Out / No.

There's little to be said for voting Yes / In just to remain part of an expensive fiasco run by people with only their own interests and their precious political project's interests at heart.

[FiF]

BlueBarge said:

Nothing of any substance including the false premise of not asking to withdraw from the UK

Of course the ballot box in the UK has some sort of option to punish those miscreants by kicking out of office.

Unfortunately as things stand they are all pretty much of a muchness , equally venal and incompetent but in different ways.

Quite happy that people don't want / can't engage as it saves time from dealing with hypocrites and fools.

No frothing here, vaguely amusing just taking the pee. So many opportunities. So much that's indefensible, and they know it.

[Bluebarge]

FiF said:

BlueBarge said:

Nothing of any substance including the false premise of not asking to withdraw from the UK

Of course the ballot box in the UK has some sort of option to punish those miscreants by kicking out of office.

Unfortunately as things stand they are all pretty much of a muchness , equally venal and incompetent but in different ways.

Quite happy that people don't want / can't engage as it saves time from dealing with hypocrites and fools.

No frothing here, vaguely amusing just taking the pee. So many opportunities. So much that's indefensible, and they know it.

So, no alternative vision for the country's future then, just moaning about everyone. Not exactly a vote-grabber, is it?

[Bluebarge]

AJS- said:

it would be ultimately more convincing if people could see past this wholly false idea that we need to be part of some club in order to be a successful trading nation.

There is no "free trade". It is all subject to international agreements which we would have to start from scratch with. That is not a false premise, that is a fact, and it is a fact that would inhibit investment in, and trade with, our country unless favourable agreements could be quickly concluded with other countries. That seems most unlikely, unless we just sign up to the EEA, in which case we would get the EU regulation anyway, but no influence.

So, I don't agree with you, but I appreciate you approaching the argument in a constructive manner

[turbobloke]

What level of influence do we get already? This is relating to political influence and ever closer union. Not meeting requirements for trade, which we already meet, and given that businesses are capable of reading updated requirements to remain compliant, we can continue to meet in future. All good.

It's about influence over other matters that make the case for getting out. The case is political not economic as trade will continue regardless of baseless scaremongering.

As we all know by now, on 55 occasions since 1996 when British Ministers have objected to an EU directive that proceeded to a vote, on 55 occasions they have been overruled.

The case for No / Out is mainly political and relates to self-determination and sovereignty not Alice stories about trade.

[Murph7355]

Bluebarge said:

...
For every example of EU waste you could find an equivalent example of Whitehall waste (bungled IT projects, scrapped Nimrods, £65k wallpaper for the Speakers apartments, aircraft carriers without aircraft, overseas aid wasted because it has to be spent within the accounting year to meet "targets") but, oddly, that doesn't cause you to demand withdrawal from the UK..

So you're comfy adding layers of similar but unelected incompetence and waste onto our system?

Bluebarge said:

...
If you could elucidate clear reasons for the UK leaving the EU, what you would replace it with and how that would be possible when our major trading partners mostly want us to stay in, how being "out" would not involve being part of the EEA and therefore pretty much "in", how long it would take to set up a workable replacement for our existing trade agreements (most commentators estimate 10 years) and how you would stem the outflow of overseas investment and jobs from the UK during that (probably 10 year) period, then it might be worth engaging you in debate.
... .

As things stand the EU relies more on our business than we do its. EU businesses would have major issues if we were to be prevented doing business with them so it won't happen.

We're also geared to conform as things stand so any divergence, should we choose it to happen, won't happen overnight. But as and when it does it would be our choice. Perhaps agreeing to some new standard might prove problematic to a bigger trading relationship and we might choose not to follow the EU path as a result.

The trade side of life will sort itself out as it always has for hundreds of years.

What won't is giving up sovereign powers. Control of our borders must rest with our elected government. Ditto our armed forces and participation in action involving them. Ditto our judiciary.

That we might use these things poorly is neither here nor there. We need to reserve the right to choose. And the way the EU is going, those rights are being massively eroded.

[Bluebarge]

turbobloke said:

The case for No / Out is mainly political and relates to self-determination and sovereignty not Alice stories about trade.

Self-determination is a chimera. If you need to co-operate with other nations (which every nation must, in order to trade or defend itself - N.Korea is perhaps the sole example that doesn't) then you have to sign up to international agreements or find yourself subject to tariffs/other consequences. That fact means that not every nation always gets what it wants, but grown-ups manage to compromise.

I'm not sure where your "55" information comes from (would be happy to see the source/more info) but (a) it is arguably an indictment of British diplomacy in Europe (b) it would be interesting to see exactly what measures it related to and (c) it's not exactly wreaked wholesale damage on the nation, has it?

[turbobloke]

A vote for No / Out would, of course, also be a vote to get away from the present costs, problems and future crises arising from self-serving incompetence with a lack of concern for democracy in a project which now exists for its own existence and to futher the interests of the self-recycling project drones no matter what the consequences at national level. Look around to see this failure already taking shape.