Should we be getting behind Brexit by boycotting German cars
Discussion
That would be a very neat solution. Fairer for other member states as well who have in effect entered into financial agreements assuming the UK would still be around.swisstoni said:
How much is it though?
Nobody knows yet, because it hasn't been negotiated. That's kinda the whole point.anonymous said:
[redacted]
But, of course, that would p
s off the "kick out Johnny Foreigner" wing of the Leavers, who would immediately start shouting about how they'd been sold down the river.TooMany2cvs said:
The "bill" is the future payments for long-term commitments already made. This should not be contentious in any way.
Great well if it's so clear then this figure would have been bandied about in the media until we all knew it off by heart.It doesn't appear the the figure is clear at all and it also seems like the EU is saying 'make us an offer' rather than clarifying matters.
swisstoni said:
TooMany2cvs said:
The "bill" is the future payments for long-term commitments already made. This should not be contentious in any way.
Great well if it's so clear then this figure would have been bandied about in the media until we all knew it off by heart.It doesn't appear the the figure is clear at all and it also seems like the EU is saying 'make us an offer' rather than clarifying matters.
Broadly speaking, we agreed to pay the EU about 60bn, they agreed to pay us back about half of that directly in subsidies (for example to farmers) and another 10-20bn into international projects of which we are a part. The former is obviously easy enough to work out; the latter is not.
tedman said:
Which wouldn't have been a problem in the first place if "the people" hadn't voted in this idiotic referendum, expressing their insatiable desire for pointless sovereignty and patriotism.
Shame this topic hit pistonheads really - since it has and you spout your opinion as fact in a way that some partisan forum commentators seem to wallow in.let me ask you:
What is the compelling positive vision for the UK within an EU federal superstate with full monetary and political union controlled from Brussells?
Really, what?
Do try and talk about future life, integrated cohesive society, culture, amenity, population size, electorate influence, self determination etc and not simply transitory economics and your bigoted view that we're all foaming mouthed xenophobes entrenched in the Empire age.
Apologies to anyone who really doesn't want this nonsense in these forums.
Edited by OldBob on Friday 20th October 13:37
OldBob said:
What is the compelling positive vision for the UK within an EU federal superstate with full monetary and political union controlled from Brussells?
Simply put - it'd never happen. Ever. So it's an utterly false question.The UK has/had a permanent opt-out from the Euro.
Any "full political union" would require significant treaties - which the UK would be involved in writing.
The UK government said after Lisbon that any future treaties would go through a referendum.
Might as well ask about the UK becoming the 51st state of the US.
OldBob said:
What is the compelling positive vision for the UK within an EU federal superstate with full monetary and political union controlled from Brussells?
The referendum wasn't "do you want more EU" it was "do you want to remain in the EU".It's as if you ticked the "leave" box because you were answering a question that wasn't being asked.
OldBob said:
tedman said:
Which wouldn't have been a problem in the first place if "the people" hadn't voted in this idiotic referendum, expressing their insatiable desire for pointless sovereignty and patriotism.
Shame this topic hit pistonheads really - since it has and you spout your opinion as fact in a way that some partisan forum commentators seem to wallow in.let me ask you:
What is the compelling positive vision for the UK within an EU federal superstate with full monetary and political union controlled from Brussells?
Really, what?
Do try and talk about future life, integrated cohesive society, culture, amenity, population size, electorate influence, self determination etc and not simply transitory economics and your bigoted view that we're all foaming mouthed xenophobes entrenched in the Empire age.
Apologies to anyone who really doesn't want this nonsense in these forums.
Edited by OldBob on Friday 20th October 13:37
Wonderful - some biters!
So ok put aside that the EU commission avowed intent is to move the bloc toward that state - it's not a secret you know.. but for arguments sake let's say it won't happen...
So, since there was the (usual) "you obviously didn't know what you voted for" suggestion, I'll re-phrase the question and see if you knew what you voted forl :
What is the compelling positive vision for the UK staying within the EU?
Really, what?
Do try and talk about future life, integrated cohesive society, culture, amenity, population size, electorate influence, self determination etc and not simply transitory economics and your bigoted view that we're all foaming mouthed xenophobes entrenched in the Empire age.
This time maybe we'll get to the real answers without stalling at the reality of question posed or not....
So ok put aside that the EU commission avowed intent is to move the bloc toward that state - it's not a secret you know.. but for arguments sake let's say it won't happen...
So, since there was the (usual) "you obviously didn't know what you voted for" suggestion, I'll re-phrase the question and see if you knew what you voted forl :
What is the compelling positive vision for the UK staying within the EU?
Really, what?
Do try and talk about future life, integrated cohesive society, culture, amenity, population size, electorate influence, self determination etc and not simply transitory economics and your bigoted view that we're all foaming mouthed xenophobes entrenched in the Empire age.
This time maybe we'll get to the real answers without stalling at the reality of question posed or not....
OldBob said:
So ok put aside that the EU commission avowed intent is to move the bloc toward that state - it's not a secret you know.
Apart from anything else, the commission can't decide anything. They simply put things forward to MEPs to vote for.But something like you suggest would not just be MEP voted anyway. It'd require major treaties. Like Maastricht, like Lisbon. Every single member gets to veto them. Every single member decides whether they want a referendum on approving or vetoing.
TooMany2cvs said:
Simply put - it'd never happen. Ever. So it's an utterly false question.
The UK has/had a permanent opt-out from the Euro.
Any "full political union" would require significant treaties - which the UK would be involved in writing.
The UK government said after Lisbon that any future treaties would go through a referendum.
Might as well ask about the UK becoming the 51st state of the US.
A Euro opt out until we are signed up to it without being asked.The UK has/had a permanent opt-out from the Euro.
Any "full political union" would require significant treaties - which the UK would be involved in writing.
The UK government said after Lisbon that any future treaties would go through a referendum.
Might as well ask about the UK becoming the 51st state of the US.
Treaties that whatever government is in power will have, possible, some involvement in, but that we will never be asked about.
The same excuse used for the Lisbon treaty would of course never be used again.
Toltec said:
A Euro opt out until we are signed up to it without being asked.
Can't happen. Simply cannot happen.Toltec said:
Treaties that whatever government is in power will have, possible, some involvement in, but that we will never be asked about.
Perhaps, perhaps not. It'd be political suicide to not do so, after Cameron's pledge to put EVERY future treaty to referendum.Toltec said:
he same excuse used for the Lisbon treaty would of course never be used again.
Cameron said he'd put it to referendum if he won the election and it hadn't yet been signed. Brown simply signed it before the election. No point in any referendum, because it was already signed.CraigyMc said:
The referendum wasn't "do you want more EU" it was "do you want to remain in the EU".
It's as if you ticked the "leave" box because you were answering a question that wasn't being asked.
Reminds me of the old joke, the bad news is the only thing to eat is camel sIt's as if you ticked the "leave" box because you were answering a question that wasn't being asked.
t, but the good news is there is plenty of it.Do want to remain and eat all of our camel s
t or leave and maybe go hungry?TooMany2cvs said:
Apart from anything else, the commission can't decide anything. They simply put things forward to MEPs to vote for.
But something like you suggest would not just be MEP voted anyway. It'd require major treaties. Like Maastricht, like Lisbon. Every single member gets to veto them. Every single member decides whether they want a referendum on approving or vetoing.
So what value are the EU commission et al adding then and what is their purpose if not to try and move the bloc in this direction? It is their political direction - why have an overarching controlling moband system dogmatically active and dedicated to this cause running the show if it will never get any traction or affect political direction? I find it odd that you'd support a management that is doing something that nobody wants.But something like you suggest would not just be MEP voted anyway. It'd require major treaties. Like Maastricht, like Lisbon. Every single member gets to veto them. Every single member decides whether they want a referendum on approving or vetoing.
So again - without telling me what you believe won't happen, tell me what will happen... ie what is the positive compelling direction for the UK within the EU
I'm sure everyone's now had enough on this car forum now ... oao
Toltec said:
CraigyMc said:
The referendum wasn't "do you want more EU" it was "do you want to remain in the EU".
It's as if you ticked the "leave" box because you were answering a question that wasn't being asked.
Reminds me of the old joke, the bad news is the only thing to eat is camel sIt's as if you ticked the "leave" box because you were answering a question that wasn't being asked.
t, but the good news is there is plenty of it.Do want to remain and eat all of our camel s
t or leave and maybe go hungry?Pre-vote:
- You have enough money to buy 155 apples.
- You have enough money to buy 132 apples.
I agree mine isn't as funny as yours.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
You really think it's all about polish workers - you dolt.Why is EU expansionist behaviour, specifically goading Russia a good thing?
Why do you support the distribution of our funding to CAP levels that subsidise French farmers?
Why do you think regulatory behaviour favouring large German manufacturers and destroying SME competition is a good thing?
Why do you support the demise of our fishing industry through re-allocation of rights?
Why would you support that funding be allocated to encourage industries on the continent when we can't state subsidise our own manufacturing?
What is it that appeals to you to be part of the stated political direction of the EU commission a federal superstate with political and monetary union - army, flag etc?
Why would you not want to be able to directly vote in and out our ultimate leaders in the interests of the UK electorate without it being diluted by the rest of the EU bloc' interests?
Why is it a bad thing to want complete sovereignty and control over all law making and jurisdiction in the UK?
Why are you happy that Germany can make unilateral illegal action and foist the problem onto those in the bloc with no reprimand?
Why is it a bad thing to want control on freedom of movement and a say in who and how many people are entitled to travel and live here?
Why is it bad to expect effective control of external borders?
Why would you not want direct voting control over those that make all of our laws and direction in the world stage?
OldBob said:
So what value are the EU commission et al adding then and what is their purpose
They're the equivalent of Westminster's ministers. There's 28 of them, each with a portfolio ("department") - one appointed by the head of government of each country. One of them is president - PM equivalent. That's Juncker, currently, who replaced Barroso three years ago for a five-year term.OldBob said:
So again - without telling me what you believe won't happen
I'm telling you that what you're stating as inevitable fact simply CANNOT happen.OldBob said:
tell me what will happen... ie what is the positive compelling direction for the UK within the EU
<shrug> Whatever the governments of the 28, and MEPs, want to happen.Perhaps if the UK wasn't currently voluntarily wasting one third of our MEP votes, having voted for people who don't want the job and refuse to do the job...
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff