So what did you vote for?

Media articles about money-saving topics
Boro Boy
Posts: 3573
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 5:05 pm
Location: London
Has thanked: 946 times
Been thanked: 1977 times
Contact:

Re: So what did you vote for?

Post by Boro Boy » Mon Nov 19, 2018 3:16 pm

Constantine wrote:
blythburgh wrote:...

And many young people in this country will feel very angry with the selfish pensioners who do not have jobs to worry about and have far better pensions than they will ever have in real terms
I know that the one thing I did not vote for was this kind of stupid prejudice. Selfish pensioners, greedy Jews, stupid you know, whatever next?

Agreed, patronising prejudice that has no home here. Everybody's vote has the same power; there is no such thing as a second class vote! :clap: :clap: :clap:

pabenny
Posts: 1142
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 4:21 pm
Has thanked: 390 times
Been thanked: 1207 times
Contact:

Re: So what did you vote for?

Post by pabenny » Mon Nov 19, 2018 4:10 pm

Boro Boy wrote:
We can't ...etc
So which of the questions was that an answer to?

Those who support Brexit frequently refer to negotiating separate trade deals but I've yet to hear specifics from anyone. The trouble is that that trade negotiations take many years and involve give and take on both sides of the table.

We could 'keep out' French dairy products or charge a tariff on them - which may be good for our dairy farmers. But the flipside of that could be restrictions on lamb exports - bad for our sheep farmers. Better overall? I couldn't say and I doubt anyone here can.
Thanked by: blythburgh

blythburgh
Posts: 14057
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 6:14 pm
Location: The Far East
Has thanked: 29220 times
Been thanked: 5687 times
Contact:

Re: So what did you vote for?

Post by blythburgh » Mon Nov 19, 2018 4:16 pm

Yougov did a poll amongst leave voting pensioners. 66% thought stopping immigration was important and would vote leave even if it meant people lost jobs. 33% would still vote leave even if members of their family lost jobs. I call that selfish and I know a lot of young people are angry about the pensioner vote that swung it in favour of brexit. After all it is there future and their job on the line which is why I voted remain.
Keep smiling because the light at the end of someone's tunnel may be you, Ron Cheneler

blythburgh
Posts: 14057
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 6:14 pm
Location: The Far East
Has thanked: 29220 times
Been thanked: 5687 times
Contact:

Re: So what did you vote for?

Post by blythburgh » Mon Nov 19, 2018 4:18 pm

Very interesting article here: https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/columnis ... ailsignout

And no doubt some on here will say that this would have happened anyway but I very much doubt it: And every month brings stories, too often overlooked, of how Brexit will blight the places that supported it: this week it was news about a doomed ball-bearing factory in Plymouth, in business for 50 years and now owned by the German company Schaeffler, but set to close with the loss of more than 350 jobs – partly, says the company, because of the “uncertainties surrounding Brexit”.
Keep smiling because the light at the end of someone's tunnel may be you, Ron Cheneler

pabenny
Posts: 1142
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 4:21 pm
Has thanked: 390 times
Been thanked: 1207 times
Contact:

Re: So what did you vote for?

Post by pabenny » Mon Nov 19, 2018 4:30 pm

butler1882 wrote:.. European Superstate with its own military ..
The EU has no military force. Along with most other EU members, the UK is a member of NATO - an organisation which also includes USA and Canada
butler1882 wrote:We didn't join a European Superstate ...
As pointed out by another poster, the UK joined the European Economic Community, which evolved into the European Union. The UK was represented in and influenced throughout. It didn't happen without us and and wasn't done to us - the UK could have vetoed that evolution.
butler1882 wrote:..with its own laws ...


Every organisation has its own laws. Sometimes they're called rules, sometimes terms and conditions. Most of the laws in the EU are pretty dull and uncontroversial - like specifying that the format and content of machine readable data in passports. Or standards for product safety.
Thanked by: Chadwick, blythburgh

Chadwick
Posts: 1491
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2010 3:21 pm
Has thanked: 715 times
Been thanked: 1911 times
Contact:

Re: So what did you vote for?

Post by Chadwick » Mon Nov 19, 2018 6:07 pm

butler1882 wrote:A trade agreement is the key point here. We did not join a European Superstate with its own laws and military while being owned by Brussels.
Granted, the European Army seems to be a possible future development, but we're still some way away. Because each of the 28 member countries has its own procedures and policies for use of armed force, it has so far proved impossible to create a single unified EU command. Close cooperation is the best we've managed. You might find this article interesting:
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/artic ... an-eu-army
It's also worth remembering that the European Defence Community and European Army were first mooted in the 1950s (by France, who also killed it off), and foreign policy cooperation has also been bubbling away since the 1970s. Unified European foreign and defence policy was most certainly on the table when the UK joined the EEC.
Last edited by Chadwick on Mon Nov 19, 2018 7:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Thanked by: blythburgh

Chadwick
Posts: 1491
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2010 3:21 pm
Has thanked: 715 times
Been thanked: 1911 times
Contact:

Re: So what did you vote for?

Post by Chadwick » Mon Nov 19, 2018 7:11 pm

butler1882 wrote:We did not join a European Superstate with its own laws and military while being owned by Brussels.
And you still haven't joined a European Superstate with its own laws.

EU law is created by MEPs (elected by you) and MPs (indirectly elected by you) or by people voted for by the people you voted to represent you. We (the UK) have participated in the rule making process since we joined. We proposed, drafted, discussed, amended, and agreed the laws that you refer to as European. [Sidenote: the UK has been on the winning side of 85% of our votes. 85% of our EU votes have given the result we wanted]

There are basically three types of EU law:
  1. The big Treaties (Treaty of Rome, Treaty of Lisbon etc) are the international agreements that form the foundations of the EU. These are agreements between the member states. In the UK, Parliament must ratify these.
  2. Regulations are generally to do with agreements on standards (eg. passport codes that someone mentioned earlier). These do go straight into effect once the EU Parliament (MEPs, elected by you) and Council of the European Union (members of each country's government) approve them. Because of this, they require careful drafting and much discussion.
  3. Finally, Directives are where the EU agrees the outcomes to be achieved and by when, but each member state creates its own laws to achieve that outcome.
There is an over-riding principle of 'subsidiarity', which means that decisions should be taken at the most local level possible. National Parliaments can 'yellow card' laws in progress that they believe are being handled at too high a level. If enough national parliaments do this, they can stop the law in its tracks, overruling the decisions made by their own heads of state in the Council.


That's a very simplified explanation. The reality is a constantly moving mix of international diplomacy between 28 countries, because there is no superstate; there's just 28 countries trying to agree common standards and rules so that they can all get along more easily. Every law is a delicate balancing act where you need three or more international bodes to all agree on it, as well as 28 independent national parliaments. At every stage, the people we voted in are trying to make sure the rules work for their own countries (except Nigel Farage, who just tried to sabotage the process, rather than improve it or achieve anything of value for the UK).


tl;dr - There is no 'European Superstate'. There are 28 countries making common laws together.
Thanked by: blythburgh

Boro Boy
Posts: 3573
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 5:05 pm
Location: London
Has thanked: 946 times
Been thanked: 1977 times
Contact:

Re: So what did you vote for?

Post by Boro Boy » Mon Nov 19, 2018 8:30 pm

Chadwick wrote:
butler1882 wrote:We did not join a European Superstate with its own laws and military while being owned by Brussels.
And you still haven't joined a European Superstate with its own laws.

EU law is created by MEPs (elected by you) and MPs (indirectly elected by you) or by people voted for by the people you voted to represent you. We (the UK) have participated in the rule making process since we joined. We proposed, drafted, discussed, amended, and agreed the laws that you refer to as European. [Sidenote: the UK has been on the winning side of 85% of our votes. 85% of our EU votes have given the result we wanted]

.

The comments above are inaccurate and misleading. I have been to the European Parliament in Brussels (they also sit in Strasbourg) and it was clearly explained to me that to think of the Euro Parliament and its MEPs in the same way as the UK's Democratic Parliament is a vast mistake. The Euro Parliament is structured very differently with the MEPs having no legislative initiative and you are merely electing someone into a talking shop debating/"tinkering" with proposals put forward by Euro Civil Servants. There are so many Bureaus, Commissions, Directives all aimed at stifling debate, democracy that why any democratic loving Briton would want to be tied to this body is beyond belief... :wtf:
Thanked by: butler1882, blythburgh

Chadwick
Posts: 1491
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2010 3:21 pm
Has thanked: 715 times
Been thanked: 1911 times
Contact:

Re: So what did you vote for?

Post by Chadwick » Mon Nov 19, 2018 10:03 pm

As I said, it's a very simplified explanation.

A simple solution just doesn't work. There are so many variations between each member state and so many different national interests that a straightforward one-size-fits-all 'superstate' political system would have loopholes, compromises and failure points all over. To patch that up - or avoid it - there are innumerable committees and groups trying to fine tune legislation before it ever reaches the big institutions. The result is that often the hard work is done behind the scenes and the wording of the legislation represents a fine balance that has been pre-agreed at least by the countries with most at stake.

As Boro Boy says, the EU Commission does a lot of this work, and is primarily responsible for putting legislation through. There's then a merry dance between Parliament, the Council and the Commission. The more contentious the subject, the more discussion. It's a wonder anything gets through at all. Sometimes things just don't get agreed (like the EU army) because the process requires the buy in from a majority of the EU members (there are various thresholds, from unanimous to qualified majority).

If there were a European Superstate, imposing laws on all the members, there would be no need for all this infrastructure and "so many Bureaus, Commissions, Directives".


(I'm not sure why you thought my comments were misleading. I didn't comment on the role of the EU Parliament except to say that MEPs have to vote through laws, which is true. You are right that it's not a direct parallel to the UK Parliament.)
Thanked by: blythburgh

Boro Boy
Posts: 3573
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 5:05 pm
Location: London
Has thanked: 946 times
Been thanked: 1977 times
Contact:

Re: So what did you vote for?

Post by Boro Boy » Mon Nov 19, 2018 10:58 pm

Yes its simple the whole EU Parliamentary structure is the "Super State" which we elect MEP's to who have no real power within the parliamentary system but which member countries will still be expected to become compliant with.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest