Bananas argument
Good name for it.
I like this tweet: History of Europe: War War War War War War War Arguments about bananas. To be honest, I'll probably go with banana arguments. #remain — Pavilion Opinions (@pavilionopinion) 29 April 2016 Never mind any arguments about the UK being sucked into a superstate and whether that's a good thing or the …
This post has been deleted by its author
I'd just like to point out the we Brits invented the Banana.. ( cue gooey eyed minions)
No honestly we did. Nearly all commercially grown bananas are descendants of ones grown by the Dukes of Devonshire at Chatsworth House Derbyshire, in a spiffing little greenhouse designed by that Paxton fellow, the bloke that did the Crystal Palace.
Which is why the cultivar is called the Cavendish after the family name of the Duke..
Any organisation only changes for one of two reasons:
- it has too
- it wants too...
Clearly the EU isn't overly fussed about fixing the glaring flaws: CAP, absurd unemployment in southern states, mass emigration, innappropriate effective costs of money, causing mammoth f'ups that only benefit people trackers & Vladimir Putin
So why would it want to change then, unless it is FORCED too?
Btw I love Europe, can get by in French & German, had my recent honeymoon in Paris, I love german cars & beer, adore french food & wine.
My family a few generations back are from Irish & Dutch stock, my mother-in-law is American, so lest anyone think otherwise I believe my self by thought and action to be as far away from a stereotypical 'little Englander' as is possible!
Europe is great, next year I expect to be selling lots of stuff I am currently developing to our european cousins.
BUT I have an MP and a monarch, my fundamental belief is that they should basically 'run' our country, not folk we have never heard of, voted for and can't kick them out of office if we want to...
And as to a European Army? If it wasn't so scary it would be bloody hilarious!
For those that wish to carry on rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic, go for it, I'm voting for leaving before we all drowned.
My 2p...
Ymmv.
Jay
N,
Could be, how well do you think the EU and the folk that 'run it' are performing at the moment?
As an aside, my previous career was Risk Consulting, hence one of my favourite subjects is the law of unintended consequences...
Thanks for your input anyway.
Cheers,
Jay
"BUT I have an MP and a monarch, my fundamental belief is that they should basically 'run' our country, not folk we have never heard of, voted for and can't kick them out of office if we want to..."
You maybe want to read that back. See if you can spot just where the fundamental contradiction in your thinking lies.
JE,
I did! Which is why there are quotes around 'run'...
I readily acknowledge what we currently have is a long way from perfect, but steadily hurtling into a Federal EU oblivion is unlikely to improve matters!
What do you think should be done differently?
Cheers,
Jay
Dear Naughty,
I didn't vote for Liz in 1952, the primary one being I hadn't been born yet, plus my dad-to-be would have been five at the time....
More to the point matey I didn't actually state that I HAD voted for my MP, or whilst clearly not having the option, HM herself either....
Hence methinks the logical fuckups are elsewhere my friend!!!
Also who is this 'Jeremy Cockson' you allude to???
Chill out a bit eh???
Cheers,
Jay
"I didn't vote for Liz in 1952, the primary one being I hadn't been born yet, plus my dad-to-be would have been five at the time...."
I assume "one" means "reason". Actually the primary reason is that nobody gets to vote on the monarch, that's one of the defining characteristics.
David,
indeed, had to scoot out sharpish...
I sought to make clear[er[ to our fellow Commentard that I hadn't voted for either my MP or HM, the former because I am not overly fond of the party, the latter because we can't.
On the whole methink Liz does a pretty good job!
Thanks!
Jay
@Fruit
So you admit that you didn't vote for your MP either?
So basically you have zero control over _either_ the Monarch, or your MP!
The idea that the electorate can 'get rid of' people they don't like is complete tosh.
The First Dave,
I'll take my time, hopefully it'll sink in....
At the last general election, there were more than three candidates (I don't recall the precise # and can't be arsed to look it up).
Candidate A was previously elected to the previous sitting of parliament.
Candidate B wasn't quite my kettle of fish
So I voted for Candidate C!!!
Candidate A got the most ticks in the box, so he was elected, which is fine by me!!
So to summarise:
- I did vote
- but for someone who regretably didn't get enough # to become my MP.
Would you be so kind as to clarify how me choosing which candidate I voted for somehow results in me having 'zero control' over who is elected as my MP, as clearly I am missing something eh?
Also if you actually READ my post, nowhere does it state, hint, generally point in the direction of me (or anyone else!) Being able to CHOOSE our Monarch, that's why it's called a MONARCHY!!
Is that clear?
Cheers,
Jay
'For those that wish to carry on rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic, go for it, I'm voting for leaving before we all drowned.' - which is basically jumping off a ship, in the night, in the middle of the Atlantic, and watching it sail off in the sunset, smugly thinking how you avoided hitting an iceberg, before quitely drowning because the life boats and the radio are still on the ship.
Dear AC,
It's an analogy, based on 'progress' over the last ten years, do you think the EU as a whole (which IS NOT the same as Europe) is:
- getting worse
- staying the same
- getting better.
Pls put a little effort in next time eh?
Cheers,
Jay
- staying the same
Certainly not perfect, can be improved on. But anyone who believes that turning our back on Europe will automatically make things better is dreaming. In the chaos, things will get worse, guaranteed. And in the meantime, all the advances that the EU *has* made in things like social justice, personal rights and equality will get flushed down the toilet. I simply do not trust the UK government to replace these. The opportunity will be taken by Boris and his ilk to dilute them all down, and all the while diverting attention by crying "Immigrants!"
// And in the meantime, all the advances that the EU *has* made in things like social justice, personal rights and equality will get flushed down the toilet. I simply do not trust the UK government to replace these.//
I think you trust them too far.
This is from a Leave campaign pamphlet I was sent:
::Does the EU keep us safe?
::"Brexit would bring two potentially important security gains: the ability to dump the European Convention on Human Rights ... and, more importantly, greater control over immigration from the European Union." (Sir Richard Dearlove, former chief of MI6)
Bear in mind that Sir Dearlove was head of MI6 when it was busy abducting people and their families and renditioning them to places where they could be secretly tortured.
(see for example : https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jun/01/mi5-chief-right-to-be-disgusted-over-mi6-role-rendition-blair )
I find it very interesting that this seems to be practically the one point that both sides agree on.
"BUT I have an MP and a monarch, my fundamental belief is that they should basically 'run' our country, not folk we have never heard of, voted for and can't kick them out of office if we want to..."
I've got some good news for you! You can vote for an MEP and no laws can be passed without their agreement.
There's also something called the "Council of Ministers" where our government also gets to sign off (or not). You may recall Dave C threatening to veto various things in the past.
The Commission (the civil service if you like) can't make laws, are appointed by our elected representatives and can be dismissed by our MEPs if they get too far out of hand.
The Eurozone (of which the majority of key EU members are a part) is basically following the Japanese model for recovery following a recession where low interest rates were (and still are...) used.to try and allow the economy to grow out of recession. It hasn't lead to good times for the Japanese economy over the last 20 years...
What happens to the EU when Merkel is no longer leading Germany as seems likely in 2017?
What happens to the UK if we vote Remain and the EU realise the threat to leave is no longer real?
More unintended consequences?
And as to a European Army
We have worse. You have Euro-Turko-American Army. With LOTS of emphasis on Turkish viewpoint, some on American viewpoint, but not European viewpoint and European (as a whole) interest.
It is hilarious how Cameron and Co used the referendum to bury an interesting piece of news. The latest round of bear bating by aforementioned Turko-Euro-American army had to be canceled. It took a Eastern European premier minister to tell USA, Baltics and Turks to f*** off and take their bear baiting exercise elsewhere and that he is not keen on rehearsing WW3 on his territory.
Which Eastern European premier minister and which NATO excercise was cancelled - you can Google it.
>Clearly the EU isn't overly fussed about fixing the glaring flaws: CAP, absurd unemployment in southern states, mass emigration, innappropriate effective costs of money, causing mammoth f'ups that only benefit people trackers & Vladimir Putin
All, with absolutely NO EXCEPTION, due to British MEP's ... good riddance !
"BUT I have an MP and a monarch, my fundamental belief is that they should basically 'run' our country, "
Ermmm, I'm a bit hazy on constitutional law, but I'm pretty sure you don't get the chance to vote for the monarch (of immigrant stock anyway :). And unless you're in a swing constituency your parliamentary vote doesn't count for much. Oh, and you only get an indirect vote for the Upper House, and then only for the life peers, not the hereditary ones and the Lords Spiritual.
"not folk we have never heard of, voted for"
Well you do get to vote for the European Parliament, and as others have pointed out here, in some cases your vote counts for more in those elections. (E.g. UKIP are much more fairly represented in the European Parliament than in Westminster.)
"And as to a European Army? If it wasn't so scary it would be bloody hilarious!"
I'm not familiar with the details, but as far as I'm aware there isn't a European Army as such, it is purely a term to describe military cooperation. But I'm sure others more familiar with the matter will provide more details.
"CAP"
CAP is expensive because the UK government vetos any changes to it. Basically in the UK most farming is done by half a dozen conglomerates they aren't based in farmhouses they are working out of swish London offices. These companies gobble up 90% of the CAP subsidies. The EU have proposed a limit on the subsidy that any farmer can get. So that there is a cut off at say £30-50K which would benefit the small farmer but screw over the big companies. The UK has always opposed such changes, moving out of the EU would not reduce the amount of subsidy, the UK government would simply pay it directly to their city mates.
Part of the expense of CAP is the use of set-aside to give over some of the land to preserve wildlife insects like bees and wild flowers. You can reduce the cost of CAP if you give those up and allow persistent pesticides to be sprayed across the country.
I think it was the Chinese who used to refer to Europe as the warring continent.
Now however southern Europe is teetering on the brink of economic collapse (to be followed by political collapse) caused by greedy bankers, wonky accountants & Syria. Weakening one of the main institutions that can help stop that is reckless.
And, honestly, do we really want The Boris as PM?
Now however southern Europe is teetering on the brink of economic collapse (to be followed by political collapse) caused by greedy bankers, wonky accountants & Syria.
Tsk, tsk. Apparently, the idiot politicians trying to centrally plan the economy are blameless then? #smh
"Tsk, tsk. Apparently, the idiot politicians trying to centrally plan the economy are blameless then? #smh"
No, I think they are human, but polititians; who, for instance, have made laws about free movement and suddenly there's a load of other people who are not in the club, but are trying to get in, the leaders who should lead, are not sure what to do. That's not too bad, surely thay can manage, but then everyone around them is shouting at them to do something and let them in and keep them out and turn them back into the sea and feed them and let them drown and help them and ignore them and give then hope and let them die in war and....
What would you do?
What would you do?
I'm not worried about the free movement of goods, services, and people about the EU. The problem that I have is that the politicians in these southern EU states can't help but spend their country into oblivion. And the Euro prevents them from using the usual devaluation tactics of the UK, US, or other countries with an independent currency.
I find many aspects of the EU admirable, but my biggest objection to it doesn't apply to Blighty since Brits can still use HM pounds. No question that idiot politicians exist in both scenarios.
CF,
Err no matey, the primary reason for the state of many southern european economies is that the Euro simply does not match their economic requirements, this allied with the Franco/German solution for a starving economy to starve it even faster clearly hasn't worked!
Of course there is also the issue that the EU knew that about their relative fiscal cycles and day-to-day tax related issues, but let them all join the club anyway...
But hey, if we had a common tax base, unified laws, common treasury functions and a full banking union (plus our own army), it would all be fine eh?
Cheers,
Jay
Err no matey, the primary reason for the state of many southern european economies is that the Euro simply does not match their economic requirements
Neither did repeated devaluations.
Greece is a special case, partly due to the massive levels of "creative accounting" by Goldman Sachs effectively defrauded itself into the Euro area. Southern Europe does not suffer from the exchange rate but from low productivity and high public debt.
At the moment all of Southern Europe is being hosed in Northern cash by holding down interest rates. This has meant hundreds of billions in savings for countries like Italy and is supposed to oil the political wheels so that much needed labour market reforms can be introduced which will hopefully help reduce un- and underemployment among the young.
Returning briefly to Greece: the country does provide an object lesson in the illusion of sovereignty. Last year the government ran a referendum against the offer from its creditors. It won the referendum but sill had no choice but to accept the offer from its creditors. This was a humiliating and unnecessary climbdown from an untenable, maximum position.
"the Euro simply does not match their economic requirements"
This, so much this! I'm very much in favour of remaining in the EU, because while it does have a myriad of problems, none of them are insurmountable with the right legal and political reform, except the Euro.
The single currency is the biggest problem with the EU, you can not have a single currency and interest rate for so many countries with vastly different economies in terms of both their size and strength as well as in nature in terms of service vs manufacturing etc, that will actually work.
By their very nature the stronger and larger economies in currency will tip the trade value of the currency and interest rates in their favour, not intentionally but simply by the weight of their economic effect on the currency.
The required political reforms will inevitably happen for the EU to survive, and in fact to some degree already are.
Despite what the Leave campaign say about Cameron getting nothing from his EU negotiations he actually got a lot more than some expected and the fact that he got what he did has really paved the way for more reform in future.
Donald Tusk, President of the European Council, was recently quoted as saying the EU needs to abandon it's ideal of ever closer union due to the tide of eurosceptic feeling not just from the UK but in other major EU countries such as Germany as well.
Change in the EU is not only coming, it's already started.
Could it all go wrong and make the EU even worse than it is? Yes.
Could it all go well and make the EU more like people really want it to be, a close political and trade alliance that keeps like minded countries united in the face of destabling forces like Russia and China (and even the USA, in a different way)? Yes.
N.B. If I hear one more person say we have to "take back control" from the unelected EU commissioners I have shall have to beat them to death with a beginners guide to the structure of the EU government.
I remember when the Euro was launched and the British media said it would fail quite quickly. I remember the BBC saying that if we'd joined the Queen's face wouldn't have been on the coin and then a reporter looking a bit surprised when national images appeared on the coins....
When I go back to the UK I get the impression from the UK media that the Eurozone is in terrible difficulty and that life there is very bad. Yet what I actually see is that life in the parts of the UK I visit (mostly the south) is no better than where I work in the Eurozone. In fact life in the UK seems worse for the average person.
I'm not saying there aren't problems in the Eurozone and nor am I saying life is peachy in the whole Eurozone (I don't live in a rich area but nor do I live in the poorest part of Greece either). I am saying that the reality is quite different from what I read in the papers.
"I'm not saying there aren't problems in the Eurozone and nor am I saying life is peachy in the whole Eurozone (I don't live in a rich area but nor do I live in the poorest part of Greece either). I am saying that the reality is quite different from what I read in the papers."
Are you on drugs? The Euro currency is a huge success?
Life isn't so bad?
Wow. I travel to Southern Europe too and see 50 per cent youth employment and the rise of extreme right parties. There's none so blind as those who don't want to see.
"Could it all go well and make the EU more like people really want it to be, a close political and trade alliance that keeps like minded countries united in the face of destabling forces like Russia and China (and even the USA, in a different way)? Yes."
Top marks PW. Top marks.
So how exactly will this reform take place?
The European parliament is powerless and capable of little more than claiming expenses.
The council of ministers is dominated by Germany who operate using 19th economic theory driven by thier race memories of hyper inflation. The second most dominant member is France where Napoleon and Louis 14th are still regarded as role models.
Add to this the fact that in the next five years a majority of EU counties will have nasty right wing leaders, Poland and Hungary are there already, Austria is getting there, France is likely to elect Madame Le Pen (one of the few French politicians with a detectable pulse).
So thie choice is for an "Ever Closer Union" of people who hate each other, or, keeping a reasonable distance from the forthcoming mess.