EU referendum ..... just why?????

Snap

Heartfeltdawn said:

This is what I really don't understand. Folk complain about identikit politics. We've had year after year of heavyweight politicians, Thatcher to Blair to the lower ranks like Eric Pickles (who is possibly the unsung midfield general of the Cameron era). We've had top down politics for years. 

Along comes Corbyn. Did you see any of the conference over the weekend? It's not the politics we've been used to from Thatcher to Brown. There are several issues with Corbyn and Labour but there is at least an attempt to do things in a different way without resorting to the same heavyweight bullshit where someone comes in, announces this and that and fuck off to anyone else's opinion and thoughts. We still seem stuck in this pattern where we need an individual to save us, that coalition politics is wrong. 

Not sure I read you right, but are you saying you don't get my opinion, or the poitics situation as is?

I do think Corbyn is a breath of fresh air, a bit, but his politics are infantile and poorly thought through. IMO. He also appears riduculously naive when it comes to foreign policy. Tbh from what I have seen of him, the bloke is a fool.

He appears to be living in some sutdent union utopia dislocated from the real world.

I don't really have a problem with identikit politics. The public seem to like the middle ground. What I don't like are the (apparently) massively out of touch stiffs who are MPs. They arent real people, they don't seem to have a clue about what most people are like.

Hence we get facile patronising soundbites like "hard working families" etc.

What I am getting at is politics needs more people like the Archbishop of Canterbury. Whilst I totally despise organised religion, this fella has lived life and so when he speaks, he speaks with real life authority - based on experience, not text book or university debating school rhetoric.

bobliefeld

"Sovereignty" is absolutely meaningless.  

EU or not all of our laws will be decided by interest groups, lobbyists, rich old white guys, imbecile politicians scared of upsetting the Daily Mail, etc.   

If anything sovereignty will make things worse for a lot of people.  One of the things Brexit people campaign on is that they'll be free to remove EU "red tape" and laws that "get in the way", things like "human rights", working hours regulations.   

I'm sure everyone here is doing quite well, we're all posting about our NGDs and what have you, but a lot of people in this country are being completely fucked over by the government and it seems like the only thing that's holding them back from an out right cull of poor people is EU red tape.

Fretwired

bobliefeld said:

"Sovereignty" is absolutely meaningless.  

Until a law gets made that affects your life and you find that our PM can do nothing about it as the needs of 27 states outweigh the needs of one state. As for people being fucked over go back to the great depression of the 30s - people died of starvation, had no work, no benefits, no access to healthcare and short lives. Move forward to today and look how far we've come in 80 odd years. People today don't really know what being fucked over means.

Brize

Fretwired said:

bobliefeld said:

"Sovereignty" is absolutely meaningless.  

Until a law gets made that affects your life and you find that our PM can do nothing about it as the needs of 27 states outweigh the needs of one state.

Tampon tax?

p90fool

Fretwired;1086526" said:

bobliefeld said:

"Sovereignty" is absolutely meaningless.  












Until a law gets made that affects your life and you find that our PM can do nothing about it as the needs of 27 states outweigh the needs of one state. As for people being fucked over go back to the great depression of the 30s - people died of starvation, had no work, no benefits, no access to healthcare and short lives. Move forward to today and look how far we've come in 80 odd years. People today don't really know what being fucked over means.

Yes, we have come a long way, but the Tories fought tooth and nail against all of those essentially Socialist reforms.

The EU didn't invent the bedroom tax, the EU doesn't want us to force genuinely disabled or terminally ill people back to work.

Having a bit of "sovereignty" removed is some people's only hope in this country.

hugbot

chillidoggy;1086255" said:I'm very concerned about the low-powered kettle edict that the EU is waiting to foist on us as soon as we vote to stay in.

See, this is the kind of thing that gives me pause because its very easy to spin as a stupid idea, brussels bureaucrats stealing all our fun ect. but I tend to think one of the primary purposes of government is to prevent tragedy of the commons situations. High powered electrics like kettles are a massive drain on the power grid (particularly as they often tend to be switched on en masse- eg at the end of a football match) so its an area where *well thought out* regulation would make sense.

But I can't find any concrete info on what the actual plans would be, just "Brussels is coming for your kettle" type scare articles. Fullfact claims it wouldn't necessarily be a limitation on wattage, it could come as an edict that kettles have to be more durable and well insulated, or be otherwise efficient enough to justify high wattage. But thats not concrete becasue the plans havent actually been outlined except in the vaguest sense.

Fretwired

p90fool said:

Fretwired;1086526" said:

bobliefeld said:

"Sovereignty" is absolutely meaningless.  












Until a law gets made that affects your life and you find that our PM can do nothing about it as the needs of 27 states outweigh the needs of one state. As for people being fucked over go back to the great depression of the 30s - people died of starvation, had no work, no benefits, no access to healthcare and short lives. Move forward to today and look how far we've come in 80 odd years. People today don't really know what being fucked over means.

Yes, we have come a long way, but the Tories fought tooth and nail against all of those essentially Socialist reforms.

The EU didn't invent the bedroom tax, the EU doesn't want us to force genuinely disabled or terminally ill people back to work.

Having a bit of "sovereignty" removed is some people's only hope in this country.

The bedroom tax was Labour's idea. I agree it's not a very good idea but I also understand the thinking behind it. The answer is to build more social housing.

MrBump

I guess that the argument that we need to have something to keep the government in check is an argument in favor of a second chamber, something that makes sure that new legislation is in the best interests of the people of the country, not in the interests of the government of the day.  Not sure that's working particularly well at the moment though.

How else does a population keep its government in check?  Mass protests, riots?  YouGov polls?  Petitions?  Guitar forums?

crunchman

hugbot said:

chillidoggy;1086255" said:

I'm very concerned about the low-powered kettle edict that the EU is waiting to foist on us as soon as we vote to stay in.

See, this is the kind of thing that gives me pause because its very easy to spin as a stupid idea, brussels bureaucrats stealing all our fun ect. but I tend to think one of the primary purposes of government is to prevent tragedy of the commons situations. High powered electrics like kettles are a massive drain on the power grid (particularly as they often tend to be switched on en masse- eg at the end of a football match) so its an area where *well thought out* regulation would make sense.

But I can't find any concrete info on what the actual plans would be, just "Brussels is coming for your kettle" type scare articles. Fullfact claims it wouldn't necessarily be a limitation on wattage, it could come as an edict that kettles have to be more durable and well insulated, or be otherwise efficient enough to justify high wattage. But thats not concrete becasue the plans havent actually been outlined except in the vaguest sense.

Edit: Quote not showing properly.  My response starts after this:

If that was all there was then they would have just published it to stop the groundless rumours.  The reason that they haven't published it is because they know that it would be a red rag to a bull before the referendum.

They have let this one slip out though:
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/may/25/netflix-and-amazon-must-guarantee-20-of-content-is-european

More red tape.  How are they going to guarantee that it will happen?  They will create watchdogs at the tax payers expense to monitor it.  As the article says, the providers will get around it anyway.  They will just commission lots of cheap rubbish to fill the quota of European origin content.

The problem is that it's a symptom of the EU culture and bureaucracy that tries to justify its existence.

UnclePsychosis

Seeing as someone else has already compared the two referenda: the hypocrisy from the likes of Boris Johnson with regards their differing attitudes to Scottish Independence and the EU is quite simply staggering. Its also amusing to see the Leavers complaining about "scaremongering" when you see some of the stuff they came out with during the independence referendum.

Scotland cedes far, far more of its sovereignty to the United Kingdom and English/Welsh/N.Irish voters than the UK does to the EU, but Johnson and many other of the high profile "leave" campaigners were very vocal that Scotland was very much "better together". Its amusing/depressing/ironic/whatever to see them completely about turn with regards sovereignty and the benefits of unions now. There's also similarly ironic about turns from many Scottish nationalists, although their flip-flopping isn't quite as ridiculous given the relative levels of sovereignty in question.

Jalapeno

The Referendum is probably 3 decades overdue - Thatcher & Blair ceded most of the "sovereignty", and unlike most Europeans countries did not put it to the people. Blair having said he would, then chose not to.

Now it's an anti-UKIP vehicle and to lance the political EU-boil in the conservative party.

And yes Boris is an opportunistic little shit - in January he was pouring scorn on the Brexiters - IMHO this is the start of his leadership bid post Cameron

Fretwired

@crunchman

They have let this one slip out though:
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/may/25/netflix-and-amazon-must-guarantee-20-of-content-is-european

More red tape.  How are they going to guarantee that it will happen?  They will create watchdogs at the tax payers expense to monitor it.  As the article says, the providers will get around it anyway.  They will just commission lots of cheap rubbish to fill the quota of European origin content.

The problem is that it's a symptom of the EU culture and bureaucracy that tries to justify its existence.

Just get the BBC to make some historical dramas in which the Brits beat up the Germans, French and Spanish. All in English with subtitles. Netflix and Amazon they can show them in the US. A remake of Sharpe's war, Hornblower and the Battle of Britain should do for starters ... :-)

bobliefeld

crunchman said:

hugbot said:

chillidoggy;1086255" said:

I'm very concerned about the low-powered kettle edict that the EU is waiting to foist on us as soon as we vote to stay in.

See, this is the kind of thing that gives me pause because its very easy to spin as a stupid idea, brussels bureaucrats stealing all our fun ect. but I tend to think one of the primary purposes of government is to prevent tragedy of the commons situations. High powered electrics like kettles are a massive drain on the power grid (particularly as they often tend to be switched on en masse- eg at the end of a football match) so its an area where *well thought out* regulation would make sense.

But I can't find any concrete info on what the actual plans would be, just "Brussels is coming for your kettle" type scare articles. Fullfact claims it wouldn't necessarily be a limitation on wattage, it could come as an edict that kettles have to be more durable and well insulated, or be otherwise efficient enough to justify high wattage. But thats not concrete becasue the plans havent actually been outlined except in the vaguest sense.

Edit: Quote not showing properly.  My response starts after this:

If that was all there was then they would have just published it to stop the groundless rumours.  The reason that they haven't published it is because they know that it would be a red rag to a bull before the referendum.

They have let this one slip out though:
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/may/25/netflix-and-amazon-must-guarantee-20-of-content-is-european

More red tape.  How are they going to guarantee that it will happen?  They will create watchdogs at the tax payers expense to monitor it.  As the article says, the providers will get around it anyway.  They will just commission lots of cheap rubbish to fill the quota of European origin content.

The problem is that it's a symptom of the EU culture and bureaucracy that tries to justify its existence.
In theory it's a very good thing.  It's a good thing to try and prevent the US from having a monopoly on TV and film.  

axisus

UnclePsychosis said:

Seeing as someone else has already compared the two referenda: the hypocrisy from the likes of Boris Johnson with regards their differing attitudes to Scottish Independence and the EU is quite simply staggering. Its also amusing to see the Leavers complaining about "scaremongering" when you see some of the stuff they came out with during the independence referendum.

Scotland cedes far, far more of its sovereignty to the United Kingdom and English/Welsh/N.Irish voters than the UK does to the EU, but Johnson and many other of the high profile "leave" campaigners were very vocal that Scotland was very much "better together". Its amusing/depressing/ironic/whatever to see them completely about turn with regards sovereignty and the benefits of unions now. There's also similarly ironic about turns from many Scottish nationalists, although their flip-flopping isn't quite as ridiculous given the relative levels of sovereignty in question.

It doesn't help the argument in the least to compare the two. Entirely different things.

bobliefeld

axisus said:

UnclePsychosis said:

Seeing as someone else has already compared the two referenda: the hypocrisy from the likes of Boris Johnson with regards their differing attitudes to Scottish Independence and the EU is quite simply staggering. Its also amusing to see the Leavers complaining about "scaremongering" when you see some of the stuff they came out with during the independence referendum.

Scotland cedes far, far more of its sovereignty to the United Kingdom and English/Welsh/N.Irish voters than the UK does to the EU, but Johnson and many other of the high profile "leave" campaigners were very vocal that Scotland was very much "better together". Its amusing/depressing/ironic/whatever to see them completely about turn with regards sovereignty and the benefits of unions now. There's also similarly ironic about turns from many Scottish nationalists, although their flip-flopping isn't quite as ridiculous given the relative levels of sovereignty in question.

It doesn't help the argument in the least to compare the two. Entirely different things.

Is sovereignty a good thing or a bad thing ?  

crunchman

I'm not sure that Scotland ceding it's sovereignty is quite the right term.  When the Union came about both countries shared the same monarch and had done for over 100 years.  It's not quite the same as the EU situation.

You are talking about something that has effectively been one country for hundreds of years splitting apart.  It's a little different from what was given way in the Lisbon treaty which only came into force 7 years ago against the wishes of the population when Brown refused us a referendum.

The problem is that there needs to be another round of treaty negotiations for the changes that the Eurozone will need to make it work.  We have been promised a referendum on any future giving up of sovereignty.  Even if Project Fear scares people into voting to stay this time, I can't see any future changes being ratified.  This will bring about a major EU crisis as all the countries have to ratify a new treaty, and other countries will refuse to ratify something that will satisfy us.  At that point things will get ugly and we will possibly end up leaving anyway.

Sporky

UnclePsychosis said:

the hypocrisy from the likes of Boris Johnson with regards their differing attitudes to Scottish Independence and the EU is quite simply staggering. 

Is it not possible, then, to believe that the UK is best off united but out of the EU? I don't see how that's hypocrisy.

Otherwise you might say that the "leave" campaign must either be in favour of independence for every county - nay, every city, town, household, or be hypocrites.

UnclePsychosis

Sporky;1086704" said:

UnclePsychosis said:

the hypocrisy from the likes of Boris Johnson with regards their differing attitudes to Scottish Independence and the EU is quite simply staggering. Is it not possible, then, to believe that the UK is best off united but out of the EU? I don't see how that's hypocrisy.

Otherwise you might say that the "leave" campaign must either be in favour of independence for every county - nay, every city, town, household, or be hypocrites.

I think it's more than a tad hypocritical to say to a country "you should give up a large part of your sovereignty to be part of the UK because it's of cultural and economic benefit" and then 18 months later for the same people to be saying "we can't give up this small amount of our sovereignty in this way, even if it costs us economically we need out, we need to govern ourselves as a matter of principle".

The amount of control that the UK and UK voters has over its own affairs as part of the EU is huge in comparison to the amount of control that Scottish voters have over their own affairs as part of the UK.

Yet apparently Scotland voting for self determination was a dreadful idea whereas the UK giving up a really tiny set of powers in comparison is completely unconscionable. It's bizarre.

bobliefeld

Sporky said:

UnclePsychosis said:

the hypocrisy from the likes of Boris Johnson with regards their differing attitudes to Scottish Independence and the EU is quite simply staggering. 

Is it not possible, then, to believe that the UK is best off united but out of the EU? I don't see how that's hypocrisy.

Otherwise you might say that the "leave" campaign must either be in favour of independence for every county - nay, every city, town, household, or be hypocrites.

It's hypocrisy when the argument is "sovereignty" which doesn't mean anything to any of us either way.  

sinbaadi

I don't think that English people would typically say Scotland should not have voted on their independence.  In fact if anything a lot of English people would like to have voted on that themselves!