Federberg
The GOAT
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2013
- Messages
- 15,597
- Reactions
- 5,693
- Points
- 113
Brexit
- Thread starter britbox
- Start date
I've been told to **** off back to the UK plenty of times mate. 90+% of the time, it's banter... and messing around.
Maybe... but sticks and stones. He probably didn't care for your mate much. Regardless of that, he makes very strong arguments for departure.
Federberg
The GOAT
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2013
- Messages
- 15,597
- Reactions
- 5,693
- Points
- 113
He certainly does. But it wasn't specific to one person is the point I was making.
franly -- whatever you bits , decide ,
NOTHING, NOTHING is more important than that you REGAIN your independence FROM THE USA.
if you have not YET admitted to this fact that your country -- once the ''MOTHER" of the USA --
NOW is merely an APPENDAGE to the american corporate fascism and totalitarianism pretending to be a ''republic" (complete with ''elections" - heck -- the people have got to be given some ILLUSIONS of '''choice" , u know) -
(it is , in technical terms what is called an 'INVERTED TOTALITARIANISM" --because everything SEEMS and APPEARS ''normal and free" which makes it more clever than say -- hitler's germany or mussolini's fascist italy) -
AND if you haven't yet admitted to that - because perhaps of some notions about being ''of the same kind of anglo-sphere'' social order that you can't get over with --
THEN it is far past time -- DEAR PEOPLE OF BRITAIN -- that you DISOWN the monstrosity across the atlantic.
it is like that in the TV SERIES? A british production, mind you (in its usual excellence when it comes to dramas) -
PENNY DREADFUL?
where the last episode DR frankenstein is tormented by the fact that his ''creations" of ''life" had turned out to be monstrous? and now asks for his friend's help to destroy them?
that'/s EXACTLY what the ''america" IS to YOU , DEAR BRITISH people.
STAYING IN EU -- means FOR THE USA - keeping YOU BOUND by the rules of BRUSSELS - which are BOUND by the rules of WASHINGTON DC...
and the TRUE purpose of it all -- is not just NATO binding ALL of you under american ''leadership" and OCCUPATION -
BUT also to BIND YOU under the CORPORATE MONOPOLIST RULES of THE USA
the WILL destroy your sovereignties, your wages, your pensions, your environmental protection, your labor standards, your health system (privatize them in emulation of the wonderful EXTREMELY expensive ''private" system of the USA THAT LITERALLY banktrupts families -- i've seen this happen personally to people) --
your education SHOOTING UP through the roof in costs that PUT YOUR young people in DEBT for the rest of their lives -- JUST LIKE IN THE USA ) -
you want MORE? just find that out soon enough the moment you BRITS VOTE TO ''STAY" -- just as OBAMA wants you to..who is a SALESMAN for his CORPORATE, WALL STREET - AMERICAN EMPIRE MASTERS...
you just have NO IDEA what ''UNCLE SAM" AND UNCLE OBAMA have in store for YOU ALL in europe!
THAT'S ALL that needs to be said.
but if you DO want more RUINATION of your economies and sovereigntyu -- GO AHEAD...
VOTE ''stay in EU as servants of BRUSSELS" who are servants of WASHINGTON...
and watch yourselves OWNED by the USA corporations. through TTIP - where the leaks CONFIRM what the USA has in store for you all -- DESTRUCTION of YOUR independence as nations. PERIOD!
there is a REASON why OBAMA was COMPELLED for the FIRST TIME in his presidency to PEN AN EDITORIAL ''defending TTIP AND TPP (asian version)"
because that is how DESPERATE HE and his wall street and US corporate masters are -- like MONSANTO , CARGILL GMO monopolists of food --
to RAM THROUGH TTIP into europe the more people find out it PLACES THE RIGHTS OF USA CORPORATIONS AND INVESTORS AND SHAREHOLDERS
ABOVE entire nations.
YOU wanna TRY IT? go ahead and see where THAT gets you just like the way OBAMA and HILLARY , KERRY and AMERICA HAS DONE IN DRAGGIN YOU -- ALL OF YOU - EUROPE
to american's IMPERIAL WARS in every manner --e conomic, military, cultural, political.
and see just how WONDERFUL the results have been for YOU, roflmaooo...
go ahead. and if you DO -- youa re NOTHING BUT A BUNCH OF OVERLY PAMPERED EUROPEAN IDIOTS for following UNCLE SAM around like a DOG!
roflmao...
DEAR BRITISH AND EUROPEANS -- STAY IN EU - BRUSSELS -- which are the administrative wing of WASHINGTON (economically -- while NATO is the administrative wing of the USA military empire over EU) -
THIS IS WHAT YOU WILL GET if you stay in BOTH administrative wings of the USA empire that has BEEN OCCUPYING YOU since the end of world war 2 ..whta YOU THOUGHT was 'liberation" was nothing but the BEGINNING of the USA'S INVASION and occupation of YOU -- because you all thought the USA is your ''friend" or because you 'share similar values" ...
you have NO idea......don't you? roflmao...
==================
RUSSIA TODAY
NATO on trade, in Europe and Asia, is doomed
Pepe Escobar is an independent geopolitical analyst. He writes for RT, Sputnik and TomDispatch, and is a frequent contributor to websites and radio and TV shows ranging from the US to East Asia. He is the former roving correspondent for Asia Times Online. Born in Brazil, he's been a foreign correspondent since 1985, and has lived in London, Paris, Milan, Los Angeles, Washington, Bangkok and Hong Kong. Even before 9/11 he specialized in covering the arc from the Middle East to Central and East Asia, with an emphasis on Big Power geopolitics and energy wars. He is the author of "Globalistan" (2007), "Red Zone Blues" (2007), "Obama does Globalistan" (2009) and "Empire of Chaos" (2014), all published by Nimble Books. His latest book is "2030", also by Nimble Books, out in December 2015.
Published time: 4 May, 2016 14:03
© Kai Pfaffenbach / Reuters
30
The President of the United States (POTUS) is desperate. Exhibit A: His Op-Ed defending the Asian face - the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) - of a wide-ranging, twin-headed NATO-on-trade “pivotingâ€.
The European face is of course the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP).
POTUS frames TPP – as well as TTIP - in terms of a benign expansion of US exports, and private (US) firms having “a fair shot at competing against state-owned enterprises.†“Fair� Not really. Let’s see how the mechanism works, focusing on TPP’s European twin.
With impeccable timing, almost simultaneously to Obama’s Op-Ed, Greenpeace Netherlands leaked 248 pages of classified TTIP documents that were to be re-discussed last week by negotiators in New York. There have been no less than 13 rounds of TTIP negotiations so far, over nearly three years.
The documents – negotiated in total secrecy since 2013 - represent roughly two-thirds of the latest negotiating text. An array of detailed studies, like this one, had been warning about the state of play. The veil of secrecy ended up being the ultimate giveaway to TTIP’s toxicity. Before the Greenpeace Netherlands leak, EU elected representatives could only examine these documents under a police watch, in a secure room, without access to experts, and on top of it they could not discuss the content with anyone else.
I will crush you with my GMOs
Everything civil society across Europe – for at least three years – has been debating, and fearing, is confirmed; this is a sophisticated, toxic US-led corporate racket, a concerted assault across the spectrum, from the environment and animal welfare to labor rights and internet privacy. In a nutshell; it’s all about the US corporate galaxy pushing the EU to lower – or abase – a range of consumer protections.
Hardball, predictably, is the name of the game. Washington no less than threatened to block EU car exports to force the EU to buy genetically engineered fruits and vegetables. In my travels in France, Italy and Spain over the past two years, I confirmed this to be the ultimate nightmare expressed by practitioners of top-end artisanal agriculture.
Read more
TTIP-off? Greenpeace leaks confirm protesters weren't kicking up a fuss over nothing
Predictably, the lobbyist-infested European Commission (EC) fiercely defends TTIP, stressing it could benefit the EU’s economy by $150 billion a year, and raise car exports by 149 percent. Obviously don’t expect the EC to connect these “car exports†to a US-led GMO invasion of Europe.
At least some nations have finally woken up from their (corporate lobbyist-induced) slumber. The French Minister for Foreign Trade, Matthias Fekl, said negotiations over a “bad deal†should stop. He went straight to the point, blaming Washington’s intransigence; “There cannot be an agreement without France and much less against France.â€
Perennially ineffectual President Francois Hollande, for his part, has threatened to block the deal altogether. Three years ago Paris had already secured an exemption for the French film industry not to be gobbled up by Hollywood. Now it’s also about the crucial agriculture front. Hollande said he would never accept “the undermining of the essential principles of our agriculture, our culture, of mutual access to public markets.â€
And what is the EC – leading the negotiations on behalf of the EU - doing? Pulling its predictable Trojan horse act; these are all “alarmist headlines†and “a storm in a teacupâ€. Puzzled EU citizens, en masse, may question if this is really the way for the EC – a bureaucratic Brussels behemoth - to supposedly defend the rights of EU consumers. Yet, infiltrated as it is by corporate lobbyism, the EC simply can’t protect the EU’s environmental and health standards, much more sophisticated than the US’s, from a corporate America bent on meddling with the content of EU laws all along the regulatory line.
I got an offer you can’t refuse
POTUS was heavily campaigning for TTIP last month in Germany. POTUS still hopes he may have a deal in the bag before he leaves office in January 2017. White House spokesman Josh Earnest has tried to put on a brave face, saying the leaks will not have a "material impact" on the negotiations. Wrong; they will – as they are mobilizing public opinion all across the EU.
David Cameron, in the UK, is also in a bind. He’s fiercely pro-TTIP. But Obama has already warned; this means Brexit is a no-no. Club Med nations, for their part, are leaning against. All 28 EU member nations – plus the European Parliament – would have to ratify TTIP if a deal is eventually reached.
TPP, for its part, has been negotiated. But it has not been approved by the US Congress (nor by Pacific nations). The approval process has gone nowhere. In fact it will be up to either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump. Trump arguably is oblivious to TPP’s details; but considering the deal is being heavily championed by Obama, Trump may go against it.
A case can be made that both TPP and TTIP vow to distort markets, in Europe and Asia; prop up (US) monopolies; transfer jobs to slave labor markets (in the case of parts of Asia); trample on intellectual property rights (in the case of the EU); facilitate tax evasion; and ultimately transfer more wealth from the many to the 0.00001 percent.
And this leads us to how Hillary Clinton – the Wall Street/US establishment candidate – views both TPP and TTIP. Well, she supported both NAFTA and CAFTA, approved under Bill Clinton in the 1990s. As Secretary of State, she lobbied for the Panama trade deal. And, crucially, she has always treated the TPP as the “gold standardâ€. No wonder; this is the trade arm of the “pivoting to Asia†she’s been so fond of - a Pacific trade deal that excludes China, which happens to be the top trade partner of most Asian nations.
Moreover, those by now famous Goldman Sachs speeches are increasingly being seen as payments for services rendered (and promised) by Hillary Clinton to the 0,0001 percent, who are, of course, in favor of global corporate America expansion.
Yet it ain’t over till the November ballot sings. Hillary now faces serious scrutiny by working class voters in the US. So no wonder, in another flip-flopping masterpiece, she’s now leaning towards describing herself as opposing both TPP and TTIP.
Still, TPP at least may be approved during the post-election ‘lame-duck’ session of the US Congress. As for TTIP, it’s now mired in Walking Dead zone. Talk about what it takes for the Obama administration to imprint its trade “legacy†in the history books; to keep blackmailing Europeans and Asians alike as if it was just a lowly Mob extortion racket.
THIS IS WHAT YOU WILL GET if you stay in BOTH administrative wings of the USA empire that has BEEN OCCUPYING YOU since the end of world war 2 ..whta YOU THOUGHT was 'liberation" was nothing but the BEGINNING of the USA'S INVASION and occupation of YOU -- because you all thought the USA is your ''friend" or because you 'share similar values" ...
you have NO idea......don't you? roflmao...
==================
RUSSIA TODAY
NATO on trade, in Europe and Asia, is doomed
Pepe Escobar is an independent geopolitical analyst. He writes for RT, Sputnik and TomDispatch, and is a frequent contributor to websites and radio and TV shows ranging from the US to East Asia. He is the former roving correspondent for Asia Times Online. Born in Brazil, he's been a foreign correspondent since 1985, and has lived in London, Paris, Milan, Los Angeles, Washington, Bangkok and Hong Kong. Even before 9/11 he specialized in covering the arc from the Middle East to Central and East Asia, with an emphasis on Big Power geopolitics and energy wars. He is the author of "Globalistan" (2007), "Red Zone Blues" (2007), "Obama does Globalistan" (2009) and "Empire of Chaos" (2014), all published by Nimble Books. His latest book is "2030", also by Nimble Books, out in December 2015.
Published time: 4 May, 2016 14:03
© Kai Pfaffenbach / Reuters
30
The President of the United States (POTUS) is desperate. Exhibit A: His Op-Ed defending the Asian face - the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) - of a wide-ranging, twin-headed NATO-on-trade “pivotingâ€.
The European face is of course the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP).
POTUS frames TPP – as well as TTIP - in terms of a benign expansion of US exports, and private (US) firms having “a fair shot at competing against state-owned enterprises.†“Fair� Not really. Let’s see how the mechanism works, focusing on TPP’s European twin.
With impeccable timing, almost simultaneously to Obama’s Op-Ed, Greenpeace Netherlands leaked 248 pages of classified TTIP documents that were to be re-discussed last week by negotiators in New York. There have been no less than 13 rounds of TTIP negotiations so far, over nearly three years.
The documents – negotiated in total secrecy since 2013 - represent roughly two-thirds of the latest negotiating text. An array of detailed studies, like this one, had been warning about the state of play. The veil of secrecy ended up being the ultimate giveaway to TTIP’s toxicity. Before the Greenpeace Netherlands leak, EU elected representatives could only examine these documents under a police watch, in a secure room, without access to experts, and on top of it they could not discuss the content with anyone else.
I will crush you with my GMOs
Everything civil society across Europe – for at least three years – has been debating, and fearing, is confirmed; this is a sophisticated, toxic US-led corporate racket, a concerted assault across the spectrum, from the environment and animal welfare to labor rights and internet privacy. In a nutshell; it’s all about the US corporate galaxy pushing the EU to lower – or abase – a range of consumer protections.
Hardball, predictably, is the name of the game. Washington no less than threatened to block EU car exports to force the EU to buy genetically engineered fruits and vegetables. In my travels in France, Italy and Spain over the past two years, I confirmed this to be the ultimate nightmare expressed by practitioners of top-end artisanal agriculture.
Read more
TTIP-off? Greenpeace leaks confirm protesters weren't kicking up a fuss over nothing Predictably, the lobbyist-infested European Commission (EC) fiercely defends TTIP, stressing it could benefit the EU’s economy by $150 billion a year, and raise car exports by 149 percent. Obviously don’t expect the EC to connect these “car exports†to a US-led GMO invasion of Europe.
At least some nations have finally woken up from their (corporate lobbyist-induced) slumber. The French Minister for Foreign Trade, Matthias Fekl, said negotiations over a “bad deal†should stop. He went straight to the point, blaming Washington’s intransigence; “There cannot be an agreement without France and much less against France.â€
Perennially ineffectual President Francois Hollande, for his part, has threatened to block the deal altogether. Three years ago Paris had already secured an exemption for the French film industry not to be gobbled up by Hollywood. Now it’s also about the crucial agriculture front. Hollande said he would never accept “the undermining of the essential principles of our agriculture, our culture, of mutual access to public markets.â€
And what is the EC – leading the negotiations on behalf of the EU - doing? Pulling its predictable Trojan horse act; these are all “alarmist headlines†and “a storm in a teacupâ€. Puzzled EU citizens, en masse, may question if this is really the way for the EC – a bureaucratic Brussels behemoth - to supposedly defend the rights of EU consumers. Yet, infiltrated as it is by corporate lobbyism, the EC simply can’t protect the EU’s environmental and health standards, much more sophisticated than the US’s, from a corporate America bent on meddling with the content of EU laws all along the regulatory line.
I got an offer you can’t refuse
POTUS was heavily campaigning for TTIP last month in Germany. POTUS still hopes he may have a deal in the bag before he leaves office in January 2017. White House spokesman Josh Earnest has tried to put on a brave face, saying the leaks will not have a "material impact" on the negotiations. Wrong; they will – as they are mobilizing public opinion all across the EU.
David Cameron, in the UK, is also in a bind. He’s fiercely pro-TTIP. But Obama has already warned; this means Brexit is a no-no. Club Med nations, for their part, are leaning against. All 28 EU member nations – plus the European Parliament – would have to ratify TTIP if a deal is eventually reached.
TPP, for its part, has been negotiated. But it has not been approved by the US Congress (nor by Pacific nations). The approval process has gone nowhere. In fact it will be up to either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump. Trump arguably is oblivious to TPP’s details; but considering the deal is being heavily championed by Obama, Trump may go against it.
A case can be made that both TPP and TTIP vow to distort markets, in Europe and Asia; prop up (US) monopolies; transfer jobs to slave labor markets (in the case of parts of Asia); trample on intellectual property rights (in the case of the EU); facilitate tax evasion; and ultimately transfer more wealth from the many to the 0.00001 percent.
And this leads us to how Hillary Clinton – the Wall Street/US establishment candidate – views both TPP and TTIP. Well, she supported both NAFTA and CAFTA, approved under Bill Clinton in the 1990s. As Secretary of State, she lobbied for the Panama trade deal. And, crucially, she has always treated the TPP as the “gold standardâ€. No wonder; this is the trade arm of the “pivoting to Asia†she’s been so fond of - a Pacific trade deal that excludes China, which happens to be the top trade partner of most Asian nations.
Moreover, those by now famous Goldman Sachs speeches are increasingly being seen as payments for services rendered (and promised) by Hillary Clinton to the 0,0001 percent, who are, of course, in favor of global corporate America expansion.
Yet it ain’t over till the November ballot sings. Hillary now faces serious scrutiny by working class voters in the US. So no wonder, in another flip-flopping masterpiece, she’s now leaning towards describing herself as opposing both TPP and TTIP.
Still, TPP at least may be approved during the post-election ‘lame-duck’ session of the US Congress. As for TTIP, it’s now mired in Walking Dead zone. Talk about what it takes for the Obama administration to imprint its trade “legacy†in the history books; to keep blackmailing Europeans and Asians alike as if it was just a lowly Mob extortion racket.
all that talk about your politicians -- is all to NAUGHT -- so long as you brits STAY IN EU - which is under the thumb of unelected ''vetted" choices by their TRUE MASTER
WASHINGTON DC , WALL STREET - THE USA empire and its shadow government...
your own ''debates" are nothing but distractions -- from the REAL threat to you IF YOU STAY IN EU -- and therefore COMPLETE the control of the USA over all europe...
through NATO as the extension of american ''muscle enforcer" to ensure COMPLIANCE by europe's armies UNDER AMERICAN dictates...
and through TTIP -- to ensure ''legal" compulsion upon the citizens of europe to obey AMERICAN CORPORATE WRITTEN ''rules"
tht are designed to ENSLAVE all of you .
MARK MY WORD. for that is what it is.
your ONLY CHOICES are therefore -- REGAIN YOUR SOVEREIGNTY FROM USA
OR BECOME WILLING COMPLIANT SLAVES to the american totalitarian system.
CHOOSE NOW.
that obama ''britain will be to the back of the queue " nonsense is uncle sam literally telling the brits -- that the USA will use economic pressure and even destruction upon the british people THEMSELVES should they vote for Brexit (as IF being ''in front of the queue" as USA clients -- under TTIP or otherwise IS actually a GOOD proposition in itself -- it is NOT) -
BUT disregarding that -- the point is - OBAMA -- under orders from HIS MASTERS of the ''deep state" of american corporatocracy and military empire -
JUST LITERALLY and openly THREATENED every single ordinary british person.
MAKE NO MISTAKE about that.
obama - usa -- THREATENED YOU -- the people of britain.
and if the british people have any self-respect left -- not to mention a real understanding of what the USA through its stil-current salesman obama has in store for you down the line --
you should be considering that PRESUMPTION by obama with EXTREME distaste. he basically told you all in your own country that you SHOULD bow to obama and the USA corporates -- OR ELSE...and ''being at the back of the queue" is NOT the last of it -- but just ONE of the tools the USA will use against britain and your own people.
REMEMBER ONE THING -- RIGHT NOW -- EUROPE AND BRITAIN -- not least the city of london -
is ALREADY OVER-RUN with THOUSANDS of AMERICAN BANKERS - officials -- basically RUNNING your own system -
that ALONE should tell you just how DEEP the claws of goldman sachs, through their fellow "khazar" ''british" rothschilds are on the FLESH of the ordinary british folk through your own politicans AND financial rulers.
if you want to SURVIVE as an independent COUNTRY -- KNOW your true enemy - THAT which you yourselves created centuries ago...the USA ...that has outgrown you - not just in power -- but more importantly in RUTHLESSNESS ....and ...TO WHOM BRITAIN, is nothing more than the same as with other countries - be they afghanistan, syria, saudi arabia, asians, africans, south americans, europeans, russians...
JUST ANOTHER PLACE TO CONQUER AND ENSLAVE under the AMERICAN ''way".
IF YOU -- BRITS don't YET accept that FACT -- you ARE lost.
BUT disregarding that -- the point is - OBAMA -- under orders from HIS MASTERS of the ''deep state" of american corporatocracy and military empire -
JUST LITERALLY and openly THREATENED every single ordinary british person.
MAKE NO MISTAKE about that.
obama - usa -- THREATENED YOU -- the people of britain.
and if the british people have any self-respect left -- not to mention a real understanding of what the USA through its stil-current salesman obama has in store for you down the line --
you should be considering that PRESUMPTION by obama with EXTREME distaste. he basically told you all in your own country that you SHOULD bow to obama and the USA corporates -- OR ELSE...and ''being at the back of the queue" is NOT the last of it -- but just ONE of the tools the USA will use against britain and your own people.
REMEMBER ONE THING -- RIGHT NOW -- EUROPE AND BRITAIN -- not least the city of london -
is ALREADY OVER-RUN with THOUSANDS of AMERICAN BANKERS - officials -- basically RUNNING your own system -
that ALONE should tell you just how DEEP the claws of goldman sachs, through their fellow "khazar" ''british" rothschilds are on the FLESH of the ordinary british folk through your own politicans AND financial rulers.
if you want to SURVIVE as an independent COUNTRY -- KNOW your true enemy - THAT which you yourselves created centuries ago...the USA ...that has outgrown you - not just in power -- but more importantly in RUTHLESSNESS ....and ...TO WHOM BRITAIN, is nothing more than the same as with other countries - be they afghanistan, syria, saudi arabia, asians, africans, south americans, europeans, russians...
JUST ANOTHER PLACE TO CONQUER AND ENSLAVE under the AMERICAN ''way".
IF YOU -- BRITS don't YET accept that FACT -- you ARE lost.
Last edited:
but note also across the atlantic..
CANADA too WAS ONCE created - as a modern nation -- under the ANGL0-BRITISH empire social order...
nevermind the bad things about that in argument - BUT where has any new CANADIAN LEADER gone to to ''give respects and take marching orders FROM" ?
is it LONDON or washington DC?
think about THAT for a moment and take a good look at the SPAWN britain herself created that is NOW READY TO SWALLOW YOU WHOLE ...and THREATENS punishment UNLESS YOU COMPLY to being swallowed without complaint.
CANADA too WAS ONCE created - as a modern nation -- under the ANGL0-BRITISH empire social order...
nevermind the bad things about that in argument - BUT where has any new CANADIAN LEADER gone to to ''give respects and take marching orders FROM" ?
is it LONDON or washington DC?
think about THAT for a moment and take a good look at the SPAWN britain herself created that is NOW READY TO SWALLOW YOU WHOLE ...and THREATENS punishment UNLESS YOU COMPLY to being swallowed without complaint.
Federberg
The GOAT
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2013
- Messages
- 15,597
- Reactions
- 5,693
- Points
- 113
Somebody sell me a Pro-EU argument to stay in...because I'm non-plussed why you would want to...
Federberg
The GOAT
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2013
- Messages
- 15,597
- Reactions
- 5,693
- Points
- 113
I think I've been clear about my reasoning. I would rather ask you what you think we gain by leaving?
Your only reasoning is that the UK is basically too small to go it alone.
First, I don't think the UK is too small to go it alone - you strike your own trade deals... one of which will be with the EU. It might not be a whole lot different than it is now and the UK may have to contribute still, just like countries like Norway, Switzerland do (far, far smaller countries by the way). There are smaller countries than the UK on the periphery of the EU that do just fine without selling out their national sovereignty. Far smaller countries around the world strike their own trade deals and do just fine. I'm living in one.
What is to be gained by leaving?
By far the biggest would be self determination. I believe in the simple concept of being able to remove your government via a democratic voting system. I'm talking about a government that makes the rules and calls the shots. If the referendum result is to stay in, you are basically voting for a federal long term super state. You aren't voting to retain the status quo... you are effectively voting for what Europe will eventually become.
Federberg
The GOAT
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2013
- Messages
- 15,597
- Reactions
- 5,693
- Points
- 113
^Sorry I missed your response.
Nope. That's not my only reason. But yes I do believe that the UK has nothing to gain by going it alone. And it's a strange thing to desire at precisely at the time when the post World War 2 settlement looks to be fraying. The UK is not a global power that can easily provide for it's own security or economic needs without alliances. The very idea of us wanting to leave the largest, wealthiest trading bloc in the world seems nuts to me, just my opinion. The 'Leave' campaign actually seems more like a Trump-ian style campaign with an appeal to voter anger about jobs and immigration. Issues that won't necessarily go away even if the UK is no longer in the EU.
Over the last couple of decades every single major issue has been determined, if not by the UK parliament then at least, by the government. The austerity programme was conducted by the British government for the UK without much agreement from other governments in Europe. The decision to invade Iraq again was a decision by Tony Blair and his lot, again with disapproving eyes from our neighbours across the channel. What great decisions have we not been able make while within the EU?
So what fundamental freedoms are we lacking exactly by staying in the EU? Nothing really. But it's the sort of polemic and falsehood that the likes of Farage like to promote. It sells well to a disgruntled populace that has suffered the consequences of the global financial crisis. Just like their cousins in the American middle belt that cheer when Trump talks about building a wall. It's polemic with very little factual substance.
What do we gain economically by retreating from our largest trading partner? What possible benefit can there be when our fellow members of the so called Anglosphere from the US to Canada to even the Kiwis are making sceptical noises about 'Leave' claims that there could be some sort of deeper association that would better serve British interests? It sounds like vapour to me, and not the nice smelling stuff. And it makes no sense when all these countries are pivoting towards Asia, the proximal giant economic bloc for them.
The EU with Britain is better and stronger. We, in the UK, are not the only ones who are uncomfortable with ever greater political union, even if there was proper democratic accountability which I agree there isn't. The task before us is to try to change that, to make the system better.
It's one thing for the likes of tiny countries like Switzerland and Norway to accept the decisions the EU makes that directly impact them. It's quite another for a larger country like Britain to have absolutely no say in what our largest economic partner does. It makes no sense, no sense at all to want to leave from a rational perspective. Only the emotional argument - which is increasingly being used by the 'Leave' campaign by the way - is comprehensible. Comprehensible but not particularly rational to me
Nope. That's not my only reason. But yes I do believe that the UK has nothing to gain by going it alone. And it's a strange thing to desire at precisely at the time when the post World War 2 settlement looks to be fraying. The UK is not a global power that can easily provide for it's own security or economic needs without alliances. The very idea of us wanting to leave the largest, wealthiest trading bloc in the world seems nuts to me, just my opinion. The 'Leave' campaign actually seems more like a Trump-ian style campaign with an appeal to voter anger about jobs and immigration. Issues that won't necessarily go away even if the UK is no longer in the EU.
Over the last couple of decades every single major issue has been determined, if not by the UK parliament then at least, by the government. The austerity programme was conducted by the British government for the UK without much agreement from other governments in Europe. The decision to invade Iraq again was a decision by Tony Blair and his lot, again with disapproving eyes from our neighbours across the channel. What great decisions have we not been able make while within the EU?
So what fundamental freedoms are we lacking exactly by staying in the EU? Nothing really. But it's the sort of polemic and falsehood that the likes of Farage like to promote. It sells well to a disgruntled populace that has suffered the consequences of the global financial crisis. Just like their cousins in the American middle belt that cheer when Trump talks about building a wall. It's polemic with very little factual substance.
What do we gain economically by retreating from our largest trading partner? What possible benefit can there be when our fellow members of the so called Anglosphere from the US to Canada to even the Kiwis are making sceptical noises about 'Leave' claims that there could be some sort of deeper association that would better serve British interests? It sounds like vapour to me, and not the nice smelling stuff. And it makes no sense when all these countries are pivoting towards Asia, the proximal giant economic bloc for them.
The EU with Britain is better and stronger. We, in the UK, are not the only ones who are uncomfortable with ever greater political union, even if there was proper democratic accountability which I agree there isn't. The task before us is to try to change that, to make the system better.
It's one thing for the likes of tiny countries like Switzerland and Norway to accept the decisions the EU makes that directly impact them. It's quite another for a larger country like Britain to have absolutely no say in what our largest economic partner does. It makes no sense, no sense at all to want to leave from a rational perspective. Only the emotional argument - which is increasingly being used by the 'Leave' campaign by the way - is comprehensible. Comprehensible but not particularly rational to me
Last edited:
You've over simplified the Leave Campaign - there are many dimensions to it and different groups have different reasons for wanting to leave. Some actually want to Stay but not on the terms being "offered".
Trade
You seem to be buying into the simplistic Clegg argument that trade with Europe will almost vanish overnight if the UK left. That's frankly nonsense when they get more out of trading with the UK than the UK does with the EU. Our imports from the EU outweigh our exports to the EU - and not insignificantly. The EU with Britain is better and stronger. .. of course it is. The deal works better for them. The UK would work out a reasonable trade deal with the EU... I think you'd agree on that.
Security
Defensively, NATO rather the EU is the major defensive coalition. In respect to global intelligence, The Brits are still largely entwined in the "Five Eyes" Anglosphere alliance with the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
There is nothing sensible to suggest that Britain couldn't be involved in an expanded pan-European intelligence agency as it would probably be associated with NATO countries anyway.
As for internal security... I'm yet to see a sensible argument on how having no real control of the countries borders somehow "improves" security.
Immigration
Not the big one for me actually, although I think it's better that a government can control immigration. A lot of services and infrastructure are under a lot of pressure parts of the country, particularly in the South East of England. Uncontrolled immigration affects planning and budgets at local levels.
On the same note, I do think there will be negative issues in the event of an exit. Point of entry will then be in the UK and rather than having these camps in Calais and the French ports, you'll end up with them in South East England.
What fundamental freedoms are lacking?
Self determination. The basic principle that if a government isn't working for the populace then you have fundamental freedom to vote them out and get rid of them. It's a principle of democracy and has worked for centuries.
I really can't figure out how you see this as such a small or irrelevant issue. It's not emotional - it's a pillar of society.
Voting to stay in is effectively a vote for the evolution of the European Super State.
You're not really voting for the European status quo (what Europe is now), you're voting for a European Solution going forward... what Europe will become. Namely, ever increasing powers, further military and political integration, lack of democracy, centralisation of power (largely dominated by German interests... banks and huge corporate entities), the withdrawal of the veto system to majority voting (because vetos will make Europe largely unworkable as this unfolds - trust me they will be gone entirely)...
The cries of disharmony will be shouted down... "This is what you voted for...." ... "No, it wasn't!"... "Yes it was, suck it up"
If you don't think Europe is going down that path then I warn you to check out the kind of Europe that the UK opted into in the 1970s (The common market) and what it's evolved into today. This is a one way street to a juggernaught of a European super state.
We need to be in it to have our say? We're in now, yes? Cameron went to Europe to with his grand "re-negotiation", stern face (you know the one I'm talking about) and came back with his tail between his legs - with absolutely nothing. A modern day Neville Chamberlain waving a blank paper in the air. Big promises... but nothing to show for it. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!! I'll ask you what kind of say did we have? Did he have? A big fat zero when faced with the European juggernaught. You think Merkel goes back to Germany empty handed when she wants to influence? Nope.
The European Parliament A toothless lame institution which is basically a gravy train. UKIP won the UK European elections... How much say do they have in the running of affairs? I know you don't like them, but that's really irrelevant... it doesn't matter which party won. What does matter is that they have virtually no impact on European affairs at all. No say or influence in how Europe is run at all.
So who does run Europe? A combination of Puppet politicians who are basically proxies, big corporate elites and banks. The European Central Bank is to all intents and purposes directed by the German Bundesbank. Many of the European policy documents were actually written by the elite coalitions. Some of these trade agreements actually look frightening - companies will be able to sue elected governments.
This is why it makes me laugh when people say we need to be in Europe to influence Europe.... the above examples render that somewhat toothless.
Worry about what you're actually voting for in the future, not what you have now.
It's not what you need to worry about now that should affect your vote Federberg, it's what your vote will morph into for the future evolution of the European superstate... and by then your future votes will mean next to nothing.
If the powers that be don't think the UK can survive without being in an expanded European superstate maybe they should step aside and let people who do take over.
The "Stay In" campaign are doing far more scare-mongering than the "Out" campaign. A lot of it is complete nonsense.
Cynically, I think if the vote is to Brexit, a referendum will come around again, with a real renegotiation taking place beforehand, rather than the feeble Cameron attempt... because rest assured, Europe will take notice of a Brexit vote and do everything in their power to keep the UK in the club. You'll get a second, better bite of the cherry.
Trade
You seem to be buying into the simplistic Clegg argument that trade with Europe will almost vanish overnight if the UK left. That's frankly nonsense when they get more out of trading with the UK than the UK does with the EU. Our imports from the EU outweigh our exports to the EU - and not insignificantly. The EU with Britain is better and stronger. .. of course it is. The deal works better for them. The UK would work out a reasonable trade deal with the EU... I think you'd agree on that.
Security
Defensively, NATO rather the EU is the major defensive coalition. In respect to global intelligence, The Brits are still largely entwined in the "Five Eyes" Anglosphere alliance with the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
There is nothing sensible to suggest that Britain couldn't be involved in an expanded pan-European intelligence agency as it would probably be associated with NATO countries anyway.
As for internal security... I'm yet to see a sensible argument on how having no real control of the countries borders somehow "improves" security.
Immigration
Not the big one for me actually, although I think it's better that a government can control immigration. A lot of services and infrastructure are under a lot of pressure parts of the country, particularly in the South East of England. Uncontrolled immigration affects planning and budgets at local levels.
On the same note, I do think there will be negative issues in the event of an exit. Point of entry will then be in the UK and rather than having these camps in Calais and the French ports, you'll end up with them in South East England.
What fundamental freedoms are lacking?
Self determination. The basic principle that if a government isn't working for the populace then you have fundamental freedom to vote them out and get rid of them. It's a principle of democracy and has worked for centuries.
I really can't figure out how you see this as such a small or irrelevant issue. It's not emotional - it's a pillar of society.
Voting to stay in is effectively a vote for the evolution of the European Super State.
You're not really voting for the European status quo (what Europe is now), you're voting for a European Solution going forward... what Europe will become. Namely, ever increasing powers, further military and political integration, lack of democracy, centralisation of power (largely dominated by German interests... banks and huge corporate entities), the withdrawal of the veto system to majority voting (because vetos will make Europe largely unworkable as this unfolds - trust me they will be gone entirely)...
The cries of disharmony will be shouted down... "This is what you voted for...." ... "No, it wasn't!"... "Yes it was, suck it up"
If you don't think Europe is going down that path then I warn you to check out the kind of Europe that the UK opted into in the 1970s (The common market) and what it's evolved into today. This is a one way street to a juggernaught of a European super state.
We need to be in it to have our say? We're in now, yes? Cameron went to Europe to with his grand "re-negotiation", stern face (you know the one I'm talking about) and came back with his tail between his legs - with absolutely nothing. A modern day Neville Chamberlain waving a blank paper in the air. Big promises... but nothing to show for it. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!! I'll ask you what kind of say did we have? Did he have? A big fat zero when faced with the European juggernaught. You think Merkel goes back to Germany empty handed when she wants to influence? Nope.
The European Parliament A toothless lame institution which is basically a gravy train. UKIP won the UK European elections... How much say do they have in the running of affairs? I know you don't like them, but that's really irrelevant... it doesn't matter which party won. What does matter is that they have virtually no impact on European affairs at all. No say or influence in how Europe is run at all.
So who does run Europe? A combination of Puppet politicians who are basically proxies, big corporate elites and banks. The European Central Bank is to all intents and purposes directed by the German Bundesbank. Many of the European policy documents were actually written by the elite coalitions. Some of these trade agreements actually look frightening - companies will be able to sue elected governments.
This is why it makes me laugh when people say we need to be in Europe to influence Europe.... the above examples render that somewhat toothless.
Worry about what you're actually voting for in the future, not what you have now.
It's not what you need to worry about now that should affect your vote Federberg, it's what your vote will morph into for the future evolution of the European superstate... and by then your future votes will mean next to nothing.
If the powers that be don't think the UK can survive without being in an expanded European superstate maybe they should step aside and let people who do take over.
The "Stay In" campaign are doing far more scare-mongering than the "Out" campaign. A lot of it is complete nonsense.
Cynically, I think if the vote is to Brexit, a referendum will come around again, with a real renegotiation taking place beforehand, rather than the feeble Cameron attempt... because rest assured, Europe will take notice of a Brexit vote and do everything in their power to keep the UK in the club. You'll get a second, better bite of the cherry.
Federberg
The GOAT
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2013
- Messages
- 15,597
- Reactions
- 5,693
- Points
- 113
Lol! Are you trying to teddytennisfan me??
I'll respond in pieces...
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Trade
You seem to be buying into the simplistic Clegg argument that trade with Europe will almost vanish overnight if the UK left. That's frankly nonsense when they get more out of trading with the UK than the UK does with the EU. Our imports from the EU outweigh our exports to the EU - and not insignificantly. The EU with Britain is better and stronger. .. of course it is. The deal works better for them. The UK would work out a reasonable trade deal with the EU... I think you'd agree on that.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I don't recall saying that trade would vanish. My point is simply that the terms of the arrangement would change, and inevitably not in the UK's favour. When the UK has to sit down and negotiate with the EU if you believe for one second that the UK would have strong negotiating power then I can tell you right now that is not realistic. Even if they obtain a similar type of relationship with the EU that Switzerland and Norway currently have, they will have no say at all in any policy changes that affect trading arrangements, they would only be able to accept them after the fact and probably costly changes as well. As for your comment about the EU benefitting more from trade with the UK than the other way around? I'm sorry but you're assuming a trade deficit confers some sort of buying power advantage? It doesn't work that way. The UK is very weak at what I'll simplistically describe as generic manufacturing, an area in which Germany is the world leader (along with Japan but that's not relevant here). On the other hand the UK is super competitive (world class really) in financial services and other services related industries like advertising. The UK has had a huge deficit versus Germany for decades, and leaving the EU isn't going to change that. Don't count of substitution effects mitigating Germany's comparative advantage. Trying to compete with the Mittelstand is pure fantasy. If anything given the way in which the UK economy is evolving things will probably get worse. Worse still leaving the EU will mean that it's going to be very difficult for the UK to keep a lot of the financial services business that concentrates in the UK. Frankfurt must be salivating at the chance of winning even more of the eurobond market. Glad I'm not working for a investment bank anymore. The thought of having to move over to Frankfurt or Zurich is awful! Anyway, in summary, nothing will change in terms of the areas where the UK's comparative advantage is weak, what concerns me is the financial services where the UK is strong. Germany and France have been jealously eying the City of London for years.
I'll tackle the other areas later..
I'll respond in pieces...
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Trade
You seem to be buying into the simplistic Clegg argument that trade with Europe will almost vanish overnight if the UK left. That's frankly nonsense when they get more out of trading with the UK than the UK does with the EU. Our imports from the EU outweigh our exports to the EU - and not insignificantly. The EU with Britain is better and stronger. .. of course it is. The deal works better for them. The UK would work out a reasonable trade deal with the EU... I think you'd agree on that.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I don't recall saying that trade would vanish. My point is simply that the terms of the arrangement would change, and inevitably not in the UK's favour. When the UK has to sit down and negotiate with the EU if you believe for one second that the UK would have strong negotiating power then I can tell you right now that is not realistic. Even if they obtain a similar type of relationship with the EU that Switzerland and Norway currently have, they will have no say at all in any policy changes that affect trading arrangements, they would only be able to accept them after the fact and probably costly changes as well. As for your comment about the EU benefitting more from trade with the UK than the other way around? I'm sorry but you're assuming a trade deficit confers some sort of buying power advantage? It doesn't work that way. The UK is very weak at what I'll simplistically describe as generic manufacturing, an area in which Germany is the world leader (along with Japan but that's not relevant here). On the other hand the UK is super competitive (world class really) in financial services and other services related industries like advertising. The UK has had a huge deficit versus Germany for decades, and leaving the EU isn't going to change that. Don't count of substitution effects mitigating Germany's comparative advantage. Trying to compete with the Mittelstand is pure fantasy. If anything given the way in which the UK economy is evolving things will probably get worse. Worse still leaving the EU will mean that it's going to be very difficult for the UK to keep a lot of the financial services business that concentrates in the UK. Frankfurt must be salivating at the chance of winning even more of the eurobond market. Glad I'm not working for a investment bank anymore. The thought of having to move over to Frankfurt or Zurich is awful! Anyway, in summary, nothing will change in terms of the areas where the UK's comparative advantage is weak, what concerns me is the financial services where the UK is strong. Germany and France have been jealously eying the City of London for years.
I'll tackle the other areas later..
^ I didn't say it gave a buyers advantage... I said it would result in a reasonable trade deal.
Britain's imports from Germany are valued at $100 billion, the exports at $46 billion... and Germany are the power brokers in the EU.
Our biggest export market (on a country by country basis is the United States... not a member of the EU)... 3 of our 4 biggest import markets on a country by country basis (United States, China and Switzerland) are not in the EU either. I'm not buying the economic armaggeddon argument for a minute. Their would be some short term pain no doubt, but we'll still be trading with EU with or without Brexit. It will also allow Britain to open up other markets which they are not allowed to explore unilaterally now... and without having to take into account 28 other countries own interests.
It's a small price to pay in not giving up sovereignty to an undemocratic, largely unaccountable super state.. which is what this will eventually become.
Britain's imports from Germany are valued at $100 billion, the exports at $46 billion... and Germany are the power brokers in the EU.
Our biggest export market (on a country by country basis is the United States... not a member of the EU)... 3 of our 4 biggest import markets on a country by country basis (United States, China and Switzerland) are not in the EU either. I'm not buying the economic armaggeddon argument for a minute. Their would be some short term pain no doubt, but we'll still be trading with EU with or without Brexit. It will also allow Britain to open up other markets which they are not allowed to explore unilaterally now... and without having to take into account 28 other countries own interests.
It's a small price to pay in not giving up sovereignty to an undemocratic, largely unaccountable super state.. which is what this will eventually become.
Federberg
The GOAT
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2013
- Messages
- 15,597
- Reactions
- 5,693
- Points
- 113
If reasonable means losing a huge amount of negotiating power then great.
The irony here is that Germany of all the countries in the EU apart from possibly Poland is probably most keen to see the UK stay in. As a counter-weight to the French. Again... I have never mentioned economic armageddon. My point is that Brexit will lead to a loss in the UK's growth potential over the next couple of decades, most independent economic institutions agree on this. There would certainly be short term pain. Sterling would take a pounding. Of course we'll still be trading with the EU, my point is that we would be in a worse situation to that which would occur if we stayed in. As for helping the UK with unilateral trade deals? Simply not the case. I'll agree that the UK would easier to negotiate with than the EU, but frankly every single non-EU market would tolerate the hassle to get to the big prize. But it's not a competition. What's far more likely is that the UK would end up riding on the coat-tails of the negotiations the EU has with other economic regions. Not sure how many unilateral deals Switzerland and Norway have! That's the point, suddenly the UK is on the outside.
Look you've got more of a leg to stand on when it comes non economic arguments. Economic stuff is a lock for staying in the EU
The irony here is that Germany of all the countries in the EU apart from possibly Poland is probably most keen to see the UK stay in. As a counter-weight to the French. Again... I have never mentioned economic armageddon. My point is that Brexit will lead to a loss in the UK's growth potential over the next couple of decades, most independent economic institutions agree on this. There would certainly be short term pain. Sterling would take a pounding. Of course we'll still be trading with the EU, my point is that we would be in a worse situation to that which would occur if we stayed in. As for helping the UK with unilateral trade deals? Simply not the case. I'll agree that the UK would easier to negotiate with than the EU, but frankly every single non-EU market would tolerate the hassle to get to the big prize. But it's not a competition. What's far more likely is that the UK would end up riding on the coat-tails of the negotiations the EU has with other economic regions. Not sure how many unilateral deals Switzerland and Norway have! That's the point, suddenly the UK is on the outside.
Look you've got more of a leg to stand on when it comes non economic arguments. Economic stuff is a lock for staying in the EU