UK Amazon Kindle Forum discussion
General Chat - anything Goes
>
The 'Take it Outside' thread This thread will no longer be moderated ***
Michael Cargill wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "Brexit is the opposite of isolation. The EU is a closed shop, a protection racket. Post-Brexit, we will have to go further abroad and trade with the rest of the world. It's fortress..
Why bother trading with your millions of neighbours when you can trade with one or two shitsplats on the other side of the globe?"
As for shitsplats, we ain't seen nothing yet. You wait to see who welcomes us with open arms once May pulls us out of the ECHR. Brothers in arms with those pillars of democracy and open society Belarus and Khazakstan.
Marc wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "Nobody voted for a coalition in 2010 or Nick bloody Clegg to be deputy PM, but our flexible system made this happen. I know it, you know it, and I suspect, most of the British publi..."
British laws will be made by people elected by the British public, and not some jobsworth in Brussels.
That's what Brexit returns to us.
2 Years ago, the Scottish Parliament wanted minimum pricing on per unit of alcohol to discourage drinking. I thought it was the nanny state at its worst, and yet, the Scottish people agreed with the SNP's proposal....
So, here we have a Scottish government, elected by the Scottish people and then, the EU steps in and says:
NO NO NO
Minimum pricing is against EU law....
Brussels is effectively telling another country the price that can be set on booze....
Right.....
And yet, people have the nerve to ask what Britain is getting back! :)
Michael Cargill wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "Brexit is the opposite of isolation. The EU is a closed shop, a protection racket. Post-Brexit, we will have to go further abroad and trade with the rest of the world. It's fortress..."
One or two shitsplats?
By that, I hope you don't mean China and India, who between them, account for almost a third of the world's population.
I shall retire to my quarters and return at dawn....
Roger wrote: "Sovereignty of the People is a truly great phrase. RMF, I understand your position, but is Brexit truly in the best interest of the UK? To my US ears, it sounds like an isolationist position. Don..."
Roger, probably not reported in the US is that for many years we have been running a Balance of Payments deficit with the EU that is estimated (by the UK Treasury) to exceed £ 100 Million this year. This is of course economically unsupportable. The Treasury and various Chancellors of the Exchequer have been hiding this by selling off anything that isn't nailed down ( and quite a bit that is!) to overseas investors, often the Chinese.
Some offset has taken place by trade with other countries, but membership of the EU is restrictive in this regard. So called 'invisibles', that is mainly Financial Services and Banking generate an annual surplus roughly equivalent to 2 months of our losses trading with the EU.
If there is no change to this, there will be no functioning UK within 10 years anyway, in or out of the EU. Out gives us a better chance to change this and survive.
British jobsworths elected by the British public were involved in writing EU laws."Brussels" does not exist on its own, it is made up of 27 democratically elected states.
Marc wrote: "you're on glue my friend. Name me one actual real change this will bring about to our Parliamentary democracy. A democracy let us not forget which is currently headed by a non-elected PM, who has t..."We have never had an elected PM
The Head of State always chooses their PM, picking somebody who can command a majority in the house of commons
Marc wrote: "Nor did we vote for a coalition of Lib & Tory last time round but hey that's what happened. So these 'odd times' I mention are becoming more frequent and less odd. ..."fortunately our first past the post system tends to work against coalition politics
R.M.F wrote: "Michael Cargill wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "Brexit is the opposite of isolation. The EU is a closed shop, a protection racket. Post-Brexit, we will have to go further abroad and trade with the rest of th..."I repurposed Michael's use of shitsplats from an economic sphere to a human rights one. Take it up with him with reference to BRICS countries (remember when BRICS was a thing?)
Jim wrote: "Marc wrote: "Nor did we vote for a coalition of Lib & Tory last time round but hey that's what happened. So these 'odd times' I mention are becoming more frequent and less odd. ..."fortunately ou..."
but we still had Brown & May as unelected PMs
Jim wrote: "Marc wrote: "you're on glue my friend. Name me one actual real change this will bring about to our Parliamentary democracy. A democracy let us not forget which is currently headed by a non-elected ..."And at least our PM has actually been voted into Parliament by a constituency, and then selected from the pool of MP s The EU will remain undemocratic until the main posts on the Commission are filled only by elected MEPs. Like that's going to happen. Ever.
R.M.F wrote: "Marc wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "Nobody voted for a coalition in 2010 or Nick bloody Clegg to be deputy PM, but our flexible system made this happen. I know it, you know it, and I suspect, most of the ..."
that's it, the right to stop Scots drinking themselves to death? That's the limit of your sovereignty reclamation?
I accept the EU does lay down some restrictions on the free market and also increases bureaucracy and the burden of reporting, but do you honestly think that takes economic policy and management away from our government in a wholesale way? The Bank of England still controls monetary policy, the Chancellor still sets the annual budget in response to our performance figures (GDP, inflation etc), not in response to some EU economic diktat.
Will wrote: "Jim wrote: "Marc wrote: "you're on glue my friend. Name me one actual real change this will bring about to our Parliamentary democracy. A democracy let us not forget which is currently headed by a ...And at least our PM has actually been voted into Parliament by a constituency, and then selected from the pool of MP s The EU will remain undemocratic until the main posts on the Commission are filled only by elected MEPs. Like that's going to happen. Ever. "
Are you really arguing that the unelected commissioners have more effect on UK economic, social & foreign policy than our PM. You're tilting at windmills. Recoverable sovereignty from the Commission is minimal and perhaps more importantly, will not cure the ills of many who voted Brexit in expectation of an improvement of their lot
Marc wrote: "I have always been virulently against US foreign intervention, but you are right, unfortunately right now due to your (with the UK trailing in on your coat-tails for most) past history, the geopoli..."I don't lend a lot of support to US foreign intervention, especially the invasion of Iraq, unless it is to stop aggression by other world powers. Yes, Hussein was a brutal dictator, but that was not the reason given for the invasion. We were told that he possessed WMDs that could be used against us. Then, lo and behold, there were no WMDs. Bad intelligence, or a ruse to invade for economic reasons? Either way, it was a bad choice.
I think we created voids in that region for the wrong reasons, and now other powers are filling those voids. One president screwed up badly and the next one tried to fix it, but I don't know that it was fixable. Now we're stuck still trying to clean it all up.
But we still have to engage in the world community. If we, or any other world power, withdraws within our own borders then we're just inviting the wolves to devour the rest of the world. If we do that then we'll be boxed in and will eventually fall.
Brexit doesn't have to be an isolationist policy, but it could become one. But it seems like it is more and more difficult to have an intelligent discussion about these issues. Now it is just a shouting match to see who can be louder than the other. At least, that is what I see happening here in the US.
Jim wrote: "Marc wrote: "you're on glue my friend. Name me one actual real change this will bring about to our Parliamentary democracy. A democracy let us not forget which is currently headed by a non-elected ...We have never had an elected PM
The Head of State always chooses their PM, picking somebody who can command a majority in the house of commons"
come on Jim, that's constitutionally true but in practise voters know that voting for a Party Leader at election time is to get them into Number 10. You can't have it both ways by stating in practise the constitution works against coalitions, because it also works to have us vote for a PM however indirect the mechanism is formally.
Roger wrote: "Marc wrote: "I have always been virulently against US foreign intervention, but you are right, unfortunately right now due to your (with the UK trailing in on your coat-tails for most) past history..."well when election campaigns dismiss the notion of experts in their field and the desirability of facts as has happened in your election & our referendum, all people have left to throw into 'debate' is to shout loudest
Marc wrote: "but we still had Brown & May as unelected PMs ..."we have NEVER had an elected PM
The head of state always selects the PM, the individual who can command a majority in the house of commons
No Marc, I was pointing out that a democracy should be run by democratically elected individuals, if it is to justify being called a democracy. And yes, the EU Commissioners have more control over important aspects of our economy that the British Cabinet. Public investment in strategic industries is barred by the EU. Renationalisation of the railways would be stopped. We cannot freely negotiate trade deals with other countries without EU approval of the terms.The elephant in the room you are ignoring is this: people's lives have been blighted, wrecked and their futures consigned to a dustbin of no hope. The governments make soothing noises and hope they will shut up. They are offered a choice between
a) Vote this way and things will get better in time.
b) But it's brilliant already! Don't change anything!
Which way do they vote?
Exactly the same applies in the US. I've just seen a clip where Clinton said: 'We're coming for the coal mining businesses and the miners jobs. They are going to go.'
Days later she lost the election in the regions depending on those mines for survival - and she was surprised. Yes, she also said that investment in renewable energy sources would be made, but the ordinary people understand that the high tech jobs created would not be for them. The way they voted isn't extremism or racism or misogyny, and to say it is is just stupid.
Marc wrote: "come on Jim, that's constitutionally true but in practise voters know that voting for a Party Leader at election time is to get them into Number 10. You can't have it both ways by stating in practise the constitution works against coalitions, because it also works to have us vote for a PM however indirect the mechanism is formally. "No they don't
After all it's entirely possible to have an administration without a majority which I believe is what happened in Scotland
Similarly if we do get a coalition then the PM might be someone from a minority party.
We co not elect our Prime Ministers, never have
They are creations of the party
Will wrote: "No Marc, I was pointing out that a democracy should be run by democratically elected individuals, if it is to justify being called a democracy. And yes, the EU Commissioners have more control over ..."Have I ever said it was racism or misogyny. I don't disagree with your analysis of an alienated and disengaged electorate taking the opportunity to make their voice heard and scream their discontent. But where I diverge from you is that their hopes of improvement cannot all be pinned on leaving the EU. As I mentioned above, politicians can rarely improve the economy on their own, because the economy is globally interlinked. They can however worsen it by making poor policy decisions. As for nationalisation, however popular among the electorate, unless the Tories go for it which is highly unlikely, the electorate won't get their wish. Cos our democracy is broken anyway. Was long before the referendum.
Anyway, I'm going to have to love you and leave you as I am off out to go see one of the few sane voices left in the cultural sector, Stewart Lee. laters potaters
The EU Commissioners are appointed by the democratically elected governments of each member state.There is nothing undemocratic about it.
Will wrote: "Exactly the same applies in the US. I've just seen a clip where Clinton said: 'We're coming for the coal mining businesses and the miners jobs. They are going to go.'"You are correct, Will. This has nothing to do with racism or extremism or stupidity. It has to do with a politician telling the truth, for once, and then getting crucified for it. It is a matter of people not accepting inevitable change and adapting to it. It is holding on to something that is dying until it is too late to change.
Michael Cargill wrote: "The EU Commissioners are appointed by the democratically elected governments of each member state.There is nothing undemocratic about it."
same as any other petty bureaucrat. It only becomes undemocratic if they try telling democratic governments what to do
Roger wrote: "Will wrote: "Exactly the same applies in the US. I've just seen a clip where Clinton said: 'We're coming for the coal mining businesses and the miners jobs. They are going to go.'"You are correct..."
I don't see it quite that way, Roger. I heard a smug politician say: I'm going to take away the industry that has held your community together for a hundred years. I'll replace it with jobs that you can't do, and which you'll never retrain to do. And I don't care what happens to you.
Now, that may be the truth - in fact it is basically what the last 3 US administrations have done - but would you not say that a politician should be crucified for holding that out as a program to the voters they are about to dustbin?
At the least it's a crass comment, and during an election campaign entirely stupid.
Michael Cargill wrote: "The EU Commissioners are appointed by the democratically elected governments of each member state.There is nothing undemocratic about it."
When those Commissioners attempt to set policy, yes Michael it is entirely undemocratic. Look at Junker: a man who made his reputation and fortune setting up tax havens for multi nationals, for heaven's sake! Would you have voted for him? I wouldn't. Bet you wouldn't either.
Democracy is when the government of a state is elected by the people for a period of time, standing to be re elected at set periods. Junker was not elected, needs not stand for election from the people, and cannot be dismissed by the people who were given no choice about him. Same with Kinnock. So no, the EU Commissioners are the very opposite of democracy - which is one of the major problems with the EU.
There are many different types of democracy and having an unelected branch of governance is a perfectly normal practice based around the concept of the separation of powers.The Commisioners are answerable to the democratically elected governments who appointed them, and the democratically elected EU parliament has the power to sack off the Commission.
That is democracy.
I think the Parliament can sack the entire commission, not individual commissioners
Either way, it doesn't detract from the overall point that it is false to say that the EU is undemocratic.
Jim wrote: "Marc wrote: "come on Jim, that's constitutionally true but in practise voters know that voting for a Party Leader at election time is to get them into Number 10. You can't have it both ways by stat..."You are correct in saying that the SNP run a minority administration. They have 63 seats (65 needed for a majority) and rely on the Green Party to get bills passed.
Sorry Michael, I fundamentally disagree with you. I do not accept that the EU is adequately democratic at all.It will become so only when the following takes place; that the Commissioners are drawn either from a pool of directly elected MEPs or alternatively become directly elected rather than appointed posts, and when the power to initiate legislation resides with the European Parliament or an executive derived from the elected MEPs. Until then, it is not
There is a huge difference between saying something is undemocratic, and saying that it is not democratic enough for your personal liking.
and the UK's democracy has many faults within it too. We have PM's with family history of setting up tax havens for godssakes so your Junker argument doesn't hold weight. We voted ours in. The revelation of Cameron's father I think came to light late in the day - a failing of our Press to hold power to scrutiny? As for Hillary, yes she was a nightmare candidate, as proven by somehow being less popular than trump. However, she called it like it is re the coal mines. Electoral suicide in that state. But I yearn for a UK politician of whatever stripe to front up about our true economic stature, our crippling level of debt, the fact that we really don't justify the 'Great' in our nation's name anymore. But no politician would ever risk that since it would be electoral suicide.
Will wrote: "At the least it's a crass comment, and during an election campaign entirely stupid." Making crass and stupid comments didn't hurt the present president elect. The difference is that his comments were mostly bullshit and had no basis in truth.
I agree, Clinton's comment about coal mining was crass and insensitive, but it was true. Even the part about the people there not being able to do the new jobs replacing the coal mining jobs. It's not that those people are too stupid to learn a new, high-tech job, the truth is that they won't do it. People fear change, even if it is for the better.
Maybe they want to hold on to their way of life. I understand that. I grew up on a cotton farm. The family farm was a way of life there back then. It is no longer. To remain in the farming business, people had to follow the trend or quit. It was inevitable. A lot of people were heartbroken. The coal miner way of life is going in the same direction. They can fight it, but the only way to stay in the industry is to adapt. To me, that's what Clinton was saying. She just said it badly.
The UK's Civil Servants aren't elected, aren't appointed by elected officials, and have much more sway over our lives than bureaucrats in Brussels. Does that mean that the U.K. isn't a democracy?The UK's balance of trade has been terrible for decades. It is sustained by large inflows of foreign capital. But it is those inflows which drive up the exchange rate to the levels that make it impossible for our industry to compete. That's the cost of living in a paradise for oligarchs.
I saw that a while back, it's pretty good.
I was listening to a radio 4 current affairs programme talking about problems with leaving the EU and they actually said farmers currently enjoying the EU's largess would be hard hit and went on to interview a Peak District sheep farmer. I'd like to know if Jim is enjoying his ' largess' please.
a couple of days ago I was talking to another farmer who I've known for a lot of years. He's a young chap, young family, trying to build up his business. His workload is amazing, (to give you an idea of how he can work he got a good Biology degree and at the same time worked as a relief milker to fund it because he'd spent his entire student loan on cattle (you'll never borrow money cheaper.)The EU largess was supposed to arrive in December. In his care, (due to Margaret Beckett and her choosing the most complicated possible system allowable under the rules, to be implemented in the shortest possible time, the system has been in perpetual collapse ever since) it arrived the following August.
The extra costs imposed on his business (and family life) because of this actually cost him more in the end that the money he was supposed to get.
Oh and as an aside, farmers seem to have voted to leave in at least the same proportion as the general population
The farmer in the Peak District agreed without a subsidy he couldn't keep going. Without the grazing sheep the hills would just revert to bracken brambles etc. He was right there. But the report made no mention of any uk subsidies which should replace the EU largess. Some of the BBC reporting on a lot of subjects is really skewed in the personal leanings of the production team. It made it seem as if farmers were really living the high life, ' largess' was said with such emphasis it was shocking. The radio got shouted at again.
The BBC is, perhaps inadvertently, 'a player' not an 'observer'The mindset is so fixed that they cannot see some things, or think they're so obviously nonsense as to not need mentioning
Farming and the EU is just a symptom of a larger problem: we've outsourced so much responsibility to Brussels in so many areas, we've forgotten how to think for ourselves. British farming was fine before the EU ever existed and it will be fine once we leave the EU. Hell, they seemed to cope well enough in WW2, from what I've read.
the problem in UK agriculture is between the wars.The difference in 1945 was that the second world war never ended, effectively we remained on a war footing well into the 1980s
Jim wrote: "the problem in UK agriculture is between the wars.The difference in 1945 was that the second world war never ended, effectively we remained on a war footing well into the 1980s"
That may be, but I have confidence that the farming sector will adapt and thrive. There's a lot of clever, talented, and hard-working people in this country, and too often the naysayers in the media are quick to run them down.
R.M.F wrote: "Jim wrote: "the problem in UK agriculture is between the wars.The difference in 1945 was that the second world war never ended, effectively we remained on a war footing well into the 1980s"
That ..."
another one of your gut feelings eh? What are you basing it on?
Those clever, talented, and hard-working people will be looking for work in other countries once we're out of the EU.
Marc wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "Jim wrote: "the problem in UK agriculture is between the wars.The difference in 1945 was that the second world war never ended, effectively we remained on a war footing well into the..."
My gut :)
On a serious note, I'm basing it on the fact that we have top universities, a vibrant creative industry, plus hundreds of years of cultural, scientific and economic progress to spur a nation us on. It's amazing how many things were discovered or invented on this island, and with that sort of legacy backing you up, you can't help but succeed.
If we can can sweep away the zombies that are the Labour and Conservative parties, then we'd have an even better chance to succeed.
This island won't go quietly into the night...I hope!
Michael Cargill wrote: "Those clever, talented, and hard-working people will be looking for work in other countries once we're out of the EU."There is a possibility of this, but predicting the future is always a fraught business.
The EU's myriad of problems may overwhelm it.
Who knows?
UK Amazon Kindle Forum
Books mentioned in this topic
The Beiderbecke Affair (other topics)The Grain Market in the Roman Empire: A Social, Political and Economic Study (other topics)
The Peasants Are Revolting (other topics)
How to Lie with Statistics (other topics)
That Old Ace in the Hole (other topics)
More...
I know it, you know it, and I suspect, most of the British public knows that t..."
many would see that as unrepresentative democracy, whether we are aware of its possibility or not. You have yet to clinch a single argument about the primacy of our sovereignty and democracy being boosted by Brexit.