I wonder how many times how the EU actually works needs to be explained to you in this thread before you understand? Juncker is not a dictator, the EU doesn't work like that. To get change in the EU we need to do the same thing we've always needed to do and Cameron is bad at - build alliances with other Governments in Europe and persuade them to support the same things we want.
Poll: The EU Referendum: How Will You Vote? (June Poll)
- Thread starter Rilot
- Start date
- Status
I wonder how many times how the EU actually works needs to be explained to you in this thread before you understand? Juncker is not a dictator, the EU doesn't work like that. To get change in the EU we need to do the same thing we've always needed to do and Cameron is bad at - build alliances with other Governments in Europe and persuade them to support the same things we want.
No idea but I bet it will happen at some point. Not immediately but a year or two down the line when there is new regulation introduced.
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Oct 2014
- Posts
- 1,774
Does the referendum work like the general election or does every vote count to a total?
Pretty sure it's a total.
Unfortunately those books sell well and tend to convince people.
Unfortunately those books sell well and tend to convince people.
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 3,636
- Location
- Dublin, Ireland
Yes, but how long does a typical trade deal take between 2 parties? Also, the UK has no representatives that have done this before.
Nate
I wonder how many times I need to tell you how the world works. Juncker may not be a dictator (as much as he might wish he was) but he is the President of the European Commission; the EU's executive arm. To pretend that what he says doesn't matter is frankly incredible.
Was Tony Blair bad a building alliances with other governments in Europe? What about Gordon Brown or John Major? The only British PM we've had whose been able to get something out of the EU for us has been Mrs Thatcher (for all her faults). She didn't do that by playing nice, she did it by standing her ground and refusing to be rolled over by bien-pensant bullies.
Well you'd better ring up Sky and the BBC and tell them they're wrong because they are saying the exact opposite.
every vote counts towards a grand total, no First past the post BS here.
It's very difficult to give you numbers. I'll be honest.
What I say is with a leave vote, Cameron gets the elbow. Get someone who has better drive for the uk. Because of this very complex situation, if we work hard we could come to a agreement to continue trading on a basic agreement until a permanent one could be put in place.
And I'm positive the buyers and sellers will be on alert.
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 3,636
- Location
- Dublin, Ireland
I don't think renegotiation of UK membership was ever on the cards. In or out is all that's on offer.
Nate
Last edited:
Really?
Maybe you'd like to explain how 27 out of the 28 members decided that the monthly trek to Strasbourg from Brussels costing around £100 million per year needs to be looked at, but can be shelved by just one country (France, who unsurprisingly gain financially from this preposterous waste of time & money).
We have no leverage in the EU, and quite frankly, if it means more countries threatening to leave to spur some kind of reform, then I will gladly vote to leave.
So turns out the people asking the questions from the audience at the debate last night weren't quite as they made out...
The 'working class' lad who couldn't find a job actually has a law degree and works as a paralegal
The 'small business owner' whose life is being made difficult by EU rules has a property management/letting agent business
The 'black British woman' was Miranda Grell, a former Labor Party Councillor.
Hands up, anyone shocked?
I thought the small business owner was a bit strange, i would have loved to know which EU rules are causing here a problem in particular??
I've just realised, Thatcher, Blair and Cameron have all had immense pressure to negotiate with the EU, and they have all walked away with barely anything. Cameron even had the threat of a referendum. On top of that we're consistently out-voted when our MEPs try to block something. We don't seem to have any effect in steering this massive ship.
The US-Australia trade deal took under a year and that was considered a fast one.
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Aug 2006
- Posts
- 5,207
I'm normally not very vocal. I have posted some views before, and it's been an interesting debate, however i've decided I'm not going to vote. It's been fun reading the arguments for and against for this EU referendum, but there is so much misinformation coming from both sides that I really don't feel that I can make an informed decision, even after doing my own research.
Originally I was going to vote leave, but all the promises such as 350 million a week going to public services such as the NHS is a load of tosh really, especially when equally they have made promises to put that money to other areas - all of which far exceed the 350 million or whatever figure it really is that we will gain back to spend. It does not add up. But even on the remain side, the toxicity from Cameron and Osborne with scaremongering is shameful.
Basically, I feel neither side is being factually honest, and if I vote to leave I want to know what the repercussions will be and what plan there will be in place to deal with those, especially with things like further cuts to public services. I don't accept that it is too difficult to make a strategy for this because we don't yet know what the fallout may be. We have known for about 6 years that there has been an increasing rise in interest to vote out, not to mention the manifesto pledge to hold an EU referendum. Why hold an EU referendum and then not prepare for the outcome of leaving the EU? So far neither side has provided honest answers about what the plan will be for leaving. The whole thing is ill-prepared, and an utter shambles from both sides.
This is just my opinion of course.
Originally I was going to vote leave, but all the promises such as 350 million a week going to public services such as the NHS is a load of tosh really, especially when equally they have made promises to put that money to other areas - all of which far exceed the 350 million or whatever figure it really is that we will gain back to spend. It does not add up. But even on the remain side, the toxicity from Cameron and Osborne with scaremongering is shameful.
Basically, I feel neither side is being factually honest, and if I vote to leave I want to know what the repercussions will be and what plan there will be in place to deal with those, especially with things like further cuts to public services. I don't accept that it is too difficult to make a strategy for this because we don't yet know what the fallout may be. We have known for about 6 years that there has been an increasing rise in interest to vote out, not to mention the manifesto pledge to hold an EU referendum. Why hold an EU referendum and then not prepare for the outcome of leaving the EU? So far neither side has provided honest answers about what the plan will be for leaving. The whole thing is ill-prepared, and an utter shambles from both sides.
This is just my opinion of course.
Surely it should be faster as we've currently got a deal by proxy; it's not like we're starting from nowhere.
[TW]Fox;29666673 said:
A) You obviously missed this post today: https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?p=29664960#post29664960
I've still not had an adequate explanation as to why UK taxpayers are funding a full-time team in the British Consulate in Ankara to work on Turkey's application to join the EU. Cameron's promises that Turkey won't be joining are looking a little bit hollow.
B) True, but it is not illegal to deduct certain costs of employment such as accommodation from workers' wages, which can make the effective rate less than the minimum wage. This already happens on various EU migrant job schemes within the UK.
- Status