|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Oct 18, 2022 16:09:14 GMT
Explain how you think the much heralded Single Market will be Britain's saviour? I dont remember claiming it would be our saviour but it might help trading with the EU a bit easier, take the pressure off the problems with NI and allow workers from the EU to work in places that are short of staff. Well that sounds fair enough EXCEPT I recall John Majors blathering about Maastricht and the fact that the overarching principle of the treaty was the concept of ‘subsidiarity’ which I later looked up and found to be a construct invented by the Catholic Church of all things, but the idea is that nothing is done at upper levels which cannot be done at lower ones. Or at least that’s how we were sold it The problem was no sooner had we been denied a vote on adopting Maastricht by an acclamation in Westminster by the political elite, the federalists of Brussels and Strasbourg were setting about ways to use the single market as a weapon to bring in federal hegemony by the back door. Cars were not allowed to be sold in Britain or the Canary Islands unless they had driving lights on 100% of the time. And note carefully what I am saying. In order for a car to be street legal in the Canary Islands, it had to be fitted with measures demanded by Brussels to make it safe in Sweden. There was NO measure within the “single market” for the United Kingdom to licence cars for use in the UK only without this EU demand. For this reason Cameron spoke the truth when he said that to leave the EU and NOT leave the single market made no sense. Of course he was saying that as a weapon to try and persuade us to remain. He little expected people like me to hear his words and say “oh I’m so glad he agrees with me that we need to leave both” |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2022 16:45:51 GMT
FWIW, I think Brexit could have been a good or a bad thing had it been handled properly. The problem of course is that people like the Welsh fuckwit in the bay decided to deliberately do fuck all despite his region voting to leave. When confronted with the fact post brexit the queues at Holyhead to take goods to the Irish rebublic were insane, the slimy bastard smirked and said “well, if a lot of stupid people had not voted to leave the EU we would not be in this position” When the reality is “if we’d taken treacherous bastards like you out and hung and drawn them for their treachery against the will of the people and shut down your stinking corrupt hell hole and put the energy you’ve put into fucking brexit over with effort to make it work we wouldn’t have anything like the shit we now have
As long as you include Nigel Farage and the entire Brexit Party in that when they betrayed the British people in their pact with the Tories, no problem. You can include countless Tory politicians in that too just for extra effect.
That would of course mean executing well over half the country, but needs must. We need to get the population down somehow.
|
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Oct 18, 2022 21:07:37 GMT
I dont remember claiming it would be our saviour but it might help trading with the EU a bit easier, take the pressure off the problems with NI and allow workers from the EU to work in places that are short of staff. Well that sounds fair enough EXCEPT I recall John Majors blathering about Maastricht and the fact that the overarching principle of the treaty was the concept of ‘subsidiarity’ which I later looked up and found to be a construct invented by the Catholic Church of all things, but the idea is that nothing is done at upper levels which cannot be done at lower ones. Or at least that’s how we were sold it The problem was no sooner had we been denied a vote on adopting Maastricht by an acclamation in Westminster by the political elite, the federalists of Brussels and Strasbourg were setting about ways to use the single market as a weapon to bring in federal hegemony by the back door. Cars were not allowed to be sold in Britain or the Canary Islands unless they had driving lights on 100% of the time. And note carefully what I am saying. In order for a car to be street legal in the Canary Islands, it had to be fitted with measures demanded by Brussels to make it safe in Sweden. There was NO measure within the “single market” for the United Kingdom to licence cars for use in the UK only without this EU demand. For this reason Cameron spoke the truth when he said that to leave the EU and NOT leave the single market made no sense. Of course he was saying that as a weapon to try and persuade us to remain. He little expected people like me to hear his words and say “oh I’m so glad he agrees with me that we need to leave both” Seems you forgot the 1992 General Election which was after Maastricht was initialled and before the UK ratified it. The public could have voted for parties opposed to Maastricht but in the biggest electoral turnout in UK history they overwhelmingly didn't. Your party (arguably the one most opposed to it) got 7,631 votes in the whole country. That's Democracy for you. The public had their vote. As for subsidiarity it's written through the Maastricht treaty like letters through rock. See article 5 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A12012M%2FTXT and it was a very important step in limiting EU power giving us (and indeed each nation) a veto over any increment in EU powers. Not that Farage and his charlatans every told the truth about it. |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Oct 18, 2022 21:17:38 GMT
Well that sounds fair enough EXCEPT I recall John Majors blathering about Maastricht and the fact that the overarching principle of the treaty was the concept of ‘subsidiarity’ which I later looked up and found to be a construct invented by the Catholic Church of all things, but the idea is that nothing is done at upper levels which cannot be done at lower ones. Or at least that’s how we were sold it The problem was no sooner had we been denied a vote on adopting Maastricht by an acclamation in Westminster by the political elite, the federalists of Brussels and Strasbourg were setting about ways to use the single market as a weapon to bring in federal hegemony by the back door. Cars were not allowed to be sold in Britain or the Canary Islands unless they had driving lights on 100% of the time. And note carefully what I am saying. In order for a car to be street legal in the Canary Islands, it had to be fitted with measures demanded by Brussels to make it safe in Sweden. There was NO measure within the “single market” for the United Kingdom to licence cars for use in the UK only without this EU demand. For this reason Cameron spoke the truth when he said that to leave the EU and NOT leave the single market made no sense. Of course he was saying that as a weapon to try and persuade us to remain. He little expected people like me to hear his words and say “oh I’m so glad he agrees with me that we need to leave both” Seems you forgot the 1992 General Election which was after Maastricht was initialled and before the UK ratified it. The public could have voted for parties opposed to Maastricht but in the biggest electoral turnout in UK history they overwhelmingly didn't. Your party (arguably the one most opposed to it) got 7,631 votes in the whole country. That's Democracy for you. The public had their vote. As for subsidiarity it's written through the Maastricht treaty like letters through rock. See article 5 eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A12012M%2FTXT and it was a very important step in limiting EU power giving us (and indeed each nation) a veto over any increment in EU powers. Not that Farage and his charlatans every told the truth about it. The only problem with your post is that, as I said, within a very short time indeed the EuroFederalists were openly stating how they should use the single market as a weapon to impose EU directives. Are you going to tell me the multitude of items across food and non food sectors alike banned from being sold in the UK by the EU were not banned because of an EU directive but because we the British people decided to allow our MPs in Westminster to ban them ? Bullshit. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Oct 18, 2022 21:36:47 GMT
I suggest you read that article 5. Subsidiarity was all about areas of competence creep not about fine details within the agreed areas of competence.
|
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Oct 18, 2022 23:23:57 GMT
Explain how you think the much heralded Single Market will be Britain's saviour? I dont remember claiming it would be our saviour but it might help trading with the EU a bit easier, take the pressure off the problems with NI and allow workers from the EU to work in places that are short of staff. Well, on the face of it that sounds all well and good. The UK's trade position with the EU has improved since 2016 contrary to all predicted claims in the lead up to Brexit: www.niesr.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/BOX-A-Improved-trade-with-EU-since-Brexit.pdfNet migration has only slightly decreased since the removal of FoM: Based on our current best assessment of available sources, net migration was estimated to be in the region of 239,000 in the year ending June 2021; there is a degree of uncertainty around today’s figures, but this represents a small decrease from the year ending June 2020* (260,000). * FoM ended. www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/internationalmigration/bulletins/longterminternationalmigrationprovisional/june2021EU born individuals in employment were down 20,000 from Q4 2019 to Q1 2022; while employment from no EU-nationals was up 440,000 in the same period. As for the issue in N.Ireland, that is a political issue that won't prevent the cost of living crisis. Brexit was always going to be used as a tool for leverage, whether it be for supply-chain disruptions due to a global pandemic or the war in Ukraine; to the printing of money and the spending sprees that had become norm for two years during lockdown. As the world comes out the other side (or in the Ukraine's case still ongoing), everyone knew debt would have to be paid back, and with prices are going up remainers tell us how either rejoining the SM or the EU would alleviate the UK's current position, but the evidence doesn't support that. Our problem is homegrown, with our current power of shower exacerbating issues hamstrung by groupthink of the global economic orthodox variety. |
|
|
|
Post by colbops on Oct 18, 2022 23:36:10 GMT
Our problem is homegrown, with our current power of shower exacerbating issues hamstrung by groupthink of the global economic orthodox variety. Huh? |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Oct 19, 2022 5:20:09 GMT
The problem of course is that people like the Welsh fuckwit in the bay decided to deliberately do fuck all despite his region voting to leave. When confronted with the fact post brexit the queues at Holyhead to take goods to the Irish rebublic were insane, the slimy bastard smirked and said “well, if a lot of stupid people had not voted to leave the EU we would not be in this position” When the reality is “if we’d taken treacherous bastards like you out and hung and drawn them for their treachery against the will of the people and shut down your stinking corrupt hell hole and put the energy you’ve put into fucking brexit over with effort to make it work we wouldn’t have anything like the shit we now have
As long as you include Nigel Farage and the entire Brexit Party in that when they betrayed the British people in their pact with the Tories, no problem. You can include countless Tory politicians in that too just for extra effect.
That would of course mean executing well over half the country, but needs must. We need to get the population down somehow.
As far as I'm aware there was no pact as such, it was something the top people in the Brexit Party decided to do. I think that decision may have been regretted since the Tories didn't exactly get Brexit done properly. |
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Oct 19, 2022 8:37:28 GMT
Our problem is homegrown, with our current power of shower exacerbating issues hamstrung by groupthink of the global economic orthodox variety. Huh? Big government and high taxes. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Oct 19, 2022 12:51:01 GMT
Oh do you mean like the remainers vast overspend. We all had camerons BS drop thorough our letter boxes that cost us all in the tune of £9 million as tax payers which was a plus for remain but not afforded to the leave side. And how about the coloured thing hampering our democrocy even tho she was not from the UK? Wow, that's incredibly racist, "the coloured thing". Whats racist about that FFS? |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Oct 19, 2022 12:54:28 GMT
Yes there was they had the 9 million for starters which the leave side never had,and were also fined for not keeping proper receipts. We will never know much more they had as they kept it covered up. Its funny how the remain side always want to talk about the leavers impropriety's but never their own.  Vote Leave had that same notional £9M free distribution (that likely never was) and I note your abysmal failure to back your remain overspend allegation. Because it was complete BS of course. Only a complete fuckwit thinks an underspend is an overspend. No they didn't as you well know. Your side couldn't even keep decent receipts and were fined. So we will never know how much they had above and beyond. And talking of fuckwits were you looking in the mirror? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2022 15:41:43 GMT
Wow, that's incredibly racist, "the coloured thing". Whats racist about that FFS? Nothing racist, just like it's gentlemanly and nice to say "all remainers should be shot on sight", same principle. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2022 15:42:30 GMT
Vote Leave had that same notional £9M free distribution (that likely never was) and I note your abysmal failure to back your remain overspend allegation. Because it was complete BS of course. Only a complete fuckwit thinks an underspend is an overspend. No they didn't as you well know. Your side couldn't even keep decent receipts and were fined. So we will never know how much they had above and beyond. And talking of fuckwits were you looking in the mirror? He kinda has a point here, Steve.
Remain did indeed break the rules and got fined for it.
It's also true that Obama intervened to try and swing it for remain and David Cameron and George Osborne abused their positions to push the remain position.
|
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Oct 19, 2022 20:23:14 GMT
Vote Leave had that same notional £9M free distribution (that likely never was) and I note your abysmal failure to back your remain overspend allegation. Because it was complete BS of course. Only a complete fuckwit thinks an underspend is an overspend. No they didn't as you well know. Your side couldn't even keep decent receipts and were fined. So we will never know how much they had above and beyond. And talking of fuckwits were you looking in the mirror? No it means you don't know because with your head in that bucket of sand you never know anything. The EC checked their spend, they underspent but something like 3 receipts were missing which means they couldn't show where the money went - a technical offence which is why they got the minimal fine. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Oct 19, 2022 21:33:16 GMT
No they didn't as you well know. Your side couldn't even keep decent receipts and were fined. So we will never know how much they had above and beyond. And talking of fuckwits were you looking in the mirror? No it means you don't know because with your head in that bucket of sand you never know anything. The EC checked their spend, they underspent but something like 3 receipts were missing which means they couldn't show where the money went - a technical offence which is why they got the minimal fine. But I do know. And we all know you are talking crap as per. I bet you miss your BS red triangle on this site....LOL LOL LOL |
|
