Page 186 of 189 FirstFirst ... 86136176184185186187188 ... LastLast
Results 1,851 to 1,860 of 1890

Thread: The EU in distress

  1. #1851
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    1,270
    Quote Originally Posted by Hive View Post
    Again please note the bold /sarcasm behind the comment about Putin. Because there is hardly anything German politicians can do, without risking a major international incident. And you of all should be glad about that. There a nice word: Realpolitik. You do what's possible. Trump is currently learning the concept with regards to North Korea.

    Wouldn't it be the FSB by now?
    Yup. FSB. Another name, same people, same methods. Germany could cut themselves off Nord Stream, as Balkan was cut off South Stream.
    Quote Originally Posted by Hive View Post
    That opinion appears to be behind a paywall.
    And no, the AfD is not the new CDU. If anything they are between CSU and NPD. And after the last split (when they kicked out the economically oriented founder) there's been a significant lean to the NPD side. They still haven't found another serious topic outside xenophobia (nicely dressed up, but nevertheless, xenophobia).
    There is an interesting confluence of AfD and Russian-German immigrants. We will see.
    Sorry for the paywall. Wasn't on mobile. For some American liberal was Adenauer the one who legitimized ex-nacis and racist who was happy that Germany was striped off Eastern parts where unclean race of Asian origin lived.

  2. #1852
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    EU
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by Hive View Post
    Sure, defend democracy while outlawing the second largest party
    Paraphrasing Cato, besides being a cute historical reference, is clearly hyperbole. Of course, English not being my mother tongue, I may have erred in assuming our stylistic figures are equally transparent to other people.

    because it's not aligned with your PoV.
    That is so adorable considering both you and the Baroness are arguing against the results of a referendum precisely because they are not aligned with you PoV. Offence is not only the best defence, but also the best deflection.

    If you accept referenda as legitimate expression of the peoples will, then why not let the people pass judgement on the deal the Gov't has reached? It is a legitimate question within a democracy.
    That is not what the Right Honourable Baroness was about. She doesn't want to "pass judgement on the deal", she wants to overturn Brexit altogether, against the express will of the people. I would like to bring your attention to the phrases stay in the EU, stop Brexit, think again about Brexit.

    Arguing on the merits of the deal is, of course, entirely legitimate. HM Government should strive to get the best possible deal, and the Loyal Opposition should do its best to provide much needed scrutiny to the process, in order to ensure it is in the best interest of the people. Of course, let us not pretend that is what she is aiming at. She doesn't want a referendum on the deal, but a repeat of the referendum on Brexit itself. That, however, is not legitimate. If she weren't intellectually and morally bankrupt, she'd resign in shame.

    Pray tell, if she did get a second referendum, and the remainers won, who could deny the leavers from demanding yet another referendum using that very same (entirely broken) reasoning, repeat ad nauseam. Besides, referenda are for major decisions, not micromanagement. The decision to leave the EU has been made, without any reference as to the specifics of the divorce proceedings. That is why there are governments and legislatures.

    The EU parliament has the right to vote on the deal, just as the 27 EU memberstates. It kinda seems fair to give the British electorate the same right.
    No, it seems fair that the UK Parliament already has same right as the EU Parliament and the parliaments of the EU27, i.e. voting on the specifics of executing the decision already made by the British electorate. The fact that you do not like that decision is an altogether different matter, but dressing your desire to overturn it in an argument for the rights of the electorate is entirely disingenuous.

    How is it undemocratic to let the British have their say in one of the most important decision they probably face for the next few decades?
    They had their say. They said they want to leave. Full stop. The losing side wanting to force them to change their mind is contrary to all democratic conventions of the Western world and repeated demagogic abuses of the word democracy won't change that.

  3. #1853
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    2,898
    Ahenobarbus, you are a great encouragement to me. Clearly a deeply thoughtful person, well read in history.

    TBH, as a similar mainstream Conservative, I am extremely suspicious of any new Liberal schemes to make the World a better place. There's always a downside to these dreams of Utopia. Usually bankruptcy.

    I am extremely positive: https://www.farnamstreetblog.com/201...tates-of-mind/

    And extremely interested in the Whole World: http://roadsandkingdoms.com/

    We always knew that the World's ignored problems were going to bite us sometime, IIRC, Prince Philip (who is as funny and outspoken as anybody, and I like him a lot...) as President of the World Wildlife Fund said back in the 1950's that we would soon have to make a choice between preserving the astonishing Natural World or becoming ant-like city-dwellers or something. Essentially overpopulation. We all know this. A sort of Philip K Dick "Blade-runner" future.

    Isn't Beijing in China quite Blade-runner now, everybody wearing smog masks. I am sure the UK will escape the clutches of the EU. But not before a lot of corrupt political windbags have done everything to oppose our efforts to build an escape tunnel. I just don't buy the "everybody working together" idea. My idea is "You do what you do, and I'll do what I do". And time will tell.
    Best Regards from Steve in Portsmouth, UK.

  4. #1854
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,193
    In a move that will certainly not go well with some, EU commission president Juncker told Nigel Farage during his state of the union speech that Britain will regret Brexit soon.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hive View Post
    And no, the AfD is not the new CDU. If anything they are between CSU and NPD. And after the last split (when they kicked out the economically oriented founder) there's been a significant lean to the NPD side. They still haven't found another serious topic outside xenophobia
    I recently came across AfD election posters which demanded a stop to the construction of new wind turbines... that was in Mecklenburg though, I did not see those posters elsewhere.

  5. #1855
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    1,270
    Quote Originally Posted by chithanh View Post
    In a move that will certainly not go well with some, EU commission president Juncker told Nigel Farage during his state of the union speech that Britain will regret Brexit soon.
    I saw that Mr. Amazon Juncker will force states to enter Eurozone. I say: OK, we will enter it, after all Euro states will fulfill unbreakable and unchangeable Maastricht criteria, fx. 60% ratio national debt/GDP. And without estimating of income of prostitutes, please.
    If he would care that every poor worker will pay in EU taxes such high as Amazon, I think many poor people will support EU.
    I recently came across AfD election posters which demanded a stop to the construction of new wind turbines... that was in Mecklenburg though, I did not see those posters elsewhere.
    That should support every poor workers party. Not to steal money from poor to support corporations. We told "Long life to Communist party" with addendum "for their own money". Communists are know to build cloud castles for others money. Same is with green dreams.

  6. #1856
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    550
    Quote Originally Posted by Ahenobarbus View Post
    Paraphrasing Cato, besides being a cute historical reference, is clearly hyperbole. Of course, English not being my mother tongue, I may have erred in assuming our stylistic figures are equally transparent to other people.
    If that's the same Cato about destroying Carthago, then we might have a difference of opinion about what constitutes hyperbole. Cato wasn't hyperbolic about demanding the destruction, but dead serious when he stubbornly repeated his demand until it got fullfilled. At least that's what i learned in school. But you've won Steve's heart and what's not to like about that

    Quote Originally Posted by Ahenobarbus View Post
    That is so adorable considering both you and the Baroness are arguing against the results of a referendum precisely because they are not aligned with you PoV. Offence is not only the best defence, but also the best deflection.

    That is not what the Right Honourable Baroness was about. She doesn't want to "pass judgement on the deal", she wants to overturn Brexit altogether, against the express will of the people. I would like to bring your attention to the phrases stay in the EU, stop Brexit, think again about Brexit.

    Arguing on the merits of the deal is, of course, entirely legitimate. HM Government should strive to get the best possible deal, and the Loyal Opposition should do its best to provide much needed scrutiny to the process, in order to ensure it is in the best interest of the people. Of course, let us not pretend that is what she is aiming at. She doesn't want a referendum on the deal, but a repeat of the referendum on Brexit itself. That, however, is not legitimate. If she weren't intellectually and morally bankrupt, she'd resign in shame.

    Pray tell, if she did get a second referendum, and the remainers won, who could deny the leavers from demanding yet another referendum using that very same (entirely broken) reasoning, repeat ad nauseam. Besides, referenda are for major decisions, not micromanagement. The decision to leave the EU has been made, without any reference as to the specifics of the divorce proceedings. That is why there are governments and legislatures.

    No, it seems fair that the UK Parliament already has same right as the EU Parliament and the parliaments of the EU27, i.e. voting on the specifics of executing the decision already made by the British electorate. The fact that you do not like that decision is an altogether different matter, but dressing your desire to overturn it in an argument for the rights of the electorate is entirely disingenuous.

    How is it undemocratic to let the British have their say in one of the most important decision they probably face for the next few decades?

    They had their say. They said they want to leave. Full stop. The losing side wanting to force them to change their mind is contrary to all democratic conventions of the Western world and repeated demagogic abuses of the word democracy won't change that.
    Two things:
    - You may misunderstand my interest in Brexit as some form of unhinged craving to overturn. I do care about the British due to some personal connection, but not so much about the current Gov't and IMHO the Leave majority is currently cutting off the nose to spite the face.

    Secondly - holding the referendum, without at least some sense of how Brexit would be staged (not the campaign promises, but actual Gov't actions) was a mistake. To argue, well more specifics would have been micromanagement and that's what Gov'ts are for is a cheap excuse for a blank cheque. Referenda are not equal to General Election, where convention dictates that one ought to judge the Government by vote after the legislative period. Quite the opposite, they are unique in their one-dimensional topics. What theoretical concept prohibits a finalising referendum three years later on that particular topic? It actually would bring referenda back into the realm of democratic convention: vote - legislative work done on issues - vote again to approve or reverse course. Isn't this the fundamental type of democratic participation: you voted for this in a veeery general sort of way, this is how we as the Gov't want to translate your will, aye or nay.

    Oh, and while we're at it: your no-backsies-argument (because of the vicious circle of counter referenda) - how is the 2016 referendum not exactly that: the grand finale of a counter operation within the conservative party running since the original referendum to join in 1975? The time frame is longer, but the principle of not excepting the previously expressed will is the quite same. The will of the people was 'join'. So, does the will of the people require a refresh cycle a la DRAM (this is a tech forum, after all ) and if so, how long? Four or Five years? Maybe Three? It's not like snap elections are unheard of *wink

    Greetings

    P.S.: stumbled over this - what specifically is a 'Loyal Opposition' if i may ask? Your language skill are top grade, so it is save to assume that this is by intent, as such i'm curious about your definition.

    P.P.S.: Btw. i see this as a purely theoretical exercise. There won't be another referendum as far as i can see and i doubt that Brexit will change anything for the better (in the daily life of the people).

  7. #1857
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    550
    Quote Originally Posted by pmoses View Post
    I saw that Mr. Amazon Juncker will force states to enter Eurozone. I say: OK, we will enter it, after all Euro states will fulfill unbreakable and unchangeable Maastricht criteria, fx. 60% ratio national debt/GDP. And without estimating of income of prostitutes, please.
    If he would care that every poor worker will pay in EU taxes such high as Amazon, I think many poor people will support EU.

    That should support every poor workers party. Not to steal money from poor to support corporations. We told "Long life to Communist party" with addendum "for their own money". Communists are know to build cloud castles for others money. Same is with green dreams.
    I agree with your slight against his Amazon love affair. But 'Juncker will force states to enter Eurozone' is plainly wrong and would constitute click bait

    Transcript:
    ... If we want the euro to unite rather than divide our continent, then it should be more than the currency of a select group of countries. The euro is meant to be the single currency of the European Union as a whole. All but two of our Member States are required and entitled to join the euro once they fulfil all conditions.

    Member States that want to join the euro must be able to do so. This is why I am proposing to create a Euro-accession Instrument, offering technical and even financial assistance.
    Link to speech transcript

  8. #1858
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    550
    Quote Originally Posted by chithanh View Post
    I recently came across AfD election posters which demanded a stop to the construction of new wind turbines... that was in Mecklenburg though, I did not see those posters elsewhere.
    i can already image the poster: a wind turbine with a hijab

  9. #1859
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    2,898
    I'm actually quite surprised that wind-turbines are turning out to be quite the winner in the cheap energy stakes: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-engl...-wind-turbines!

    What we (sadly) have in the UK is a lot of wind and rain. I mean, I got DRENCHED last night in a Force 7 with rain on Portsmouth seafront. But this windpower is Win-Win IMO. And certainly better than expensive Nuclear waste which just sits around while nobody has a clue what to do with it!

    Talking of "windpower", EU man Jean-Claude Juncker is just a career politician taking bribes from any dubious business interest like German Volkswagen's allegedly "clean" Diesel car factories.

    The big problem with the EU is "Who are they?". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQ1sNdDI5a0.

    I'm a bit of a Jeremy Paxman myself. I dress well in jackets, I am well-read and educated. Thing is, the UK is off on it's own little adventure which may or may not turn out well. But for sure, if we'd stayed in the EU we would have been "assimilated" into some BORG Collective.

    Resistance is NOT futile!
    Best Regards from Steve in Portsmouth, UK.

  10. #1860
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    550
    Quote Originally Posted by system7 View Post
    I'm actually quite surprised that wind-turbines are turning out to be quite the winner in the cheap energy stakes: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-engl...-wind-turbines!

    What we (sadly) have in the UK is a lot of wind and rain. I mean, I got DRENCHED last night in a Force 7 with rain on Portsmouth seafront. But this windpower is Win-Win IMO. And certainly better than expensive Nuclear waste which just sits around while nobody has a clue what to do with it!

    Talking of "windpower", EU man Jean-Claude Juncker is just a career politician taking bribes from any dubious business interest like German Volkswagen's allegedly "clean" Diesel car factories.

    The big problem with the EU is "Who are they?". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQ1sNdDI5a0.

    I'm a bit of a Jeremy Paxman myself. I dress well in jackets, I am well-read and educated. Thing is, the UK is off on it's own little adventure which may or may not turn out well. But for sure, if we'd stayed in the EU we would have been "assimilated" into some BORG Collective.

    Resistance is NOT futile!
    Oh, come on! Not even with 7of9 in our midst? 'Let me assssimmmmilate you'

    And to top it all of, the price of Wind Power is coming down so quick, that the guaranteed fix-price for Hinkley Point C of 92 Pounds per MWh for the next 35 years (including automatic inflation adjustments, of course) seem even more ludicrous! The nuclear waste is just a very nice bonus.

    Link to The Guardian 11.09.2017

    ...Two windfarms – the Hornsea 2 project off the Yorkshire coast and the Moray offshore windfarm in Scotland – secured a guaranteed price for their power of 57.50 Pounds per megawatt hour (MWh) from the government. This is far below the 92.50 Pounds awarded to Hinkley last year.
    So, what is this? Very, very expensive energy security or rather incompetence, bordering on stupidity? I'd never say someone got bribed

    But at least the British get a shiny new Nuclear Power Plant - build by the French and Chinese. The next PM, or the one after get to cut the Ribbon, depending on how long the delays will be. That's worth at least a few billions
    Last edited by Hive; 14th September 2017 at 04:26 AM. Reason: the Forum sw isn't too keep on non-ASCII characters like the Pound sign

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
WordPress Appliance - Powered by TurnKey Linux