back with a vengeance BREXIT - 31 January 2020

[Gambino]

She's a politician. She's meant to represent..... She had came out in favor of the leave camp... Which means she must have her reasons for wanting to leave Europe. Now she is in the papers saying she is on the remain side. Which means she is using her representation to let people know she wants to stay in. That is simple. So it begs the question, how can a single poster change her mind on her not wanting to leave anymore.

[Gambino]

Swedish MEP Peter Lundgren said Denmark and Sweden were already “on the brink” of quitting, suggesting that should the UK leave, a “Nordic trading bloc” led by Britain could be born. Sweden has been sticking by its EU commitments, but barely. It’s little wonder. Sweden now has the highest level of non-EU immigration per capita. 

And while newcomers are extended free health care and a five-euro flat fee for dental care, the elderly have seen their state pensions cut and must still pay 400 euros for a new tooth. State-sponsored polls reveal a small majority for staying in the EU. Ask Swedes what they would do if Britain left, however, and it’s a different story. 

In April a poll by TNS Sifo, Sweden’s biggest polling company, found more people in favour of leaving than remaining if Britain voted for Brexit. Mr Lundgren said: “I think Sweden may fall. The Netherlands has also threatened a referendum if Brexit happens. Denmark will also go for a referendum and so will the Czech Republic. 

“Britain has always been there for Europe. You made huge sacrifices to save us from Nazi dictatorship. 

“The British have a very strong sense of freedom and Brussels has messed with that. That’s the biggest lesson that will come out of a Brexit.” 

Morten Messerschmidt, a Danish MEP and member of the European Conservatives and Reformists Group, said: “The idea of a Nordic bloc is being spoken about. Many Danes would find it appealing if the UK, after leaving the EU, created an alternative free market-oriented organisation. It could include the Netherlands and Switzerland too. 

“Denmark is in the EU for trade but there is no ideological loyalty. A Nordic bloc would attract Danes because it takes us back to the original EEC idea. 

“The Maastricht treaty turned a commerce-oriented operation into an ideological operation with ever-closer union. It became an entity by itself. It’s a shame it needs a political earthquake to shake Brussels but it’s not Britain that’s wrong, it’s Brussels.” 

Mr Lundgren added: “Brussels still doesn’t understand the problem, which is that it’s ruled by elite politicians, who are very well paid and enjoy luxury lives on EU money. 

 

[dub]

Peter Lundgren is a nationalist 

[Gambino]

And does that mean his opinion shouldn't be heard?

[dub]

It means he'll paint a picture in favour of nationalism 

[Da Luv Doc]

Gambino on that immigration crap again I see.....

 

I've noticed a lot of whites who moan about immigration either have no effect on their jobs with regards to immigrants and are plain racist.

[Da Luv Doc]

Quick to moan about the Eastern Europeans, not the French, Italians, Irish or Spanish and have issues with ethnic minorities.

 

I understand Gambino and his reasoning now, he is just a horrible person.

[Gambino]

Post about the nordic countries ditching the EU and forming a trading bloc with the UK actually but since I already know you are a retard I'll forgive your comments.

[Da Luv Doc]

Gambino: "Blah blah blah Immigrants blah blah blah benefit blah blah blah i want to suck off prince philip blah blah blah Eastern Europeans blah blah blah"

[Da Luv Doc]

 

[JOHN DOE]

9 hours ago, Niall Ferguson said:

Let me just say, if any of you think a vote in or out will make any discernible difference to our lives, you are sadly mistaken. This is particularly true if you think voting out will make a difference.

As a party promoter, I need artists to come from the EU without the bother of visas etc, so I will be voting in purely for that reason. There will be minor issues like this for everyone individually, depending on what business you have etc etc.

However, for the vast majority of people who aren't directly (I mean level 1 directness) affected you are screwed whether you stay in or not. Global government will always have the power over you.    

What a stupid post from a very stupid person 

[JOHN DOE]

On 19 June 2016 at 3:07 AM, Gambino said:

Interesting question. I don't imagine things to change in any major noticeable way for me personally, might get a GP appontment quicker though. Probable improvement in the economy down the line,  better for small businesses, public services will be able to catch up with demand after a slow down of uncontrolled Immigration. We've already been well and truly fucked over right now. But then I'm not voting leave for any personal gains. I'm doing it out of pride for my nation and the will for my people to govern themselves and hold who they vote in accountable. I don't wanna be dictated to from overseas from countries who quite frankly have governments that don't like us. I don't want even more people rushing here when the EU allow Turkey to join them. I have no interest in seeing the end of the British Army because they dream of a European one. I hope to see English Fisherman allowed to fish our own seas again rather than EU countries controlling it and then selling our own fish back to us. I don't wanna see money we give the EU being given to other countries to prop up businesses which result in businesses here being closed down. The remain camp can argue the case that we don't know exactly what we can expect when we leave, but we do know what we'll get if we stay and that's enough to get the fuck outta this Union. Oh and I'll be in a better mood and less argumentative to all the far left fuckboys on here who bow down to their globalist masters. So you can look forward to that improvement.

So the main reason for you voting leave is because you believe you will get a gp appointment quicker

/

 

are you currently employed

[Gambino]

Yes and the fact you chose to simple comment on my humor but realistic comment about the GP appointment and ignore everything else I said is wookless....... Is that how you lot are voting on here, based on self gain and not for the benefit of the country as a whole?

[Mr. Martinez]

I think this is the best thing I have read on the whole debate. Sealed my vote. 

 

Quote

 

I have been on facebook for quite a while but I have never actually posted an original message, only replied to other people's (indeed, this started as a reply to a posting by Iain Smith). So this is a first. I am driven to it by the prospect of a Brexit victory on June 23.

The referendum started out as a tactic to keep one wing of the Conservative Party quiet during an election campaign. It didn’t bother me much. However, it has since become something else. I don't think the arguments for and against membership of the EU are really what's at issue, or not only what's at issue. The EU debate is also a proxy for something else.

On one side are two deeply disaffected groups. The first are mostly working class, they have yet to recover the ground they lost after the economic crash of 2008, they see their wages and opportunities undermined by immigrants and in the EU they have found someone or something to blame. Middle-class though I am, I have quite a significant acquaintanceship with members of this group and we have discussed the EU. The subject is impossible to avoid. They are not racist, they are mostly liberally inclined but they feel, probably rightly, that they are being penalised for other peoples' (bankers, politicians, EU bureaucrats) ambitions.

The second group probably comprises an equal mix of the working class and middle class (this is a guess on my part) and they are moderately-to-deeply reactionary, hate/distrust the modern world, want to return to the "good old days", regard all foreigners with suspicion etc etc. In the EU debate they have at last found a cause about which they can be outspoken and passionate, with leaders at last able to speak up on their behalf (Gove, Farage, Johnson et al). I have many acquaintances in this group as well. My sympathy for them is limited although I think I understand their sense of loss.

These two groups, animated by a mix of grievance and fear, are ranged together on the Brexit side. (I realise there are other kinds of Brexiteers, driven by principle not by grievance, but they appear to be small in number - again, a guess on my part. Every Brixiteer I know swears they are motivated by principle but all, in my experience thus far, fit into groups one or two.)

On the other side is the third group, mostly (but not entirely) middle-class, who have pretty much recovered the ground lost in 2008 and who face the future with measured optimism. They work in industries that depend on global markets and they generally see the EU as an opportunity rather than a threat. They are socially liberal and they approve of the liberalising drift of EU legislation (workers’ rights etc). They have little in common with the first group and certainly do not share its pain or its anxiety. They abhor the second group (some of them might even find their own parents in its ranks).

This third group contains some EU enthusiasts but I suspect not too many. Most realise that the EU is in a mess (the referendum itself is proof of that, but there is also the EU's lamentable response to the refugee crisis, the Greek debacle, youth unemployment and the continued fudge over the legitimacy of the EU institutions). They did not seek the referendum and would rather it was not taking place. They have been drawn into the debate on the Remain side because they are appalled by the prospect of a Brexit victory, not just for what it would mean for our EU membership but, more importantly, for what it would mean for our vision of the UK. I am in this third group.

I did not want the referendum. We have been bounced into making a yes/no decision, as if we were all inevitably either or one side or the other. We are not. But I am drawn in because I really, really do not want the tenor of political discourse in this country to be dictated by xenophobes, Little Englanders, nostalgics and populists like Boris Johnson. I had reason to be in South Africa in the 1970s, at the height of apartheid, and I came to the conclusion that the dominant culture in South Africa was indistinguishable from the cultural and ideological bias of the then Sunday Express: ignorant, entitled, hate-filled, resentful, awash with the false consciousness of victimhood and quick to find scapegoats. I do not want the social progress we have made in my lifetime - the truly astonishing achievement of successive Tory and Labour governments from Attlee to Blair - undone by resentful reactionaries nursing a false sense of grievance. The good old days were not good. I was there. The present day is so much better. Those of you who are black, gay, female, disabled or otherwise socially unprivileged will have special reason to understand what I am saying, but actually everyone has benefited.

Of course, not everyone has benefited equally and there is a long, long way still to go, but Brexit in the UK, just like Trump in the USA, threatens to unravel it all. Really, it does. What do you think will happen after a Brexit victory? Do you think the rightward drift in our domestic politics will come to a halt, appetites sated? Not a bit of it. It will get worse. And worse.

For those minded to vote for Brexit, let me make some further observations. An out vote will likely mean ten years or more of legislation to undo the legislation of the last four decades. The referendum is not a magic wand: vote out and suddenly we are free. Our membership of the EU is embedded in a web of legislation. Voting out and not undoing that legislation is not Brexit. Yet each piece of legislation will be contested, not in Europe but within the UK. I was on the train to Bath last weekend and there were a few Vote Out hoardings in farmers’ fields. Will those farmers who vote out be happy to see their subsidies taken away? (EU subsidies account for 55% of farm incomes in the UK.) Or isn’t it more likely that, having voted out, they will then argue tooth and nail for their subsidies to remain, whether the bill is paid by the EU or the British taxpayer? Leaving the Common Agricultural Policy only makes sense if we then open the door (ie remove the trade barriers) to cheap food from the rest of the world. Does anyone think that the National Farmers' Union would let that happen? Seriously? Won’t every interest group argue likewise for the retention of their protected status? Where will we end up: with half our EU-inspired laws unchanged and the rest constrained either by special interests or by the continuing need to conform to the regulations of the trading bloc we have just decided to leave, the trading bloc upon which we still depend but in which we no longer have a vote? What kind of Brexit is that?

Talking of voting, my Brexit friends are incensed that, in a club of 28 members, the UK doesn't always get its way. The EU has two forums where votes are taken: the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers. The Parliament, which as we all know is constitutionally weak and in which the leading British party is the anti-EU UKIP (with 24 seats, followed by Labour with 20 and the Conservatives with 19), tries to reach decisions by consensus, so that most of the time the UK is accommodated without a vote. But sometimes it does vote. Despite UKIP’s endless obstruction and opposition, the UK is actually on the “winning side” in those Parliamentary votes 71% of the time. The Council of Ministers, in which the EU governments are represented, is far more powerful, but, like the Parliament, it tries to arrive at decisions by consensus. In the period 2004 to 2009, the UK was on the “losing side” in 2.6% of the votes taken and in the period 2009 to 2015 it was on the “losing side” in 12.3% of the votes taken. In other words, the UK was on the “winning side” in 97.4% and 86.7% of the votes taken in those periods. (It is at least arguable that the increase in the UK’s “loss” record in the more recent period reflects the greater intransigence of the UK since the accession of a Conservative-led administration.)

And while we are on the subject of how the EU works, note that there are 55,000 civil servants in Brussels looking after the interests of 508 million people. This compares with 400,000 civil servants in Whitehall and the 150,000 doctors, 380,000 nurses, 156,000 technicians and 38,000 managers in the NHS. The UK’s “share” of the EU’s bureaucratic burden is about 6,500 civil servants. Even if there were no benefits, the cost of EU membership would be negligible (about 0.5% of GDP). But, of course, there are substantial benefits.

As to sovereignty, I would urge Brexiteers to take off their nostalgia-tinted glasses and get real. Our government spends just under half our GDP on public services. That clearly gives the government real executive power. Similarly, our legislature makes the laws that tell us how we can behave. That, too, is real power. But neither the government nor the legislature really determines our direction or speed of travel. That is decided by the economy, over which the legislature and the government have very little power. The economy is determined by decisions made by big corporations and the capital markets. No matter where they are based, the big corporations and the capital markets really have no nationality. Years ago, the English counties had the power to impose their own excise duties (hence all the smugglers’ tales), but the inexorable logic of economic development and the emergence of a fully national economy rendered those powers redundant. So it is today, at a higher level. We really do live in a global economy, as any survey of the objects in your house (food, fridge, computer, television, carpets etc) will confirm. Frankly, our lives are determined as much by decisions made by corporate executives and investment fund managers as they are by politicians or civil servants. Will Brexit make that position better? No. On the contrary, it will make it worse, for it will remove us from the protection, limited though it is, of the largest trading bloc in the world, the EU. Meaningful sovereignty at the national level is simply not on the agenda. It really isn't, not for anyone. Those days are gone.

The story is the same in foreign policy. We are not big enough to stand on our own. If we are not part of the EU we will become the poodle of the USA. This is not what the Brexiteers have in mind, of course, but it will be the outcome if the out vote prevails. If you want the UK to be weaker, by all means vote out. It is not, I think, what you intend.

Finally, what happens if the majority in the UK vote out but the majority in Scotland vote in (as it appears they will)? Or, vice versa: the majority in the UK vote in but the majority in England vote out? Think about it. These are real possibilities. Either outcome spells the end of the UK as we know it. In the first case, the Scots will rightly demand another referendum on independence. In the second, the English will be outraged that their will has been thwarted by the Scots (and possibly the Welsh). The English will not do the obvious thing and create their own Parliament, for that really would bring the curtain down on the UK (an inevitability in my view). No, they will contest the outcome, over and over and over, in the hope that eventually they will get what they want. They won’t.

These are arguments about the merits or otherwise of Brexit, but, as I said at the outset, I don’t think what is really at issue here is the EU. What is at issue is our view of Britain. Having said that I am a reluctant participant in a debate that I would rather wasn’t happening, I have to acknowledge that the questions it has raised really do need answers. The disaffection of the first group I described above needs to be addressed. As yet, I do not see strong leadership in either party offering to take on that responsibility. Cameron is standing down, so the Tories have a shadow for a leader, and anyway everything they have done since 2010 has had the effect of alienating the working class still further. And Corbyn is so half-hearted he might as well be signalling in semaphore. If we do remain, somebody has to get a grip on the vast gulf that has opened up between the politicians and the people, particularly the working class. I expect the Labour Party to fill this vacuum – historically, that’s its job - but it looks to me that it might be ten years before they are ready for the challenge. Those ten years will be fraught with the danger of a further drift to the right, a drift of which we have had plenty of warning in the form of the UKIP vote. Hence, even if Remain wins, it is not the end of the matter: it is the beginning of a long haul back to political legitimacy, in local government, in the British nations and regions, in the UK and in the EU. This is not an easy sell, of course. Much easier to sell the “let's get our country back” simplicities of Brexit.

And I should say a word in favour of the EU. Sure, it has the aspect of a capitalist club currently wedded to a neo-liberal model of economic development. But it is also the most successful experiment ever attempted to forge collaboration between nations (nations that had been at each others' throats for a thousand years) and it has a very powerful social-democratic culture. For all its faults, I support it because I can distinguish between the politics of tomorrow (what I would like for my great-grandchildren) and the politics of today (what we can have in the meantime).

The referendum, which started as a nothing issue for me, has become a fundamental choice about what kind of Britain we want and what kind of agenda we will follow in the years to come. I am adamantly against Brexit. I am for Remain. I hope you are too.

 

 

www.facebook.com/tilott/posts/10208018108063220?pnref=story

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Grafter]

What is wookless?

 

/

I think most people will vote based on what it will mean for them individually

[james00]

Sargon vs TF Brexit debate

 

[Brem]

Might be Voting in simply because the other side has not made a cogent argument as to how thing will work after. That being said tired of scummy Eastern Europeans and other d*ckheads coming to the country. Those that contribute can stay but it's ridiculous that these guys can claim benefits after three months in the country.

additionally seperation from the EU gives Brtiain the power to become rogue in terms of policy. At the extreme end, think Vfor Vendetta. At least as things stand we are all covered by the European human rights act.

[Gambino]

8 minutes ago, Brem said:

. At least as things stand we are all covered by the European human rights act.

I would prefer some kinda British Bill of rights. It's cool people having rights etc but when this Human Rights laws stops Terrorists from being deported because they claim a right to family life etc..... It pits me extremely against it. Don't see why this country and it's people cannot be trusted to come up with something similar without the added rubbish.

[Gambino]

Watching that video James. lol Germans got psychological problems.

[Mame Biram Diouf]

15 minutes ago, Brem said:

Might be Voting in simply because the other side has not made a cogent argument as to how thing will work after. That being said tired of scummy Eastern Europeans and other d*ckheads coming to the country. Those that contribute can stay but it's ridiculous that these guys can claim benefits after three months in the country.

Couple of my colleagues based out in France informed me that immigrants over there have to work 3 months before they can claim 3 months welfare (6 months for 6 months etc), they then cannot claim anymore welfare until they have and can prove they have worked another month for example.

 

Nothing to do with the EU. That is our incompetent government. 

 

[Gambino]

This Sargon dude if that is him on the left is annoying..... Taking that view that the UK are small timers who can't do anything for themselves without holding the EU's hand.

[james00]

3 minutes ago, Gambino said:

This Sargon dude if that is him on the left is annoying..... Taking that view that the UK are small timers who can't do anything for themselves without holding the EU's hand.

nah Sargon is the one in the box. they both bring up good points i think what it comes down to economically is, international business and sovereign business and which out weighs the other.

[Niall Ferguson]

1 hour ago, JOHN DOE said:

What a stupid post from a very stupid person 

I'm very comfortable with you thinking this about me.

You're the same guy who was happy that he drew a bosh on road and beat same day, and this was last week!

[JOHN DOE]

1 hour ago, Grafter said:

I think most people will vote based on what it will mean for them individually

That's what your supposed to do

align your self with the policies that will affect you and your family

What do you do for a living if I may ask Gambino

I'm guessing you are working class(like most of us) who will feel brexit more than anyone else 

 

don't let these rich guys gas you into thinking your gonna be put first

leave or remain those with money won't be hit too hard in the short or long term  it is those without  

 

 

 

[JOHN DOE]

1 minute ago, Niall Ferguson said:

I'm very comfortable with you thinking this about me.

You're the same guy who was happy that he drew a bosh on road and beat same day, and this was last week!

Couple weeks ago and yes I was delighted.