Brexit has created chaos in Britain – nobody voted for this

[StreetCowboy]

5 minutes ago, HAKAPALITA said:

Dont foreget Pensions were bought by the working man at a very poor rate of interest, they re not handouts but poorly repaid investments

As I understand, in the UK, pensions are paid out of the current budget based on a defined benefit. 

 

There is no pot of money that has been set aside from the National Insurance contributions to pay for them, and nor does the pension depend on the performance of any notional fund (unlike company pensions, which are required to be supported by a fund which is now quite strictly regulated, since the days of Robert Maxwell).

 

 

[Grouse]

9 minutes ago, talahtnut said:

Discrimination Grouse? 

No, bigotry

[Airbagwill]

29 minutes ago, aright said:

In the votes that I cast what ballot paper did Mr Selmayr's name appear on?

As you can see from my quote Mr Selmayr was appointed in secret by Mr Juncker ; Mep's knew nothing about it......this is your idea of representative democracy is it? 

Rather feeble acid test for democracy....If we had to vote for every rank and file official, we'd be in booth day in day out......I don't think many Brexiteers actually iunderstand what democracy means....perhaps you'd venture a definition?

Edited April 21, 2018 by Airbagwill

[HAKAPALITA]

1 minute ago, Airbagwill said:

Rather feeble acid test for democracy....If we had to vote for every rank and file official, we'd be in booth day in day out......I don't think many Brexiteers actually iunderstand what democracy means....perhaps you'd venture a definition?

For Youger Folks it means . Give me the money you earned as i wage slave, silly old fool.

[talahtnut]

15 minutes ago, Grouse said:

No, bigotry

Ooh deep folly.

[aright]

7 minutes ago, Airbagwill said:

Rather feebme acid test for democracy....If we had to vote for every rank and file official, we'd be in booth day in day out......I don't think many Brexiteers actually iunderstand what democracy means....perhaps you'd venture a definition?

Better still, since I am one of the group who you claim don't actually understand what representative democracy means  why not give us the definition of someone informed like yourself.  

[HAKAPALITA]

12 minutes ago, aright said:

Better still, since I am one of the group who you claim don't actually understand what representative democracy means  why not give us the definition of someone informed like yourself.  

But not in Joined Up Writing, Crayon Only with Pictures.

[aright]

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, Airbagwill said:

Rather feeble acid test for democracy....If we had to vote for every rank and file official, we'd be in booth day in day out......I don't think many Brexiteers actually understand what democracy means....perhaps you'd venture a definition?

Secretary-General of the European Commission is a rank and file position. Funny.

 

[StreetCowboy]

17 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Secretary-General of the European Commission is a rank and file position. Funny.

 

He’s a servant, not a representative

[Kieran00001]

3 hours ago, nauseus said:

The Common Market did not lie. Heath did. These quoted stated aims were plainly false (as the Greeks now know) as is your confidence in the democratic nature of the EU, which in practise fulfills the precise definition of bureaucracy.

 

What aim on their do you feel was false?  It is clear to me that they have been achieving all of them.

 

Do you mean that you think Greece has done badly out of joining the EEC? 

 

Going back hundreds of years before the EEC all Greece had seen was war.  This is the longest period they have seen without conflict in 500 years.  Clearly that fulfils the stated aim of maintaining peace. 

 

At the time of succession into the EEC half of Greeks were sustenance farmers, their lives have been improved enormously since the 70's, it was basically a 3rd world country, for example, they had an infant mortality rate of 25/1000 before the EEC and now it is just 3/1000.  That would fulfil the stated aim of increasing living standards. 

 

The debts they have now got themselves into were their own doing, their own banks lent too much money, they were then lent money by the EU and the IMF to bail out their banks, and when they can't pay the rates on those loans the EU bails them out again, it was tax payers across Europe who paid for Greece's development, paid for their bailout and now they pay the interest due on their loans, tax payers in other countries keep paying for Greece and you feel sorry for the Greeks, I guess you don't pay taxes anywhere in Europe.  Anyway, that would fulfil the aim of helping the poorest regions. 

 

And what other option did the EU have than loan them money to bail out their banks?  If no one bailed them out then the Greek banking system would have collapsed and that would have been disastrous for the Greek people, they all would have lost all their money.  The common market has fulfilled the stated aim of promoting growth and if they had of just allowed their banking system to collapse that would have ended that for them, so they really had no other option.  Well, not quite all of them would have lost all their money, their corrupt politicians allowed some Greek people to squirrel away hundreds of millions in unpaid taxes into Swiss banks over the same period, and when Switzerland offered to give the money to Greece they refused. 

 

I feel sorry for poor Greek people, but the country needs to elect the right governments, the EU isn't responsible for member countries irresponsible governments.

[Kieran00001]

4 hours ago, aright said:

 

Isn't that the point. I want representative democracy which you obviously don't

The European Parliament is a representative democratic system.  If you want that why are you against the EU and not the UK system?  Makes no sense.

 

Where does it mention a European Parliament? Where does it say one day our political and social future will be governed by the EU

It says bringing the people of Europe together, what more can they do to bring us together than make it effectively one country?

 

No. IMO the EU will never be democratic that's one of the reasons I voted OUT

Facts are either true or false, there is no room for opinion, the EU is democratic, the most democratic in the world, fact.

 

Extreme right wing parties now have MEP's in the German, French, Italian and Dutch Parliaments. hardly an endorsement of EU policies is it. 

Do you also blame the Nazi's on the Jews?

 

 The migrant crisis shows once again the European Commission has no respect for the will of member states. This may be an acceptable form of democracy to you but it's not to me that's partly why I voted out. 

The form of democracy is representative, the one you claim to long for, the policy of the EU is enacted by legislature that every country complaining agreed on.  And what would you do with them anyway?  They all arrive in the same few places, we can't put all the burden on them, we can't send them back, what do you suggest?

[Kieran00001]

2 hours ago, sandyf said:

In 2017, pensions were 111 billion and GDP was 2.565 trillion which by my reckoning is 4.3% of GDP.

With the rise in GDP now declining and rise in pensions increasing your 7% may not be far away, but no one will be any better off.

 

 

Not sure where I found the original stat I used but this I have just found says 155 spent in 2017 and 8% of GDP.

https://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_national_pensions_analysis

 

[nauseus]

42 minutes ago, StreetCowboy said:

He’s a servant, not a representative

You were talking about officials.

[StreetCowboy]

2 minutes ago, nauseus said:

You were talking about officials.

You were talking about officials, who are servants, not representatives

[aright]

12 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

Isn't that the point. I want representative democracy which you obviously don't

The European Parliament is a representative democratic system.  If you want that why are you against the EU and not the UK system? Makes no sense.

*****Saying it's a democracy doesn't make it true My reply from Post 4499 to sandyf  attempting to show it's not

 In the votes that I cast what ballot paper did Mr Selmayr's name appear on?

As you can see from my quote Mr Selmayr was appointed in secret by Mr Juncker ; Mep's knew nothing about it......this is your idea of representative democracy is it? 

 

Where does it mention a European Parliament? Where does it say one day our political and social future will be governed by the EU?

It says bringing the people of Europe together, what more can they do to bring us together than make it effectively one country?

 

Instead of disappearing behind the wall and answering a question that wasn't asked try answering the 2 questions.

 

 

No. IMO the EU will never be democratic that's one of the reasons I voted OUT

Facts are either true or false, there is no room for opinion, the EU is democratic, the most democratic in the world, fact.

See ***** above

 

Extreme right wing parties now have MEP's in the German, French, Italian and Dutch Parliaments. hardly an endorsement of EU policies is it. 

Do you also blame the Nazi's on the Jews?

A ridiculous and unrelated analogy. As I pointed out the sudden increase in the election of far right wing parties is as a result of people feeling their values and wishes are being ignored and as a consequence want to punish the EU. If it's not that what do you think it is?

 

 The migrant crisis shows once again the European Commission has no respect for the will of member states. This may be an acceptable form of democracy to you but it's not to me that's partly why I voted out. 

The form of democracy is representative*****, the one you claim to long for, the policy of the EU is enacted by legislature that every country complaining agreed on.  And what would you do with them anyway?  They all arrive in the same few places, we can't put all the burden on them, we can't send them back, what do you suggest?

European politics is dominated by an elite which holds in contempt the needs and demands of voters. Brussels has a python like grip on the member states who have lost their sovereignty in an undemocratic way.They no longer have the power to decide on key aspects of their everyday life from their economy to immigration. All this controlled by unelected bureaucrats in the European Commission instead of national politicians elected and held accountable by voters. What do I suggest we do?

Do what 17 million people voted for leave the EU

 

[StreetCowboy]

1 hour ago, aright said:

 

You will never convince anyone of anything until you agree with them.

[Kieran00001]

1 hour ago, aright said:

 

As you can see from my quote Mr Selmayr was appointed in secret by Mr Juncker ; Mep's knew nothing about it......this is your idea of representative democracy is it? 

Selmayr is just the secretary, he takes care of the agenda, the diary and the minutes.  The issue with his appointing was not a of loss of democracy, no one wants a say in who he chooses to be the secretary, that's just you, the issue other MEP's had with it was that it was in private and fast so it did not allow others a fair chance to apply for the job, its classic jobs for the boys stuff but that has nothing to do with EU democracy, that is just him giving his associate a job.

 

Instead of disappearing behind the wall and answering a question that wasn't asked try answering the 2 questions.

But I did answer your question, it is hardly my problem if you can't see that bringing countries together means making a central government, and it was hardly a secret, Churchill, who came up with the whole idea, called it a United States of Europe.

 

As I pointed out the sudden increase in the election of far right wing parties is as a result of people feeling their values and wishes are being ignored and as a consequence want to punish the EU. If it's not that what do you think it is?

It's a result of the economic crisis, there is always a rise in far right wing parties when the economy is bad.

 

They no longer have the power to decide on key aspects of their everyday life from their economy to immigration. 

You make it sound as if it was sprung on them when in reality of course it was the premise of the union and they knew exactly what they were getting themselves into.

[aright]

3 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

As you can see from my quote Mr Selmayr was appointed in secret by Mr Juncker ; Mep's knew nothing about it......this is your idea of representative democracy is it? 

Selmayr is just the secretary, he takes care of the agenda, the diary and the minutes.  The issue with his appointing was not a of loss of democracy, no one wants a say in who he chooses to be the secretary, that's just you, the issue other MEP's had with it was that it was in private and fast so it did not allow others a fair chance to apply for the job, its classic jobs for the boys stuff but that has nothing to do with EU democracy, that is just him giving his associate a job.

 

Instead of disappearing behind the wall and answering a question that wasn't asked try answering the 2 questions.

But I did answer your question, it is hardly my problem if you can't see that bringing countries together means making a central government, and it was hardly a secret, Churchill, who came up with the whole idea, called it a United States of Europe.

 

As I pointed out the sudden increase in the election of far right wing parties is as a result of people feeling their values and wishes are being ignored and as a consequence want to punish the EU. If it's not that what do you think it is?

It's a result of the economic crisis, there is always a rise in far right wing parties when the economy is bad.

 

They no longer have the power to decide on key aspects of their everyday life from their economy to immigration. 

You make it sound as if it was sprung on them when in reality of course it was the premise of the union and they knew exactly what they were getting themselves into.

Selmayr is just the secretary. The Secretary General  is the senior civil Servant in the EU responsible  for all 33000 of the Commission's staff.  He is not a score keeper. Classic jobs for the boy's stuff? Tell that to the MEP's who didn't get due process. The undemocratic nine minute power grab was orchestrated by Junker and you say the EU is not to blame. Juncker is the EU.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2018/03/a-very-eu-coup-martin-selmayrs-astonishing-power-grab/

 

As a matter of interest Churchill also said "If Britain must choose between Europe and the open sea she must always choose the open sea" I don't recall hearing him talk about an EU Superstate.    see****  It's not that the answer  has been misunderstood, the question  hasn't been answered.

 

There is always a rise in far right wing parties when the economy is bad. Really?

In Germany the AfD have come from nowhere to  get 80 odd seats in a 630 seat parliament. When was their economy significantly bad .Why are you in denial on the relationship between immigration and right wing voting

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/629022/EU-migration-crisis-far-right-parties-Europe-Germany-Sweden-France

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/germanys-right-wing-afd-party-surges-to-new-high-as-concern-of-refugee-rises-a6810726.html

 

.......and they knew exactly what they were getting in to.

****During the 1975 referendum the government contended membership was relevant to peace, security, regional and international development as well as to trade and economic cooperation. Where in this statement does it say the trading bloc is looking to form an EU government and EU etc's.  and how would you explain, how the people, would know from this, a European project was planned. If you have references I would be pleased to see them.  

 

[aright]

Saw this today and found it very interesting. The reduction in the share of world GDP by the EU is almost 50%. The EU could hardly be described as a growing dynamic market. The Commonwealth has always had a greater population than the EU but now it has a greater share of world GDP than the EU or the USA. I wonder if the UK discussed a trade deal with them at this weeks Commonwealth meeting In London....I hope so They would provide us with a market greater than the EU. I also heard today that Zimbabwe would be invited back into the Commonwealth contingent on their next General Election being above board. 

 

 

 

[simoh1490]

9 hours ago, StreetCowboy said:

You will never convince anyone of anything until you agree with them.

Amen! And that goes for the rest of the bunch too.

[bert bloggs]

23 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

We spend 7% of our GDP on pensions and 0.7% on foreign aid, perhaps we could use this money to increase pensions by 10%, but then we would see more suffering around the world and more refugees as a result, are you looking for more refugees?

I will worry about them ,once our own pensioners are looked after,anyway if we were not such a soft touch they would not come .

[Kieran00001]

7 hours ago, aright said:

Selmayr is just the secretary. The Secretary General  is the senior civil Servant in the EU responsible  for all 33000 of the Commission's staff.  He is not a score keeper. Classic jobs for the boy's stuff? Tell that to the MEP's who didn't get due process. The undemocratic nine minute power grab was orchestrated by Junker and you say the EU is not to blame. Juncker is the EU.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2018/03/a-very-eu-coup-martin-selmayrs-astonishing-power-grab/

 

As a matter of interest Churchill also said "If Britain must choose between Europe and the open sea she must always choose the open sea" I don't recall hearing him talk about an EU Superstate.    see****  It's not that the answer  has been misunderstood, the question  hasn't been answered.

 

There is always a rise in far right wing parties when the economy is bad. Really?

In Germany the AfD have come from nowhere to  get 80 odd seats in a 630 seat parliament. When was their economy significantly bad .Why are you in denial on the relationship between immigration and right wing voting

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/629022/EU-migration-crisis-far-right-parties-Europe-Germany-Sweden-France

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/germanys-right-wing-afd-party-surges-to-new-high-as-concern-of-refugee-rises-a6810726.html

 

.......and they knew exactly what they were getting in to.

****During the 1975 referendum the government contended membership was relevant to peace, security, regional and international development as well as to trade and economic cooperation. Where in this statement does it say the trading bloc is looking to form an EU government and EU etc's.  and how would you explain, how the people, would know from this, a European project was planned. If you have references I would be pleased to see them.  

 

 

How many civil servants have you had a vote on?  Sure he is responsible for the others, he sets the agenda and the diary, what power did you think he had?  And I don't have to tell them, the MEP's know that it is jobs for the boys stuff, that is why you know about it, because they were complaining that the appointment was made in a jobs for the boys style.  I am critical of Junker, but that is not an EU issue, it is an issue in Junkers group, I am not sure why you are struggling to understand this.  In the UK if you vote Labour you get to vote for your PM, if you vote Conservative you don't, that is not a lack of democracy in the UK system, it is in the Conservative party.

 

Junker is not the EU, that is ludicrous, I have explained to you how the process works and it is not like the UK system where the PM gets all the power.

 

Yes, Churchill assumed Britain would retain it's empire.  But don't be claiming that no one knew the intention of the EEC was to create the EU, it was the plan from the beginning.

 

Yes, right wing parties come along when the economy is bad, it has happened throughout the world though this financial crisis.  Bad economies have effects on many things, such as immigration, so even when one country still succeeds throughout a global crisis they can still feel the effects, such as how Germany has through the constant influx of immigrants who choose them as other countries are still suffering economically.  It is more complex in Germany's case, they also welcomed a million refugees from Syria, not all Germans welcomed them though, some were against it, and there were issues and those who were against it have been fuelled by those issues.  But in the end all the educated Syrians they have taken in will provide a nice boost to the German economy and the right wing will disappear again, just like they did after the Turks made them rich again.

 

Again, it says that the aim is bring the peoples of Europe together.  The Parliamentary Assembly began in 1949, it was clear long before the 1975 referendum that the idea was to have a parliament as they already had had one for 26 years!  And back in 1957 when they signed the Treaty of Rome they formed the Common Market, so it was clear in the 1975 referendum that the idea was to have a trading bloc as they already had had one for 18 years!  So you see, it was hardly just a plan by 1975, it was already long underway, the people given a vote before it took effect to it's full extent, so there is exactly zero claim that the people couldn't have known, they all should have known, it was all in the public domain and had been for 18 years!

 

 

[Kieran00001]

1 hour ago, bert bloggs said:

I will worry about them ,once our own pensioners are looked after,anyway if we were not such a soft touch they would not come .

 

Yes, it's true, although I do not see it as being a "soft touch" but as meeting our agreement as parties to the Refugee Convention, also something I call humanity.  

If you care about our pensioners then you should choose the best for the UK economically, leaving the EU has been shown now to have a bad effect regardless of the deal we get, it is the likes of pensioners who will suffer.

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

How many civil servants have you had a vote on?  Sure he is responsible for the others, he sets the agenda and the diary, what power did you think he had?  And I don't have to tell them, the MEP's know that it is jobs for the boys stuff, that is why you know about it, because they were complaining that the appointment was made in a jobs for the boys style.  I am critical of Junker, but that is not an EU issue, it is an issue in Junkers group, I am not sure why you are struggling to understand this.  In the UK if you vote Labour you get to vote for your PM, if you vote Conservative you don't, that is not a lack of democracy in the UK system, it is in the Conservative party.

 

Junker is not the EU, that is ludicrous, I have explained to you how the process works and it is not like the UK system where the PM gets all the power.

 

Yes, Churchill assumed Britain would retain it's empire.  But don't be claiming that no one knew the intention of the EEC was to create the EU, it was the plan from the beginning.

 

Yes, right wing parties come along when the economy is bad, it has happened throughout the world though this financial crisis.  Bad economies have effects on many things, such as immigration, so even when one country still succeeds throughout a global crisis they can still feel the effects, such as how Germany has through the constant influx of immigrants who choose them as other countries are still suffering economically.  It is more complex in Germany's case, they also welcomed a million refugees from Syria, not all Germans welcomed them though, some were against it, and there were issues and those who were against it have been fuelled by those issues.  But in the end all the educated Syrians they have taken in will provide a nice boost to the German economy and the right wing will disappear again, just like they did after the Turks made them rich again.

 

Again, it says that the aim is bring the peoples of Europe together.  The Parliamentary Assembly began in 1949, it was clear long before the 1975 referendum that the idea was to have a parliament as they already had had one for 26 years!  And back in 1957 when they signed the Treaty of Rome they formed the Common Market, so it was clear in the 1975 referendum that the idea was to have a trading bloc as they already had had one for 18 years!  So you see, it was hardly just a plan by 1975, it was already long underway, the people given a vote before it took effect to it's full extent, so there is exactly zero claim that the people couldn't have known, they all should have known, it was all in the public domain and had been for 18 years!

 

 

Yes, they should have known. A few people knew. Heath certainly knew. The information was there but it was not fully and openly disclosed. If it had been we would have not joined! Most did not know the realise the extent of the deceit and were not told the full truth. No honesty from the government of the day and no internet. 

[nauseus]

15 hours ago, StreetCowboy said:

You were talking about officials, who are servants, not representatives

Officials was used by the airbag. Funny how you jumped in on that one?

 

7 hours ago, Airbagwill said:

Rather feeble acid test for democracy....If we had to vote for every rank and file official, we'd be in booth day in day out......I don't think many Brexiteers actually understand what democracy means....perhaps you'd venture a definition?

[talahtnut]

17 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

Yes, it's true, although I do not see it as being a "soft touch" but as meeting our agreement as parties to the Refugee Convention, also something I call humanity.  

If you care about our pensioners then you should choose the best for the UK economically, leaving the EU has been shown now to have a bad effect regardless of the deal we get, it is the likes of pensioners who will suffer.

It is true that Brexit has been shown to have a bad effect.

It is also true that Brexit has been shown to have a good effect.

Ignoring the many political deceptions, most people naturally

seek freedom and independance..and that's what they voted for.

[Eloquent pilgrim]

1 hour ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

How many civil servants have you had a vote on?  Sure he is responsible for the others, he sets the agenda and the diary, what power did you think he had?  And I don't have to tell them, the MEP's know that it is jobs for the boys stuff, that is why you know about it, because they were complaining that the appointment was made in a jobs for the boys style.  I am critical of Junker, but that is not an EU issue, it is an issue in Junkers group, I am not sure why you are struggling to understand this.  In the UK if you vote Labour you get to vote for your PM, if you vote Conservative you don't, that is not a lack of democracy in the UK system, it is in the Conservative party.

 

Junker is not the EU, that is ludicrous, I have explained to you how the process works and it is not like the UK system where the PM gets all the power.

 

Yes, Churchill assumed Britain would retain it's empire.  But don't be claiming that no one knew the intention of the EEC was to create the EU, it was the plan from the beginning.

 

Yes, right wing parties come along when the economy is bad, it has happened throughout the world though this financial crisis.  Bad economies have effects on many things, such as immigration, so even when one country still succeeds throughout a global crisis they can still feel the effects, such as how Germany has through the constant influx of immigrants who choose them as other countries are still suffering economically.  It is more complex in Germany's case, they also welcomed a million refugees from Syria, not all Germans welcomed them though, some were against it, and there were issues and those who were against it have been fuelled by those issues.  But in the end all the educated Syrians they have taken in will provide a nice boost to the German economy and the right wing will disappear again, just like they did after the Turks made them rich again.

 

Again, it says that the aim is bring the peoples of Europe together.  The Parliamentary Assembly began in 1949, it was clear long before the 1975 referendum that the idea was to have a parliament as they already had had one for 26 years!  And back in 1957 when they signed the Treaty of Rome they formed the Common Market, so it was clear in the 1975 referendum that the idea was to have a trading bloc as they already had had one for 18 years!  So you see, it was hardly just a plan by 1975, it was already long underway, the people given a vote before it took effect to it's full extent, so there is exactly zero claim that the people couldn't have known, they all should have known, it was all in the public domain and had been for 18 years!

 

 

An interesting and comprehensive post; may I just ask about one statement, when you say that  “In the UK if you vote Labour you get to vote for your PM, if you vote Conservative you don't, that is not a lack of democracy in the UK system, it is in the Conservative party”

 

are you referring to the fact that Theresa May was not elected as Prime Minister in the general election, but just succeeded the retiring David Cameron ….. thanks

[nauseus]

16 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

What aim on their do you feel was false?  It is clear to me that they have been achieving all of them.

 

Do you mean that you think Greece has done badly out of joining the EEC? 

 

Going back hundreds of years before the EEC all Greece had seen was war.  This is the longest period they have seen without conflict in 500 years.  Clearly that fulfils the stated aim of maintaining peace. 

 

At the time of succession into the EEC half of Greeks were sustenance farmers, their lives have been improved enormously since the 70's, it was basically a 3rd world country, for example, they had an infant mortality rate of 25/1000 before the EEC and now it is just 3/1000.  That would fulfil the stated aim of increasing living standards. 

 

The debts they have now got themselves into were their own doing, their own banks lent too much money, they were then lent money by the EU and the IMF to bail out their banks, and when they can't pay the rates on those loans the EU bails them out again, it was tax payers across Europe who paid for Greece's development, paid for their bailout and now they pay the interest due on their loans, tax payers in other countries keep paying for Greece and you feel sorry for the Greeks, I guess you don't pay taxes anywhere in Europe.  Anyway, that would fulfil the aim of helping the poorest regions. 

 

And what other option did the EU have than loan them money to bail out their banks?  If no one bailed them out then the Greek banking system would have collapsed and that would have been disastrous for the Greek people, they all would have lost all their money.  The common market has fulfilled the stated aim of promoting growth and if they had of just allowed their banking system to collapse that would have ended that for them, so they really had no other option.  Well, not quite all of them would have lost all their money, their corrupt politicians allowed some Greek people to squirrel away hundreds of millions in unpaid taxes into Swiss banks over the same period, and when Switzerland offered to give the money to Greece they refused. 

 

I feel sorry for poor Greek people, but the country needs to elect the right governments, the EU isn't responsible for member countries irresponsible governments.

The EEC has overseen the decline of European area overall growth to the weakest in the world. Greece has 50% youth unemployment. Fantastic achievements!

 

War and peace - like all moaners you conveniently discount the formation and existence of NATO.

 

Infant mortality rates have improved all across the western world, so don't attribute that to the wonderful EEC/EU.

 

The Greek debt is a result of the Greeks cheating and the EU allowing them to use the Euro before the Greek economy was properly aligned. If the EU truly wanted to help a poorer country, they would have assisted and developed the Greek economy first, not bailed them out later, with crushing loan conditions.

 

[Kieran00001]

21 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Yes, they should have known. A few people knew. Heath certainly knew. The information was there but it was not fully and openly disclosed. If it had been we would have not joined! Most did not know the realise the extent of the deceit and were not told the full truth. No honesty from the government of the day and no internet. 

 

We had already joined, the referendum was on whether to leave.

This is a quote from a parliament session before the 1975 referendum.  There was a leave campaign, and they were informing the public of the intentions of the community, so clearly it was not only a few who knew, everyones MP knew and everyone with an interest in politics knew.

 

"Both sides of the House now clearly accept a directly-elected European parliament. If we accept that, we surely accept that such a body will do something. It will not sit there and do nothing. It will legislate."

 

"The point about the European Parliament and the inability of the British elector, once that Parliament is set up, to change the laws which it makes, is being hidden by the pro-Market case. The pro-Marketeers know that if the British fully understood that, they would he sure to vote to come out of the EEC. My hon. Friends and I, who find ourselves on this side of the argument, will ensure that throughout the referendum campaign the British public will be made aware of that fact. I hope that on that basis they will vote for self-rule and self-government. I hope that finally they will say "Let us in this country rule ourselves and let us not be ruled by Brussels."