Brexit's effect on UK 'will be profound and unpredictable', lawmakers say

[7by7]

6 hours ago, rufanuf said:

Long on explanation, short on practical reality. The reality is the EU is at best a flawed attempt to be a democratic institution. At it's worse something far more sinister.  As I've stated already, who EVER voted for foreign heads of state to interfere in the laws of another land?  NOT ONE EU CITIZEN. When you get your head around this, you will understand the mindset of those who voted Brexit, and would do so a thousand times regardless of any other argument.

Unfortunately, long explanations are required when communicating with people who are obviously lacking in knowledge of and/or do not understand the basics! But I'll keep this one as brief as I can.

 

Any international treaty imposes responsibilities and obligations upon it's signatories.

 

Membership of any international organisation imposes obligations and responsibilities upon it's members.

 

Citizens vote for the governments who sign those treaties, who join those international organisations.

 

BTW, several countries had referenda on, for example, the Maastricht Treaty. So your assertion that not one EU citizen voted for any of the powers invested in the EU which override those of a member state is completely wrong. Thatcher didn't want a referendum  in the UK; but that's not the EU's fault!

 

What one has to decide is whether the benefits outweigh these obligations and responsibilities.

 

I believe the benefits of EU membership do.

 

As did 67.2% those who voted in the 1973 referendum.

 

But for one reason or another, 51.9% of those who voted in the 2016 referendum didn't; so we are leaving.

 

A decision I regret, but accept.

 

 

Edited July 22, 2017 by 7by7

[nauseus]

3 hours ago, 7by7 said:

y previous explanation of the role of the Commission as if it were your own?

 

 

3 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 

Yes, he did resign as prime Minister in 2013 over a scandal involving Luxemburg's security services, as Prime Minister he had the ultimate responsibility even though he was not personally involved: Luxembourg PM Juncker to resign over spy scandal.

 

Luxemburg has been a tax haven since at least the 1970s; a policy continued by Juncker while he was Prime Minister. But  Luxemburg is not the only tax haven in Europe: The Top 10 European Tax Havens.

 

But my purpose is not to defend Juncker; my purpose is to show that the EU is democratic. 

Junker was not the only candidate, but he won the election and so was nominated by the Council, that nomination being approved by the European parliament. That he was not the UK's choice does not make the process undemocratic!

 

Why are you posting my previous explanation of the role of the Commission as if it were your own?

 

Whether your statement is true or not; the fact is that the Commission is subservient to the three democratic institutions and it's decisions can be overruled by those institutions.

 

I got it a long time ago; thanks.

 

In the case of Ordinary Legislative Procedure, which is how the majority of EU laws are made, yes it is the Commission which proposes. It's proposals being prompted by input from various sources, including citizens groups, the European Parliament and member state's governments.

 

But this does not mean these proposals will become law. They can, and often are, amended by the European parliament, and some are rejected by both the Parliament and Council. How EU decisions are made

 

But I see I am essentially wasting my metaphorical breath; it is propaganda you believe, not the facts.

He was involved but never mind - the point is that many commissioners who are nominated and appointed are political mediocrities, often with poor track records of competence or trustworthiness and so not fit for purpose - Juncker is a prime example and Kinnock and Mandelson are two more from the UK.

 

Well you've said it yourself  "yes it is the Commission which proposes " - it is the only source of laws and regulations and amendments are not often made due to the sheer volume to be voted on - rare changes are usually minor or cosmetic. If the commissioners are not not fit for purpose the their proposed laws regs are not likely to be either! 

[nauseus]

3 hours ago, 7by7 said:

Unfortunately, long explanations are required when communicating with people who are obviously lacking in knowledge of and/or do not understand the basics! But I'll keep this one as brief as I can.

 

Any international treaty imposes responsibilities and obligations upon it's signatories.

 

Membership of any international organisation imposes obligations and responsibilities upon it's members.

 

Citizens vote for the governments who sign those treaties, who join those international organisations.

 

BTW, several countries had referenda on, for example, the Maastricht Treaty. So your assertion that not one EU citizen voted for any of the powers invested in the EU which override those of a member state is completely wrong. Thatcher didn't want a referendum  in the UK; but that's not the EU's fault!

 

What one has to decide is whether the benefits outweigh these obligations and responsibilities.

 

I believe the benefits of EU membership do.

 

As did 67.2% those who voted in the 1973 referendum.

 

But for one reason or another, 51.9% of those who voted in the 2016 referendum didn't; so we are leaving.

 

A decision I regret, but accept.

 

 

Well explain this oh knowledgeable one:

 

BTW, several countries had referenda on, for example, the Maastricht Treaty. So your assertion that not one EU citizen voted for any of the powers invested in the EU which override those of a member state is completely wrong. Thatcher didn't want a referendum  in the UK; but that's not the EU's fault! Thatcher finally saw the light and that's why she was asked to leave! If she had remained PM to 1992 then there would have been a referendum on Maastricht. Blair promised a referendum for the Lisbon Treaty and then reneged. The European constitution was rejected by France and the Netherlands in referendums in May and June 2005 but this was reworded (made even harder to read) as the Lisbon Treaty in 2009. “They must go on voting until they get it right.” LOL

 

What one has to decide is whether the benefits outweigh these obligations and responsibilities. This was done nationwide and democratically via the 2016 UK referendum. The UK voted out.

 

As did 67.2% those who voted in the 1973 referendum. The 1973 referendum concerned the EEC, toted as the common Market, not the EU. Biggest lie of all.

 

But for one reason or another, 51.9% of those who voted in the 2016 referendum didn't; so we are leaving. Good.

 

A decision I regret, but accept. You could have fooled me!!

 

[nauseus]

4 hours ago, 7by7 said:

Juncker was nominated by 26 votes to 2.

 

Are you saying that Cameron's vote should count more than the 26 who voted for Juncker?

 

I though you were a believer in democracy?

I believe in democracy that's why I do not believe in the EU as it is now.

[rufanuf]

13 hours ago, 7by7 said:

Unfortunately, long explanations are required when communicating with people who are obviously lacking in knowledge of and/or do not understand the basics! But I'll keep this one as brief as I can.

 

Any international treaty imposes responsibilities and obligations upon it's signatories.

 

Membership of any international organisation imposes obligations and responsibilities upon it's members.

 

Citizens vote for the governments who sign those treaties, who join those international organisations.

 

BTW, several countries had referenda on, for example, the Maastricht Treaty. So your assertion that not one EU citizen voted for any of the powers invested in the EU which override those of a member state is completely wrong. Thatcher didn't want a referendum  in the UK; but that's not the EU's fault!

 

What one has to decide is whether the benefits outweigh these obligations and responsibilities.

 

I believe the benefits of EU membership do.

 

As did 67.2% those who voted in the 1973 referendum.

 

But for one reason or another, 51.9% of those who voted in the 2016 referendum didn't; so we are leaving.

 

A decision I regret, but accept.

 

 

Once again, long on explanation. The long explanations by you are because you don't understand the BASICS of democracy. All your explanation is irrelevant because all it does is try to explain the workings of a flawed approach to democracy. Sorry if you don't understand this. If we didnt have a referendum in the UK because a politcian didnt allow it, then the EU shouldnt have accepted it. But they did becuase it was part of a power grab.

 

It's no good talking about the functionality of say for example a treaty without addressing how the treaty came into being, and whether it was democratic. One of the amusing facts about the EU and Brexit is that some where suggesting Brexit should of needed over 2 thirds of the public vote to carry it thru. Until it was pointed out NOT a single vote was requested from the public to pass it into law! The treaties of the EU are at the core of the undemocratic issue, Treaties are not part of a democratic process, they are part of a legal process,(they should not have been used in the manner they where to form the EU)   they was never voted on by the public in the UK. The treaties voted for by the public where about a common market NOT political Union, and everyone would agree to the common sense of the common market.

Edited July 22, 2017 by rufanuf

[Khun Han]

37 minutes ago, rufanuf said:

Once again, long on explanation. The long explanations by you are because you don't understand the BASICS of democracy. All your explanation is irrelevant because all it does is try to explain the workings of a flawed approach to democracy. Sorry if you don't understand this. If we didnt have a referendum in the UK because a politcian didnt allow it, then the EU shouldnt have accepted it. But they did becuase it was part of a power grab.

 

It's no good talking about the functionality of say for example a treaty without addressing how the treaty came into being, and whether it was democratic. One of the amusing facts about the EU and Brexit is that some where suggesting Brexit should of needed over 2 thirds of the public vote to carry it thru. Until it was pointed out NOT a single vote was requested from the public to pass it into law! The treaties of the EU are at the core of the undemocratic issue, Treaties are not part of a democratic process, they are part of a legal process,(they should not have been used in the manner they where to form the EU)   they was never voted on by the public in the UK. The treaties voted for by the public where about a common market NOT political Union, and everyone would agree to the common sense of the common market.

 

"long on explanation"

 

Nail hit squarely on head. Long on explanation = too many llinks of 'logic'.

[melvinmelvin]

1 hour ago, rufanuf said:

Once again, long on explanation. The long explanations by you are because you don't understand the BASICS of democracy. All your explanation is irrelevant because all it does is try to explain the workings of a flawed approach to democracy. Sorry if you don't understand this. If we didnt have a referendum in the UK because a politcian didnt allow it, then the EU shouldnt have accepted it. But they did becuase it was part of a power grab.

 

It's no good talking about the functionality of say for example a treaty without addressing how the treaty came into being, and whether it was democratic. One of the amusing facts about the EU and Brexit is that some where suggesting Brexit should of needed over 2 thirds of the public vote to carry it thru. Until it was pointed out NOT a single vote was requested from the public to pass it into law! The treaties of the EU are at the core of the undemocratic issue, Treaties are not part of a democratic process, they are part of a legal process,(they should not have been used in the manner they where to form the EU)   they was never voted on by the public in the UK. The treaties voted for by the public where about a common market NOT political Union, and everyone would agree to the common sense of the common market.

 

several of the treaties or amendments to the Treaty of Rome have been subjected to referenda in misc. EU member states,

that UK chose not to do that

shows more a democracy shortage in UK rather than EU

 

if it is a common view among UK citizens that such treaties should have been put to the people

then blame your politicians

 

 

[rufanuf]

6 hours ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

several of the treaties or amendments to the Treaty of Rome have been subjected to referenda in misc. EU member states,

that UK chose not to do that

shows more a democracy shortage in UK rather than EU

 

if it is a common view among UK citizens that such treaties should have been put to the people

then blame your politicians

 

 

Glad you agree then. Passing blame is not the issue, The lack of democracy is however and whoever is instigating it.

[rufanuf]

7 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

"long on explanation"

 

Nail hit squarely on head. Long on explanation = too many llinks of 'logic'.

Its not logical its psychological. Those who support the idea look for supporting arguments. Those that don't, don't! Is that logical enough for you?

[Basil B]

On 19/07/2017 at 2:24 AM, wombat said:

since when have lawmakers been economists ?

 

Without laws there would be no economy...

 

Fact is without the right laws after Brexit there will be no economy,we already see many financial companies heading for the exit door and others hedging their bets...

 

For those who voted Brexit you have taken us on a very slippery road that know one knows what is at the end. 

[rufanuf]

36 minutes ago, Basil B said:

Without laws there would be no economy...

 

Fact is without the right laws after Brexit there will be no economy,we already see many financial companies heading for the exit door and others hedging their bets...

 

For those who voted Brexit you have taken us on a very slippery road that know one knows what is at the end. 

Independence maybe? Something knowone ever voted to lose.

[puck2]

20 hours ago, nauseus said:

I believe in democracy that's why I do not believe in the EU as it is now.

7by7, I admire your patience towards some believers/Brexiteers.

 

You and others show them examples of what they believe is wrong (there is no half-wrong). As US Reps, they are getting aggressive and insulting when you don't confirm their believe – because of your explanations with facts.

 

They follow the preaching of their „masters“, neglecting (your) facts.

 

 

 

Long explanation is biting them, it' longer than a tweet.

 

That remembers me our good teacher in high school who said: „politics and religion have something in common, believe“ (against facts).

 

You can tell them, I walked over the water. They will deny it. But when they read it in the bible they believe it. The imams can tell their muslim followers that they directly go to the heaven, if they kill a nonbeliever and will have 72 virgins (Farage and Johnson – if muslims - would promis whores). The muslims believe it.

 

And here in this threat?

You can show them that the EU has a parliamentary democratic style, they don't believe/"get it".

You can show them that - „Juncker was nominated by 26 votes to 2. Are you saying that Cameron's vote should count more than the 26 who voted for Juncker“ - . they believe that the UK is a democracy and the EU not.

The list goes on ….

 

Although Farage corrected his mistake – too late after the Brexit vote - it didn't disturb the Breixiteers.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/24/nigel-farage-350-million-pledge-to-fund-the-nhs-was-a-mistake/

[nauseus]

17 minutes ago, puck2 said:

7by7, I admire your patience towards some believers/Brexiteers.

 

You and others show them examples of what they believe is wrong (there is no half-wrong). As US Reps, they are getting aggressive and insulting when you don't confirm their believe – because of your explanations with facts.

 

They follow the preaching of their „masters“, neglecting (your) facts.

 

 

 

Long explanation is biting them, it' longer than a tweet.

 

That remembers me our good teacher in high school who said: „politics and religion have something in common, believe“ (against facts).

 

You can tell them, I walked over the water. They will deny it. But when they read it in the bible they believe it. The imams can tell their muslim followers that they directly go to the heaven, if they kill a nonbeliever and will have 72 virgins (Farage and Johnson – if muslims - would promis whores). The muslims believe it.

 

And here in this threat?

You can show them that the EU has a parliamentary democratic style, they don't believe/"get it".

You can show them that - „Juncker was nominated by 26 votes to 2. Are you saying that Cameron's vote should count more than the 26 who voted for Juncker“ - . they believe that the UK is a democracy and the EU not.

The list goes on ….

 

Although Farage corrected his mistake – too late after the Brexit vote - it didn't disturb the Breixiteers.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/24/nigel-farage-350-million-pledge-to-fund-the-nhs-was-a-mistake/

You two should really get together sometime.

[puck2]

1 minute ago, nauseus said:

You two should really get together sometime.

Thank you for the answer - rich of "facts".

[Khun Han]

"Lets give....."

 

A suggestion by people not holding the purse strings. As opposed to:

 

"I will....."

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/14/osborne-predicts-30bn-hole-in-public-finance-if-uk-votes-to-leave-eu

 

By the person holding the purse strings.

 

I know which one is the biggest, ugliest lie.

[nauseus]

3 minutes ago, puck2 said:

Thank you for the answer - rich of "facts".

Fact is the the 350M was on the red bus, not Farage's purple one. Farage was not invited to be part of the main leave campaign.

 

You are digging up year old bones already well beaten on drums on TV. try some original stuff.

[rickudon]

So, who is right? 52% of those who voted voted to leave the EU. The rest of the world voted by devaluing the pound by 18%. What worries me, is that Brexiteers just blame it on currency manipulators, not facts. Currency manipulators have short term effects, this devaluation has already lasted a year. And it isn't going to recover before 2019, if then.

 

And the politicians? They still cannot agree what sort of Brexit they want, and have no clue of the ramifications of every suggestion that is aired. I doubt if there will even be a coherent plan by 2019. Civil servants are trying to plan for an action which hasn't been planned. or agreed by all parties.

 

The only thing we can be certain about in the short term, is uncertainty. And economies do not thrive on that.

 

So my retirement in Thailand has changed from comfortable to careful. I  am now researching how much i can make from selling plastic bottles, cardboard and cans. Just in case. ......

[rufanuf]

2 hours ago, rickudon said:

So, who is right? 52% of those who voted voted to leave the EU. The rest of the world voted by devaluing the pound by 18%. What worries me, is that Brexiteers just blame it on currency manipulators, not facts. Currency manipulators have short term effects, this devaluation has already lasted a year. And it isn't going to recover before 2019, if then.

 

And the politicians? They still cannot agree what sort of Brexit they want, and have no clue of the ramifications of every suggestion that is aired. I doubt if there will even be a coherent plan by 2019. Civil servants are trying to plan for an action which hasn't been planned. or agreed by all parties.

 

The only thing we can be certain about in the short term, is uncertainty. And economies do not thrive on that.

 

So my retirement in Thailand has changed from comfortable to careful. I  am now researching how much i can make from selling plastic bottles, cardboard and cans. Just in case. ......

You lot really still don't get it do you?

 

Most people who voted Brexit couldn't give a flying fig about the strength of the pound, the figure written along the side of a bus or some bloke called Farage.

 

They voted to leave the EU because they do not believe layer upon layer of politicians,  in turn writing layer upon layer of laws and legislation, most of which impacts people whose lives are a million times removed from their own can in anyway be called "democratic".  Yet you all still keep wheeling out the same tired old arguments trying to suggest those who don't share your beliefs about the benefits of being ruled by an elite class are light on so called "facts". The simple fact is I do not want this form of socialist wet dream for the country I was born in, and I wouldn't wish it on any other nation either.

Edited July 23, 2017 by rufanuf

[rickudon]

And 'You lot' Do not get it either. Brexit is immensely complicated, and almost certainly an economic nightmare for Britain. A few paltry democratic changes at a massive cost. And i very much doubt that we will end up more free. Quite the reverse.The UK was in dire economic straits at the time we joined the EC, and any lack of democracy about EU policies was because the British government failed to consult the people. And we gradually thrived.

 

We also put up with years of fake news from the dailies about EU regulations on bent bananas and cabbages  =most of it utter rubbish. Where there problems? Of course, like the butter mountains and wine lakes, but those problems were eventually resolved. Better to work from within. As for Democracy, many countries claim to be democratic - very few really are.

 

Strange how most Europeans saw the EU as beneficial, as did most of the rest of the world. But there are always those who are never satisfied, or think they can do it better. I don't find it very Democratic to have to choose between 2 parties with crap policies once every 5 years - you only ever get part of what you want and the politicians often then back track on their policies. Who wants loons like Boris Johnson or Corbyn in control? I would prefer a massive bureaucracy like the EU, they do less damage!

[Khun Han]

1 hour ago, rickudon said:

And 'You lot' Do not get it either. Brexit is immensely complicated, and almost certainly an economic nightmare for Britain. A few paltry democratic changes at a massive cost. And i very much doubt that we will end up more free. Quite the reverse.The UK was in dire economic straits at the time we joined the EC, and any lack of democracy about EU policies was because the British government failed to consult the people. And we gradually thrived.

 

We also put up with years of fake news from the dailies about EU regulations on bent bananas and cabbages  =most of it utter rubbish. Where there problems? Of course, like the butter mountains and wine lakes, but those problems were eventually resolved. Better to work from within. As for Democracy, many countries claim to be democratic - very few really are.

 

Strange how most Europeans saw the EU as beneficial, as did most of the rest of the world. But there are always those who are never satisfied, or think they can do it better. I don't find it very Democratic to have to choose between 2 parties with crap policies once every 5 years - you only ever get part of what you want and the politicians often then back track on their policies. Who wants loons like Boris Johnson or Corbyn in control? I would prefer a massive bureaucracy like the EU, they do less damage!

 

Wow! Just Wow!

 

A few paltrey democratic changes?!? We're giving away our sovereignty. Nobody notices when everything is going hunky dory. But what about when the going gets tough? Economic and other policies will be set for the European (and especially German) greater good, and we won't be able to do a thing about it. The UK was in dire economic straits at the time we joined the EEC because of trades union militancy gone through the looking glass and hopelessly outdaded heavy industry. Thatcher dealt with that in her own way, which created a boom and bust economy. Nothing to do with the EEC.

 

The problems with European agricultural policy have been resolved? Really???

 

Plenty of Europeans have voted against the EU. Their local powers-that-be just change the question slightly until the locals vote the 'right way', as per EU instructions. I think that it's infinitely better to be voting in and out the likes of Corbyn and Boris Johnson every few years than having a series of front men for the real European power, such as Juncker, imposed on us ad infinitum.

[rufanuf]

4 hours ago, rickudon said:

And 'You lot' Do not get it either. Brexit is immensely complicated, and almost certainly an economic nightmare for Britain. A few paltry democratic changes at a massive cost. And i very much doubt that we will end up more free. Quite the reverse.The UK was in dire economic straits at the time we joined the EC, and any lack of democracy about EU policies was because the British government failed to consult the people. And we gradually thrived.

 

We also put up with years of fake news from the dailies about EU regulations on bent bananas and cabbages  =most of it utter rubbish. Where there problems? Of course, like the butter mountains and wine lakes, but those problems were eventually resolved. Better to work from within. As for Democracy, many countries claim to be democratic - very few really are.

 

Strange how most Europeans saw the EU as beneficial, as did most of the rest of the world. But there are always those who are never satisfied, or think they can do it better. I don't find it very Democratic to have to choose between 2 parties with crap policies once every 5 years - you only ever get part of what you want and the politicians often then back track on their policies. Who wants loons like Boris Johnson or Corbyn in control? I would prefer a massive bureaucracy like the EU, they do less damage!

In your opinion. You see this is at the heart of the issue. If Brexit is "immensely complicated" Its becuase entering the EU in the first place made it so. Your describing "entrapment", and thats why those with any sense of national identity want out even more. REGARDLESS of the economics, as thats the very thing that's been used to snare us. Of course its going to be messy, the EU wouldnt have it any other way.