|
|
|
YNWA
The UK is in a mess because of ignorance on The EUROPEAN UNION.
24 UK MEPs in the EU are UKIP!!
Out of 73 UK MEPs.
This MUST change in the coming European elections at the end of May.
New #MEPS REPRESENTING THE UK.
YNWA
UK population increase by 10 million in the last 20 years.
Baby boomers , and living age older 80+ yo.
Accounts for 8.5 million people over 20 years (1998 - 2018)
Net migration = 1.5 million in 20 years.
More retired people , means needing more people working to provide pension funds, elderly people services.
YNWA
MEPs who have served one term could get a maximum pre-tax payment of €50,900 (£43,575),
while an MEP in office since 1999 could receive €169,680 before tax. (FARAGE)
The 73 MEPs will receive around £6m payoff.
Plus Farage has £500k+ assets
Offshore money
Lied about that
Plus his assets have risen from £150k to £500k in the last year.
Farage is poison. Liar.
Koala tea
Why you pay taxes is an interesting question.Originally Posted by Balinkay
Completely agree that joining the EU on a referendum is just as absurd as leaving it. Smells of politicians just washing their hands and not taking the responsibility they are being paid to take. Why the hell am I paying taxes if they're going to ask me to solve all the tough problems?
Re: Suarez, of course they are different predictions - one's football, the other's fuckball.
A renewed referendum on "no-deal" vs "May's deal" also makes sense. I was operating under the impression that her deal wasn't even an option anymore and it was literally "no deal" vs "stay". That dude who likes to yell "ORDAAA ORDAAAA" in parliament said he wouldn't let the other scoundrels discuss "May's deal" again.
While I do agree the EU is acting in its own interests, I don't particularly see what it's doing to the detriment of those it's meant to represent, though I don't really know how the negotiations are going. Is there something glaringly bad for EU citizens in the Union's stated position on Brexit. Maybe it's acting against the best interest of the UK people. In fact I assume that's what they're doing.
Edit: Concerning the divide between the people and the parliament - I saw / heard about some study that showed something like 17% of the populace were backing some Brexit position, while over 50% of parliament wanted it to happen. USSR levels of representation in power right there.
On referendum's if you hold that critique consistently, then it applies equally to joining Europe as you accept it does leaving the eu. Your position is to then add another referendum as a solution. Seems a bit circular or inconsistent a position to hold.
Politicans are not what they used to be, the century of self shows quite well the destruction of politics as we used to know it.
Personally I dont see any referendum coming before the people on the Brexit matter. Article 50 was triggered, the eu seems to be only willing to accept an extension if May's deal is agreed to beforehand otherwise it wont accept an extension. The stage is set for parliament, accept May's deal which the eu approve of or leave on a no deal Brexit.
The perception is her deal is worse than a no deal and unlikely to get the votes needed. The worst of both worlds. Unless parliament votes to accept her deal the UK is looking at a no deal Brexit. They may not vote in a no deal in parliament but that'll be of little consequence. It's the default position and one the eu is willing to hold.
Imo it looks like the UK is headed for a no deal Brexit, if they want to vote on whether they accept that after it happens then they might vote but I cant see why they would hold that vote at all after the fact.
It seems to me there'll be no time for a referendum on the matter. Or if one occurs it'll likely be after the fact.
The negotiations should have started on an aggressive footing and been concluded quickly to allow for a vote, if a vote was ever intended at all.
Unlike political footballing of the matter it seems businesses have envisaged this scenario for a good while now and are best placed for a no deal Brexit.
Your edit would be interesting too see these polls as I've not seen any which even approximate to such a state of play.
Koala tea
Where do you get the net migration = 1.5 million in 20 years.
Going off this resource it seems to be around 4.5 or 4.6 million net migration over 20 years. 3 times your figure.
https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/long-term-international-migration-flows-to-and-from-the-uk/
First Team
Teresa May now saying they might not even bother to have another vote on a deal next week. What a bunch of shameless retards. Nice work if you can get it
Mrs May outlined 4 options now:
1. Ask for another extension
2. Revoke article 50
3. No deal
4. Her deal
First Team
The online petition hits 4 million and Farage blames "Russian collusion", that's a good name for a racehorse.
Gloryhunter
@CC
As I very clearly and explicitly stated in my previous post, asking the people wether or not to leave is about as moronic as asking them wether or not to join. Zero inconsistency there.
Let's get one thing straight - my solution to the problem is not another referendum. I'm asking why it's not the UK's. Mine would involve armed militias, gladiator rinks and copious amounts of cotton candy.
Considering the damage has been done by putting the EU membership to the people's vote twice, I can't see how staying or leaving the union could possibly hold any legitimacy if the decision is now suddenly made solely by parliament. It sounds tyrannical. This is not circularity. I'm saying that on a principal level asking the people to solve the EU question is absurd. It should not have happened. Or if it did, it should have at least been handled with so much more care and scrutiny (open to talk about that).
Once it has happened though, you've set the precedent and need to keep going, otherwise you're playing favourites and the people lose trust in their government. I.e. if the MPs just said "nope, we goin' nowhere". And yes, the UK is rather civilised, but that's how the streets come to run red in some parts of the world. Once you've said it's up to the people, you have to stick by that no matter the result.
I hope I've made it clear why those two positions don't contradict each other.
And parliament is kind of fucked, no? The stage you described is really not set, since they've voted against May's deal and to never leave the EU with no deal. They've kind of shot themselves in the foot. And stomach. And face. They're out of options. Bar seppuku maybe.
Like I said, just saw/heard about those polls somewhere online, could have been bollocks.
Your comment on the EU acting in the interest of the institution and not its people kind of worried me. Can you elaborate? I'd like to know if they were fucking me over.
Edit: I just now realised there can't be a "no-deal" vs "stay" referendum, as parliament said "no deal" is never an option.
Last edited by Balinkay; 23rd March 2019 at 10:42 AM.
Etiam si omnes, ego non
First Team
When I heard about the new political party, The Brexit party, I thought you're 3 years late mate - but maybe they're not as daft as they look.
From what I can tell, of the 4 options, an extension is now the most likely. Which leads to Britain having to take part in the European elections.
Which makes me think Monsieur Farage somehow knew this all along. A prediction CCTV would be proud of!
Koala tea
Merkel has reiterated that the EU will not extend article 50 as France and Italy have spoken on the matter and Italy will use its veto.
It must be agreed and the only way France will agree is if May's deal is accepted before the date is up. Italy may still force a veto to it.
So May has a couple of days to get parliament on board with her deal (unlikely) and the people to confer via a referendum or peoples vote which would seem to be technically impossible as well as practically.
The default position is a no deal Brexit, WTO terms. It looks most likely to me.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks