Brexit #2

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 01:19 PM

"
Feel free to deal with any of these suggestions in as much detail as you wish, but do so as an adult with a modicum of intelligence that has been, so far missing from your postings
Jim Carroll "

Rather difficult when my response is promptly deleted.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 01:31 PM

If your remarks were part of an off topic scrum, they were eliminated. Trying to keep to just one Brexit thread means keeping this one on the rails. Play nice.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 01:53 PM

Leave obtained 1.8 percent over the magical fifty mark. Now suppose that that just a little more than that majority had voted remain instead. Let's say two percent of the total voting electorate. That swing would have left remain the winnner. Now is anyone really going to argue with me that fewer than two percent of the voting electorate were racist, xenophobic ignoramuses? The conclusion must be obvious: anti-immigration sentiment won the referendum for remain. It was always there in spades anyway and was exploited extremely cynically, dishonestly and successfully by the leave campaign. Disagree and you're in cloud-cuckoo land. By the way, the proportion of immigrants who claim state benefits is tiny when set alongside the numbers of native Brits who do so. In my mum's care home Elena from Italy and Emilia from Romania (to take just two examples from many) are wonderful, enthusiastic and beautiful women who are over-qualified and who have come here to WORK. Their wages are low and they have to sign up for weekend and shift work. I don't know where we'd be without them and tens of thousands of others like them. I think we may be about to find out.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 03:07 PM

"Now is anyone really going to argue with me that fewer than two percent of the voting electorate were racist, xenophobic ignoramuses?"
A little more fundamental than that Steve
A survey carried aout a little over two years ago (published in The Daily Mail, of all places) suggested that between a half and on third of the British population held and had expressed racist views
That is not to say they were active racists, of course they aren't.
Active racism is growing, but it is still a tiny minority who are prepared to act on their prejudices
We (my generation certainly) were conditioned to dislike, distrust or denigrate foreigners we even SANG ABOUT IT IN OUR SCHOOL SERVICES uny=ti it was removed from the hymn books
It is this passive racism that the Brexiteers drew from

It happened here in Ireland recently when a Presidential candidate, PETER CASEY , drew on the Irish hatred and fear of Travellers and managed to push up his vote from nowhere to 22%, and Ireland hasn't got a real race problem
Both depressing an frightening to learn what lies just below the surface
Jim

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 03:12 PM

Steve I would not argue with your suppositions, but I would take issue on one point. Immigration has been a fact of life in the UK for many decades and has presented no real problems. In fact in the 50's immigration was encouraged from the West Indies to swell the labour force. Modern Immigration is now on a scale that impacts the low skilled. Surplus labour creates low wages and zero hours contracts. This is one of the many drawbacks of capitalism. Both Labour and Conservatives could have legislated against the more severe impact of these realities but chose not to. I wonder why not? It was also labour that ceased to keep checks on aliens departing the UK, as a result thousands exist illegally under the radar further depressing unskilled wages. Trying to explain the loss of the referendum on a minority racist,xenophobic ignoramuses voting is insulting all those that voted for other reasons. When are you going to accept you lost. I am surprised you do not blame it on Putin as well.
There is yet another problem in Europe:
Yanis Varoufakis The Euro Has Never Been More Problematic 16th November 2018

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 05:51 PM

"Surplus labour creates low wages and zero hours contracts."

This is simply not true, and, worse, it is one of the stock racist excuses for keeping immigrants out. Low wages are created by employers paying low wages because they can. Get it? Zero-hours contracts are created by unscrupulous employers who have bought into the Tory lie of the "flexible labour market." Yes there is a minority of workers who put on a brave face to say that those contracts suit them. The truth is that those contracts are one of the most iniquitous developments of modern capitalism, the legacy of the emasculation of the trade unions, started by Thatcher and gleefully perpetuated by New Labour. Corbyn's Labour has promised to get rid of zero-hours contracts. I disagree with almost everything that Corbyn is doing apropos of brexit, but that's one thing I mightily applaud.

Subject: RE: Brex
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 09:36 PM

There's a lot of racism of one sort or another in society.

I rather suspect there were a fair few among the Remain vote who were to some extent racist. But they still saw enough reasons to vote to stay in the EU to decide t

And the same would apply the other way, people who weren't in any way racist who had other reasons to vote Brexit.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 02:16 AM

Surplus labour creates low wages and zero hours contracts.

I think is intended to be a version of "the law of supply and demand". If the supply exceeds the demand, the price falls. If the demand exceeds supply the price rises.

But that is only an approximation to the rule. You need to add in the clause "until some constraint is reached." You can't increase production of widgets indefinitely: you run out of factory space or skilled staff or raw materials. Even if you can't satisfy the demand. And the same is true in the case of labour: things like the minimum wage act as constraints. As can, or could, laws about zero hour contracts.

It is worth remembering that the minimum wage is not about the government being nice. It is about reducing the amount the government would otherwise have to spend on benefits by making the employer shoulder a reasonable part of the burden, rather than take more profit and pass the costs onto the country as a whole.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 03:55 AM

"There's a lot of racism of one sort or another in society.
"
It's artificial to allot racisim to any social group - it runs through our society like Blackpool runs through rock
Active groups have divided into two camps,
The Tommy Robinson/Nigel Farage crowd who have taken it onto the streets, formed parties (Robindon has about six to his credit(sic) and Farage will no doubt form another now that his creation has been laughed off the political scene
The other (looney left, no doubt!) side have formed anti-racist groups to actively oppose it
As for a large section of the population, it lies dormant to be drawn on when needed by them upstairs
Powell tried his hand at it and became an embarrassment to the establishment, was kicked out and sought refuge with the Sectarian Unionists of Northern Ireland
Interestingly, some of the Sectarian paramilitaries in the North, finding time on their hands following The Troubles, turned their hand to targetting the homes of immigrants DETAILED SURVEY HERE

I have no doubt that racism is rife among the upper echelons of society, but they have learned to use it wisely rather than to have it emblazoned on their T-shirts (or dress shirts, as the case may be)
Brexit was a perfecct example of the skilful use of racism, as was Trump and Orban.... et al
It might have given us a vicious, talentless, no-mark right-wing President had not most of the Irish people seen though Peter Casey
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 04:56 AM

I agree with what you say, Kevin, but my point was that it would have taken just two percent of the voting electorate to vote leave wholly on the grounds of racism/ xenophobia/anti-immigrant to swing the vote in favour of leave. Utterly without evidence, I contend that that is highly likely to have been the case. Just another argument against referendums, I suppose.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 05:21 AM

You could put it even more strongly, Steve. Of the 52% that voted Leave, 48% could have voted the same way with never a racist thought in their entire lives, and that 2% of racists *could* swing the result. I say could because some of them would still have voted Leave on other grounds.

And I point that out because Remainers are often accused of labelling all Leavers as racist. Not so - it just needed a minority to affect the result.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 05:24 AM

Agreed.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: KarenH
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 07:22 AM

Before Jim claims there is no racism or prejudice in Ireland again, have a look at the comments page here. I selected this one as an example:

"Saw a few Muslims wearing Burkas today. Scary stuff"

https://www.thejournal.ie/ireland-refugees-2-2982893-Sep2016/

The Bank of England did a detailed survey using statistical measures on the effect of immigration on wages and found that only in certain areas of work was there a negative outcome, something like 1% per 10% of immigrant workers in unskilled/semi-skilled areas. They worked on a supply and demand model.

However, arrangements have already been made to allow temporary immigration in some less popular areas eg seasonal farming work. With a Tory government it would not be reasonable to expect wages to go up after Brexit. In fact if you include holiday pay and other things, one of their big reasons for coming out is less regulation.

Take the care secton, where there is a lot of use of immigrant workers, low pay poor conditions and poor services are well rehearsed features of the system, but I see no prospect of these improving as nobody seems able to pay for it.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 07:44 AM

"Before Jim claims there is no racism or prejudice in Ireland again, have a look at the comments page here."

Karen, I might be being a bit thick, but my understanding is that Jim has consistently said precisely the opposite - especially in terms of racism against the Traveller community?

Feel free to correct me if I'm misunderstanding something.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 08:07 AM

It might have given us a vicious, talentless, no-mark right-wing President had not most of the Irish people seen though Peter Casey.

Though that would have been embarrassing,Irish presidents are basically just decorative, but without any significant power. A very sensible arrangement.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 08:21 AM

You are of course, right Baccy
There is racism in Ireland, and not just with Travellers (who's treatment verges on ethnic cleansing)
It would be complacent to suggest otherwise

The incoming of immigrants has raised the level of prejudice here, but not seriously - yet - I think I mentioned the welcoming ceremony for the new citizens a couple of days ago - tends to be the way things are in general
In the main, Ireland is an extremely welcoming country, but since the shenanigans pulled the teeth from the Celtic Tiger, things have toughened somewhat and Goldman-Sachs buying up of rented property and selling to to the better off have made things a damn sight worse - a breeding ground for scapegoating and racist resentment
According to the Jewish community here, they have met with nothing but friendliness since they first started to settle in Ireland after the war
We'll have to run very fast and a long way before we catch up to the UK though

Farage held an Anti-Europe meeting a few months ago in Dublin - so far, no effect; let's wait and see.
Would be very grateful if you kept in in a cage back there
It is now reckoned that most European Countries now have a Farage waiting in the wings
Happy days are here again eh
Jim

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 08:21 AM

.........This is simply not true, and, worse, it is one of the stock racist excuses for keeping immigrants out. Low wages are created by employers paying low wages because they can.

This is one of the many drawbacks of capitalism. Both Labour and Conservatives could have legislated against the more severe impact of these realities but chose not to. I wonder why not?
'Twould appear I get it rather faster than your goodself!

To turn your own argument around it could be argued that in a normal population 15.7% are below average intelligence and 6.4% Cognitively impaired. Therefore a valid argument would be that 22.1% of the electorate probably had no idea what they were voting for and what way they voted is anybodies guess. Trying to argue a minority of a certain mindset stole the referendum is pure hokum, as you very well know.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZO9JGSScMQ

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 08:40 AM

Showing videos like that is despicable - are you seriously suggesting it represents anything other than a poor individual with communication difficulties ?
Crap - utter despicable crap
Developing articulacy has nothing to do with intelligence and far more to do with education which is more and more being put out of reach of those who are unable to afford it
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: KarenH
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 08:56 AM

Have a look at this, and then argue that bad jobs and conditions are caused by immigrants:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/jan/01/newcross-healthcare-ex-employee-cut-throat-culture-fines-sick-staff

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 09:23 AM

HERE KAREN
Jim

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: KarenH
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 10:12 AM

I am completely baffled that people don't see 'racism' as part of Brexit, though I do accept that the ethnocentrism and anti-Europeanism which gave rise to the contemptuous and contemptible use of words like 'Grog' 'Eyetye' 'Dago' may not strictly speaking be "racist". Similar enough in many cases.

Jingoism is not a 'thick working class' thing, as sometimes implied; an academic historian tried to convince me the other week that the only thing the Victorians admired which was Italian was ancient Rome. So much for the quattrocento and the Renaissance then. The partner of the same person commented on the bad housing described in the novel about refugees in Italy in WW2 was that in England such housing would have been closed down. ANd this demented gibberish came from somebody who had been alive in WW2 and must remember Homes for Heros. Crackpot jingoism.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 10:59 AM

Interesting piece by Dan Snow in the Guardian

Brexit is not an end to Britain’s liaison with Europe

May be a bit too optimistic but that is needed at the moment :-)

Enjoy

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Stanron
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 11:23 AM

Interesting article DtG, and not much there that I would disagree with. It has been said many times, perhaps not so much recently, we are leaving the political construct called the EU. We are not leaving Europe.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 12:01 PM

" we are leaving the political construct called the EU. We are not leaving Europe."
Remains to be seen - the mess that has been created leaves a huge question mark over both
If democracy had anything to do with any of this the people would be aseked to re-conirm this decision based on everything that has emerged - even leading Tories are suggesting this
Over Moggie's dead body, of course - he happily invests his money in Irish funds while wagging the flag fro Britannia, AS WILL MANY BREXITEERS

Patriotism doesn't travel much further than personal financial interests, it would seem
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 01:52 PM

https://www.schroders.com/en/uk/private-investor/insights/markets/where-are-the-post-brexit-opportunities-in-europe/

Why link to a financial article written in 2016?

They say a week is a long time in politics. One day can be a long time in financial markets- Remember black Wednesday when Sorus cleaned up?

we are leaving the political construct called the EU. We are not leaving Europe.

Interesting you say the political construct called the EU. The UK willingly voted for an economic union, the political union slid in by the back door. Yet some still deny the name of the game is a Federal United States of Europe. An interesting race through history below:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/12176234/Nine-deceptions-in-our-history-with-the-EU.html

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/10559458/We-want-a-United-States-of-Europe-says-top-EU-official.html


https://www.euractiv.com/section/eu-priorities-2020/news/merkel-calls-for-political-union-to-save-the-euro/


https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/882881/Brexit-EU-secret-document-truth-British-public

Below:Sorbonne speech of Emmanuel Macron - Full text / English version
(a very dangerous man)
http://international.blogs.ouest-france.fr/archive/2017/09/29/macron-sorbonne-verbatim-europe-18583.html

Retaining our sovereignty seems a worthy ideal to me.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 01:57 PM

I don't have any sovereignty. It makes little difference whether it is exercised by UK, French, German, Polish or other politicians, except that of those choices the UK ones are the ones I trust least. Even if I did have sovereignty, it would be worth giving up for cheaper and better imports.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 02:18 PM

Even if I did have sovereignty, it would be worth giving up for cheaper and better imports.

So you would sell your birthright for a mess of pottage?

Think about it next time Armistice comes around:
" tell them of us and say,
For their tomorrow, we gave our today”

and yet you would trade their sacrifice quite happily for baubles!

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 02:49 PM

"
Why link to a financial article written in 2016?"
For the same reason you were hauling up articles which went back as far as 2010 nor so long ago
You seem to want things both ways
If Moggie can put his cash in Ireland im sure his fellow "patriots" will be more than happy to do likewise if it keeps their feet on the table
Bit crass to challenge the validity when much af your argument is proudly based on a self-confessed propagandist blogger

So you would sell your birthright for a mess of pottage?"
Meaningless rubbish - the most of our birthright is to make the best of shitty and rapidly deteriorating - go measure the gap between haves and have nots, or see the jobs we and ours are forced to take in order to stay alive - go look at the number of workers living on or below the poverty line despite that fact that they are in work
Are you for real
I bet you sing the National Anthem every time you turn the tele off
You are an anachronism that it would be hard to make up

Birthright - for crying out loud....
Best line since Spitting Image went belly upwards
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 03:13 PM

Well we know you are an anglophobic exiled racist jim. You do not have to confirm it each time you post. By the way, what did your father do in the war? I assume, despite your hatred of all things British, you still hold out your hand each time for your British pension. I have no doubt your convictions do not extend as far as your pocket.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 04:02 PM

"I assume.......you still hold out your hand each time for your British pension. I have no doubt your convictions do not extend as far as your pocket."

Why should anyone refuse the pension to which they are entitled by virtue of contributions paid in via NICs over many years of work?

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 04:49 PM

Obviously there are many people who see a Federal United States of Europe analogous to that in North America as desirable, and express their hope to achieve that. There are people who would hope for a World Government. There are those who plan for inhabiting Mars. But none of these ambitions are at present close to coming into existence, and they can't come into existence, if they ever do, until a lot of things have changed.

UK membership of the EU in no way involves a commitment to such a project. In fact it is a major block on any developments in that direction. For anyone wishing to achieve a Pan-European state, Brexit is clearly to be desired. The evidence that there is general opposition to a British exit within the EU is evidence that it is absurd to see talk of this dream as anything more than a fantasy in this time.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 05:32 PM

That's absolutely right. Sure, the occasional zealot may have called for a United States of Europe or for "ever closer union." Those sentiments have been pounced on, clutching-at-straws style, by brexiteers and their ancestors. But the mass of Europeans don't want that. They comprise patriotic citizens of their own very distinctive countries. If anything threatens their individualism it's globalisation led by massive multinationals, not some bloke sitting in an office in Brussels. And, while we are members, that individualism is protected. We have the power of veto. Once we leave, all that finishes and everything we hate about the potential future of the EU becomes more likely to come about. And we won't have a say.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 05:41 PM

All part of the 'Leave Project Fear' - just like the '70 million Turks queueing up to invade the UK'.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 03 Jan 19 - 02:20 AM

I have no doubt your convictions do not extend as far as your pocket.

It is an interesting one, that. I have asked a lot of Leavers to say how they will be personally worse off - not the country paying an "exit fee" but actual cash from their own pocket - or longer wait times for the NHS, if only temporarily, etc etc - and, faced with these say "Yes, I embrace these deprivations because of my convictions."

None has done so yet, partly because few can admit to the possibility of being worse off at all.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Stanron
Date: 03 Jan 19 - 03:49 AM

There is no point in arguing any of this. The remainers on this forum take a statement like

"this COULD mean that we will be poorer"

and re-interpret this to mean

"this WILL mean that we will be poorer".

but the original statement could also mean

"this COULD mean that we will NOT be poorer"

which COULD mean that we will be the same or even richer.

Three possibilities of which the inconvenient two are ignored.

Why would any intelligent person argue around this?

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 03 Jan 19 - 04:08 AM

I think the hard left posting here like to deny reality:

Quotes from Federalists and Pro-Integrationists:
Jean-Claude Juncker - President of the European Commission quotes:

    "When it becomes serious you have to lie."

    "We decide on something, leave it lying around and wait and see what happens. If no one kicks up a fuss, because most people don't understand what has been decided we continue step by step until there is no turning back."

    "I'm ready to be insulted as being insufficiently democratic, but I want to be serious, I am for secret, dark debates."

    "Britain is different. Of course there will be transfers of sovereignty. But would I be intelligent to draw the attention of public opinion to this fact?"

    "There is a single legal personality for the EU, the primacy of European law."

    "If it's a 'Yes,' we will say "On we go!" and if it's a 'No' we will say "We continue!">/I>

Viviane Reding - Vice President of the European Commission

    "Strengthening Europe's legitimacy can be best done by turning our Union into a United States of Europe. As in the U.S., we need a two-chamber system for the United States of Europe. A strong political Union with a strong government (the Commission) and two Chambers - the European Parliament and a 'Senate' of Member States."

    "There will be no repatriation of EU powers. It is not our problem, it is not us making the demands. You are either ‘in’ or ‘out’."

    "At Maastricht people wanted to have us believe that we could irreversibly establish a monetary union and a new world currency without creating a United States of Europe at the same time. That was a mistake, and now that mistake needs to be corrected"

    "We must now embark on the road to a United States of Europe."

    “British sovereignty is mainly in their head because they've signed the EU treaty and most business is in Europe.”

    "The most powerful parliament in Europe is the European Parliament. Seventy per cent of laws in this country are co-decided there.”

    "When people ask politicians today “What will become of Europe?” or “Where is European integration heading?”, we usually give an evasive answer. “We don’t want a super state” that is generally the first thing we say. I must admit that I have in the past often resorted to this kind of thing myself.

    "On the basis of a report by the Presidents of the EU institutions, the European Council is currently working on four new stages of integration: a European banking union with central European bank supervision; a European fiscal union with stricter control mechanisms over national budgets and the development of our own European financing capacity; a European economic union, involving a greater degree of joint decision-making on economic, tax, and social policy and finally a political union."

Jose Manuel Barroso - Former President of the European Commission and Former Prime Minister of Portugal

    "The time for piecemeal solutions is over. We need to set our minds on global solutions. A greater ambition for Europe. Today we are at a turning point in our history. A moments when, if we do not integrate further, we risk fragmentation."

    "For the euro area to be credible – and this not only the message of the federalists, this is the message of the markets – we need a truly Community approach. We need to really integrate the euro area."

    "For all of this to work, we need more than ever the independent authority of the Commission, to propose and assess the actions that the Member States should take. Governments, let's be frank, cannot do this by themselves. Nor can this be done by negotiations between governments."

    "We should remember that our Europe is a Europe of citizens. As citizens, we all gain through Europe. We gain a European identity and citizenship apart from our national citizenship."

    "We must also be realistic and recognise that, if Europe is to exert its influence fully, if Europe really wants to be a power, we must strengthen the Common Foreign and Security Policy. It must be credible. It must be based on a common security and defence dimension if we are really to count in the world."

    "Certain forms of intergovernmentalism could be the death of the united Europe we wish for."
Posted byu/[deleted]3 years ago
Quotes from Federalists and Pro-Integrationists

Jean-Claude Juncker - President of the European Commission

    "When it becomes serious you have to lie."

    "We decide on something, leave it lying around and wait and see what happens. If no one kicks up a fuss, because most people don't understand what has been decided we continue step by step until there is no turning back."

    "I'm ready to be insulted as being insufficiently democratic, but I want to be serious, I am for secret, dark debates."

    "Britain is different. Of course there will be transfers of sovereignty. But would I be intelligent to draw the attention of public opinion to this fact?"

    "There is a single legal personality for the EU, the primacy of European law."

    "If it's a 'Yes,' we will say "On we go!" and if it's a 'No' we will say "We continue!"

    “You would not create a European army to use it immediately”

Viviane Reding - Vice President of the European Commission

    "Strengthening Europe's legitimacy can be best done by turning our Union into a United States of Europe. As in the U.S., we need a two-chamber system for the United States of Europe. A strong political Union with a strong government (the Commission) and two Chambers - the European Parliament and a 'Senate' of Member States."

    "There will be no repatriation of EU powers. It is not our problem, it is not us making the demands. You are either ‘in’ or ‘out’."

    "At Maastricht people wanted to have us believe that we could irreversibly establish a monetary union and a new world currency without creating a United States of Europe at the same time. That was a mistake, and now that mistake needs to be corrected"

    "We must now embark on the road to a United States of Europe."

    “British sovereignty is mainly in their head because they've signed the EU treaty and most business is in Europe.”

    "The most powerful parliament in Europe is the European Parliament. Seventy per cent of laws in this country are co-decided there.”

    "When people ask politicians today “What will become of Europe?” or “Where is European integration heading?”, we usually give an evasive answer. “We don’t want a super state” that is generally the first thing we say. I must admit that I have in the past often resorted to this kind of thing myself.

    "On the basis of a report by the Presidents of the EU institutions, the European Council is currently working on four new stages of integration: a European banking union with central European bank supervision; a European fiscal union with stricter control mechanisms over national budgets and the development of our own European financing capacity; a European economic union, involving a greater degree of joint decision-making on economic, tax, and social policy and finally a political union."

Jose Manuel Barroso - Former President of the European Commission and Former Prime Minister of Portugal

    "The time for piecemeal solutions is over. We need to set our minds on global solutions. A greater ambition for Europe. Today we are at a turning point in our history. A moments when, if we do not integrate further, we risk fragmentation."

    "For the euro area to be credible – and this not only the message of the federalists, this is the message of the markets – we need a truly Community approach. We need to really integrate the euro area."

    "For all of this to work, we need more than ever the independent authority of the Commission, to propose and assess the actions that the Member States should take. Governments, let's be frank, cannot do this by themselves. Nor can this be done by negotiations between governments."

    "We should remember that our Europe is a Europe of citizens. As citizens, we all gain through Europe. We gain a European identity and citizenship apart from our national citizenship."

    "We must also be realistic and recognise that, if Europe is to exert its influence fully, if Europe really wants to be a power, we must strengthen the Common Foreign and Security Policy. It must be credible. It must be based on a common security and defence dimension if we are really to count in the world."

    "Certain forms of intergovernmentalism could be the death of the united Europe we wish for."

Jacques Santer - Former Prime Minister of Luxembourg and former Chairman of the European People’s Party

    "We Christian Democrats in the European People’s Party want the European Community to become a United States of Europe."

Romano Prodi - EU Commission President

    “Here in Brussels, a true European government has been born. I have governmental powers. I have executive powers for which there is no other name in the world, whether you like it or not, than government”

Helmut Kohl - Former German Chancellor

    "We want European Union, a United States of Europe."

    "In the next 2 years we will make the process of European integration irreversible. This is a really big battle, but it is worth the fight”

    “The process of Union is like the Rhine flowing into the sea. Anyone who stands in its way is crushed”

Angela Merkel - Chancellor of Germany

    "The ideal of European unification is still today a question of war and peace.”

    "I believe we will come to it step by step. The process of handing over authorities to a unified European department will take 20-30 years."

    “In the European Union we have to come closer to the creation of a European army.”

Joschka Fischer - German Foreign Minister

    “Transforming the European Union into a single state with one army, one constitution and one foreign policy is the critical challenge of the age.”

    “The creation of a single European state bound by one European constitution is the decisive task of our time”

Guy Verhofstadt - Former Prime Minister of Belgium, Leader of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats in the European Parliament (The group the LibDems are in.)

    "We are at a crossroads, are we becoming the UN of Europe or are we becoming the US of Europe?

    "Are we becoming a loose confederation as the Eurosceptics want? With the nation states in the driver seat and without any real European Integration coordination and solidarity. Or we become this federation, this political and economic union that we absolutely need." Video

    The constitution was rejected last year by France and the Netherlands do you think the constitution should be revived or should we start from scratch? "No, no I think that we have to continue the ratification process because that keeps the pressure on the European Institutions and the European leaders to continue European integration." You would disregard the votes in France and the Netherlands? "That is there responsibility." Video

    "That is the real problem colleagues, why there is such a real problem in this crisis because member states are reluctant to transfer new soveriegnty and powers to the European Union and we all know that the only way out of this crisis is a new transfer of powers to the European Union and to the European Insitutions." Video

    "We have now a diplomatic service… but we also need a European army."

    "We need to go forwards to the United States of Europe."

Franco Frattini - Former Italian Foreign Minister

    “It is a necessary objective to have a European army”

Matteo Renzi - Prime Minister of Italy

    "I dream, think and work for the United States of Europe."

Jean-Luc Dehaene, Former Belgian Prime Minister and Vice-President of the EU Convention

    We know that nine out of 10 people will not have read the Constitution and will vote on the basis of what politicians and journalists say. More than that, if the answer is No, the vote will probably have to be done again, because it absolutely has to be Yes. "

Arnold Toynbee - Historical researcher and founding father of the EU

    "We are working discreetly ........ and all the time we are denying with our lips what we are doing with our hands."

Raymond Barre, former French Prime Minister

    "I have never understood why public opinion about European ideas should be taken into account."

Jean Monnet Founder of the European Movement (One of the EU's 'Founding Fathers')

    "Europe's nations should be guided towards the super state without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps, each disguised as having an economic purpose, but which will eventually and irreversibly lead to federation."

    "The fusion of economic functions would compel nations to fuse their sovereignty into that of a single European State"

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Jan 19 - 04:14 AM

"Well we know you are an anglophobic exiled racist jim. "
You know no such thing
I detest or mistrust most English politicians
I would be as much wasting my time asking you to back your claims up with afacts as I have in th past asking you to produce evidence for all your claims
Your "bogtrotting Irish" racism is so regular as to need no backing up
"There's always something there to remind us" as the song once said

Once more, your expected abuse is a filler-in for the fact that you are unable to respond to the points made about you heavily clichéd flag wagging - regular and as expected as number 10 buses

What did my father do in the war ?
He spent a couple of years recuperating from the serious wounds he received wound's and a horrific year in a Spanish jail after setting out to fight fascism while the English authorities were appeasing "Herr Hitler" and King Edward the 8th (would have been) was teaching the Royal family the Nazi salute
When he finally recuperated, he spent the next ten years as a Navvy because MI5 blacklisted him as a "premature anti-fascist" as those heroes came to be known

His brother, my Uncle Jerry, a decorated war hero who was traumatised when he was sent to Germany to open up the extermination and slave camps financed and run by German Industrial right-wing capitalism, became a regular Commando and was disciplined for refusing to obey the British Army's orders to go to Greece to train Fascist fighters in the Greek Civil War

I would wish on everybody the same pride I still feel for my family's dedication to humanity
Far more 'patriotic' and human than the pathetic flag-wagging that now passes fro being "British" - heroes all, as far as I am concerned
Why do you ask ?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 03 Jan 19 - 04:16 AM

Ah, the Nigel defence.

It is not about what will or could or might happen. It is about you saying something like "Even if it means I or my loved ones have to suffer X that is a price I am prepared to pay." In the medical case that might mean suffer a painful medical condition for months longer than would otherwise, for instance. My half brother - a strong Leaver- keeps reminding us of what our parents and grandparents went through 'to be free of German domination.' 'They risked their lives and those of loved ones. So what are you prepared to risk?' Answer comes there none.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 Jan 19 - 04:22 AM

Three possibilities of which the inconvenient two are ignored.

Yes, Stanron. Three possibilities of which only the one that says we will be poorer is backed up by almost 100% of all economists, most business leaders and the government itself.

Why would any intelligent person argue around this?

Well, yes. Exactly.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Stanron
Date: 03 Jan 19 - 04:49 AM

The fact, and as a fact it is questionable, that lots of people make a mistake does not stop it being a mistake.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 03 Jan 19 - 04:49 AM

If anything threatens their individualism it's globalisation led by massive multinationals,

Where do you think the ultimate destination of globalism resides?
Do you not think European Federalism is merely a stepping stone to an eventual world government?

Other events are afoot.
Agenda 21 is a non-binding action plan of the United Nations with regard to sustainable development. It is a product of the Earth Summit (UN Conference on Environment and Development) held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992.
The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development was launched by a UN Summit in New York on 25-27 September 2015
According to some the above declarations have some nasty stings in their tale. Beware that weasel word sustainability!
The significance of a world government in the process of globalization in the 21
https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/speeches/2017-02-13/secretary-general%E2%80%99s-remarks-world-government-summit

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 Jan 19 - 04:55 AM

The fact, and as a fact it is questionable, that lots of people make a mistake does not stop it being a mistake.

So, Stanron, what do you have to offer by way of evidence that almost 100% of all economists, most business leaders and the government itself are wrong on this while you are right? This is what this thread has been about from the start. If you believe we will be better off, let us in on your insider knowledge. Up to now all the pointers indicate that we will be worse off. What makes you so optimistic?

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 03 Jan 19 - 05:08 AM

A world government would be fantastic. But its not on the agenda. The link you give is a theoretical analysis of how it might work if people agreed.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Stanron
Date: 03 Jan 19 - 05:13 AM

Dave the Gnome wrote: So, Stanron, what do you have to offer by way of evidence that almost 100% of all economists, most business leaders and the government itself are wrong on this while you are right?

What evidence do you have that almost 100% of all economists, most business leaders and the government itself actually say what you say they say?

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 Jan 19 - 05:25 AM

What evidence do you have that almost 100% of all economists, most business leaders and the government itself actually say what you say they say?

I can't believe that after over 2000 posts, many of them linking news items confirming what I say, that you are asking that question but, here goes...

From The Economist

From The Caterer

From CNN

There are hundreds, if not thousands, of such links. I have yet to see any saying we will be better off.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Jan 19 - 05:26 AM

I understand from a friend this morning that one of the first effects of Brexit will be that those wishing t visit Australia will be forced to take out medical insurance

Not even the good grace to respond to the answers I gave Iains
How expected !
Far from being the Anglophobe and racist you describe me, I am extremely proud of what my family of British citizens did for their country, while the people you represent and admire dragged its name into the mire prior to the war and continue to keep the spirit of race hatred and bigotry alive and kicking up to the present day   
I trust we will never see this accusation ever again
Rule Britannia - pip-pip
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 03 Jan 19 - 06:59 AM

As there has been no answer to my question, by someone who expressed self-righteous outrage that a UK National, living in Ireland, should have the temerity to accept the UK State Pension, I'll ask again - why should anyone refuse a pension to which, by dint of contributions via NICs over many years of work, they are perfectly entitled?

https://www.gov.uk/state-pension-if-you-retire-abroad

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Jan 19 - 08:36 AM

"What stunning advice for little jimmie to follow!"
Sorry - forgot one
Three in one posting - you excel yourself
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Jan 19 - 10:34 AM

Can I make something clear here Karen
I have no great objection to occasional outbursts of temper, most of us do it at one time or another
Iains has developed abuse into a technique for avoiding arguments he can't handle from the first thread he posted on, go look - I doubt if you can find he hasn't done this on
I got so fed up with being abused by him at one stage, I began to paste them up and post them on the relevant thread - they numbered into the twenties and thirties on some threads on occasion- in all, I would guess they amount to the several hundreds .   
Each time I put them up, he calms down a little, but come the next problem, he starts over again
I really have had enough - I don't mind strong argument - I welcome it, but Iain's personal abuse has got beyond a joke - time for it to stop once and for all before more threads get closed
Jim

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Jan 19 - 10:41 AM

You insult Jeremy Corbyn all the time, Iains.

As for Juncker, a couple of things. First, you gave no sources for your quotes and I imagine that a bit of context for a good few of them might have provided a bit of gloss that you didn't supply. Second, the President of the Commission has no powers to execute any of his aspirations. Only elected members of the European Parliament can do that, and we have considerable powers of veto. Generally, the EU is run by consensus and one man spouting his hopes means not a lot really.

Stanron, you'd make a damn good climate change denier too.

Oh no...don't tell me...