Europe should we stay in or get out?

Oh no. It's The Matrix, isn't it? Tell me it ain't so, bro!
If you don't believe in it then it means it's not happening so you don't have to deal with it.
The Communications Data Bill won't apply to you because you don't believe it exists.

Interesting logic you employ, actually. I'm going to test it by not believing in gravity then dropping something from shoulder height. It should just hover.

Tested it. Doesn't work.

Conclusion: reality exists outside of belief.
 
Upvote 0
Alternative: Belief exists within reality.
Well, everything exists within reality, doesn't it.
What I mean is that belief doesn't change reality, so whether or not the EU is good for the UK, is nothing to do with opinion nor belief, because the EU is what it is. The skill comes in translating the reality as accurately as possible. Some people are better at this than others, but everyone gets a vote, so since the nature of the EU is something which is easily knowable, then which way a person will vote comes down to their motivation and their quality of character, not their opinion.
There were some good examples of this in the 20th Century.
 
Upvote 0
No, sorry. Two people can perceive the same thing differently.
Of course they can. Music is a good example.

It's still real, but it's being perceived in two (or more) different ways.
It's only real as far as their perception will allow, but actual reality exists regardless of perception.
Otherwise, I may as well believe that a billion pounds has appeared in my bank account.
Reality exists and THEN the perception, not the other way around.

In terms of the EU, the reality is easily knowable, because living in relative freedom is arguably better than living in slavery. But some people who know this would still prefer to live in slavery because their motivations are different to those of people who wish to live in freedom.
Some people, due to a lack of quality of character, would like to vote for other people to live in slavery, but the reality stays the same for everyone; it's just the motivation which is different.
 
Upvote 0
I will be voting out.

I do believe it'll cause short term economic issues and perhaps a recession but for the long term it's going to be best.

The idea of a single market and a single currency (thankfully we got away with this but it could happen in the future) is economic suicide.
We're due a recession whether we stay in or out. Look at the charts; it goes in cycles. We're overdue, really. Governments have just been "kicking the can" so that someone else will have to deal with it and they can draw their enormous salaries and benefits for as long as possible.

However, I would say that a certain amount of "economic rebalancing" would be sorely needed in the UK.
Our taxes are too high and so is regulation. Less of both means more money to spend, higher employment, greater innovation and more happiness for everyone. The EU squashes these things.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Davek0974
Upvote 0

KM-Tiger

Free Member
Aug 10, 2003
10,346
1
2,893
Bexley, Kent
The idea of a single market and a single currency (thankfully we got away with this but it could happen in the future) is economic suicide.
Works well enough in the USA.

But of course all the states speak the same language, have the same law, and they have a constitution that ensures the federal govt answers to the people.
 
Upvote 0

MikeJ

Free Member
Jan 15, 2008
6,965
2,257
Northumbeland
Not at all.
You're just naive.
You're institutionalised.

Surveillance: whenever you drive on major (and some minor) roads, your numberplate is recorded. Whenever you walk in a busy place, your face is recorded and face-recognition software is used in areas of high footfall. You carry around with you a tracking device (let's call it a smart phone), the location of which is recorded. Your communications are monitored for keywords and phrases. Your call and email contacts are recorded (Data Retention Regulations 2014). Your internet browsing activity (including social media), email correspondence, voice calls, internet gaming, and mobile phone messaging services will all soon be recorded for 12 months (at least) (Communications Data Bill).
Does that sound a bit like surveillance to you?

Slavery: your purpose is to pay taxes, and to be obedient, so that your masters can live off your labour and have power over you. You cannot say what you like, and your movements are known at all times. You are given leisure time so that you have the illusion of being free and your masters can expend the least amount of energy in making sure that you pay your money and don't step out of line. However, you are a slave and will become more of one in the EU. You live in a cage but the bars have been hidden from you, nor to you want to see them, because that would require some courage.

Genocide: according to the UN definition, the British people, as well as many peoples in Europe, are being subjected to the following aspects of genocide: (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group.
Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi had a word to say about that.

"I'm A Celebrity" is probably on tonight so there's no need to be concerned with anything other than who is going to win, or have a shower under a waterfall in their bikini! There will also be a new iPhone out soon, not forgetting the new Galaxy S7, so you can concern yourself with wondering what the new features will be! And don't forget to get some Facebook likes! And keep your eye on the house prices!
Anything to distract you.

Congratulations. That's the biggest load of crap I've ever read on here. And I read Swisaw's "The Secret of Fans".

If I'm a slave, explain why I can pack my bags tomorrow and go to another country. Pretty much any country I choose. I'm off to South Africa at the weekend. Doesn't sound like slavery to me.

Genocide? That really is insulting, and you should be ashamed for using that language. You should seek help.
 
  • Like
Reactions: scribe0101
Upvote 0
I have concerns as before we entered the EU we were a manufacturing nation,since then our manufacturing base has been destroyed by various governments in favour of financial services .

Our manufactured goods were what made us successful prior to entering the EU.

I doubt we have the capacity to replicate the golden days.IMHO
 
Upvote 0

Newchodge

Moderator
  • Business Listing
    Nov 8, 2012
    22,698
    8
    8,012
    Newcastle
    I think people have in mind being able to deport criminals and terrorists without them squealing "human rights, human rights".

    Surely the proper definition of an acceptable policy is allowing all people to access human rights, even if they are personally despicable.
     
    Upvote 0
    The guys in what was Guantanemo bay - what have they done?
    They were enemy combatants caught on the battlefield in at least most cases, if not all. Oh sorry, I mean "humanitarian workers", hahahahah.

    Many of those released from Guantanamo returned to terrorism and were killed, arrested or are still at large. It's the ideology which drives them. It is seldom the case that a person is a jihadi one minute and renouncing Islam the next.
     
    Upvote 0
    Really? Who told you that? George Bush, on the telly? PFFFFT!
    Yeah that's right.
    What really happened was that the US went to enormous expense to pick up some random Muslim men and keep them locked up for years for no reason.

    The inmates at Guantanamo from Afghanistan were caught on the battlefield. They were suspected, with enough justification, of being enemy combatants who were fighting against the US and their allies.
    It used to be the case that if enemy combatants were found on the battlefield, out of uniform, then they could be executed on the spot. Since there's only one way to win against jihadists, I would prefer that were still the case.
     
    Upvote 0
    'Enemy combatants'. What, unambiguously known as 'soldiers'?
    Well, no.
    Soldiers wear uniforms and insignia and have rank and are part of an organised army.
    Enemy combatants do not.
    Taliban fighters did not wear a uniform nor insignia nor have proper ranks nor were part of an organised army nor conducted themselves in line with the rules and customs of war.

    A man does not become a soldier merely by picking up a gun.

    Locked up for being a soldier?
    No, they were not locked up for being soldiers. They weren't soldiers for a start.

    No charges, no trial, no justice, just held so the US can feel powerful against those darned raggle-taggle cave-dwellers? How strange!
    What's strange is your complete lack of understanding of war, but your attitude is a good example of why we lost in Afghanistan.
    The kind of laws which apply to burglars, muggers, fraudsters and murderers cannot be applied to fighters on a battlefield. That ought to be obvious, no?

    Try not to shill for the enemy, old chap.
     
    Upvote 0

    Cobby

    Free Member
    Oct 28, 2009
    4,079
    857
    Yeah that's right.
    What really happened was that the US went to enormous expense to pick up some random Muslim men and keep them locked up for years for no reason.
    No expense spared to make political points, and sometimes just domestically, not even internationally. Have a quick read about the delayed release of their own citizens that are/were prisoners, all for political posturing.
     
    Upvote 0

    MikeJ

    Free Member
    Jan 15, 2008
    6,965
    2,257
    Northumbeland
    Yeah that's right.
    What really happened was that the US went to enormous expense to pick up some random Muslim men and keep them locked up for years for no reason.

    The inmates at Guantanamo from Afghanistan were caught on the battlefield. They were suspected, with enough justification, of being enemy combatants who were fighting against the US and their allies.
    It used to be the case that if enemy combatants were found on the battlefield, out of uniform, then they could be executed on the spot. Since there's only one way to win against jihadists, I would prefer that were still the case.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaker_Aamer

    Nice when everything's so black and white. Or, in some people's cases, white and whiter.
     
    Upvote 0
    It's odd that his Wikipedia page doesn't mention that he was a terrorist, when he was a terrorist: http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2015/10/shaker-aamer-guantanamo-and-the-questions-that-wont-be-asked/
    Supporting a foreign government's rights to detain a UK citizen without trial for numerous years clearly isn't traitorous.
    I'm not concerned with where he has citizenship. That someone gains a British passport through the treason of the British government is neither here nor there. A dog which lives in a barn does not become a horse.
    Shaker Aamer is an Arabian who fought as a terrorist and follows an ideology which makes him the mortal enemy of my people. Yours too. That he was able to come back to the UK rather than being sent to Saudi, or preferably shot, is of great regret.

    However, when we leave the EU we will be able to secure our borders once more and won't have to allow trash like him to come and live here.
    Tell us the genocide one again. That was really funny.
    It might be funny to you, but it wasn't funny to the girls of Rotherham or Cologne, who have been among its primary victims. Nor will it be funny to your children and grandchildren, who will wonder why they've been left such a mess to clean up.

    Given your character, I definitely think you are better off voting "in".
     
    Upvote 0

    MikeJ

    Free Member
    Jan 15, 2008
    6,965
    2,257
    Northumbeland
    It might be funny to you, but it wasn't funny to the girls of Rotherham or Cologne, who have been among its primary victims. Nor will it be funny to your children and grandchildren, who will wonder why they've been left such a mess to clean up.

    Still not genocide though, is it? It's more like EDL publicity.
     
    Upvote 0
    Yeah, an IQ of 160 probably means I will. That and the campaigners for "out".
    If you had an IQ of 160 then you wouldn't be mentioning it in public. Haha. You could still vote "in" with an IQ of 160 because IQ does not equate to intellectual honesty.

    Still not genocide though, is it? It's more like EDL publicity.
    EDL? Oh dear. For someone with an IQ of 160 (haha), you sure like your opinions to be assigned to you.

    As for genocide, I posted the UN definition previously. There's a tad more to genocide than chopping people up with a machete or putting them into gas chambers.
     
    Upvote 0

    MikeJ

    Free Member
    Jan 15, 2008
    6,965
    2,257
    Northumbeland
    Former member of Mensa, as it happens.

    Explain this. The Rotherham scandal was perpetrated by UK citizens of Pakistani heritage. How would leaving the EU make any difference to that? They didn't come in through the EU, did they? I know it's only 160, but I'm pretty sure Pakistan isn't in the EU.

    Anyone would think you're trying to stir up racial hatred to justify your position.
     
    Upvote 0
    Former member of Mensa, as it happens.
    Did they chuck you out when they found out that you'd pulled a Carol Smillie?

    Explain this. The Rotherham scandal was perpetrated by UK citizens of Pakistani heritage. How would leaving the EU make any difference to that? They didn't come in through the EU, did they? I know it's only 160, but I'm pretty sure Pakistan isn't in the EU.
    With your vast intelligence you ought to be able to work this out for yourself. I'll give you a clue to start you off: there is an ideology behind the EU, which existed before the Lisbon Treaty and even before the "Common Market" vote in 1975. It is the ideology which causes the harm, and its effects are experienced in different ways. The EU is just one of the harmful effects of this ideology.
    We cannot rid our country of this ideology whilst we are in the EU. We must leave in order to have a chance of getting rid of it.

    Anyone would think you're trying to stir up racial hatred to justify your position.
    Oh dear, you have played the race card, so you have automatically lost. Accusations of racism and suchlike are merely tools designed to shut down debate. They don't work on me. There are only facts and logic, and the opposites of those things.
    So take your control-freakery and thought-policing elsewhere.
     
    Upvote 0

    Latest Articles