Lisbon 2: prepare to bend over and recieve ur destiny!

Valmont

ben bedlam wrote: »

When is it ok to ignore the voice of the people? NEVER.

When they're being really really stupid. I hope the government can read this thread to see what they are up against.

Sam Vimes

Valmont wrote: »

When they're being really really stupid. I hope the government can read this thread to see what they are up against.

now be careful there. it's never ok to ignore the will of the people no matter how stupid they are. and they're not being ignored here, they're being gently nudged into educating themselves and maybe changing their minds

anonymous_joe

obl wrote: »

Absolutely loved the way Billy Timmins put down that Libertas eejit on Q and A. "Who are the unelected elite?". Quality!

She didn't like that comment much did she? ^^

thelordofcheese

whatisayis wrote: »

By that comment I would have to assume you have never heard of the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base(CCTB) which is an attempt to harmonise corporate tax in the EU. Please read the link below and then explain why it has been put on hold due to Ireland's rejection of Lisbon.

http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_1013971.shtml

This goes back to the earlier "France proposes crazy shit all the time". They've been against corporate tax rates lower than their own for forty or so years, and this is not the first nor the last attempt to get a measure like this passed.

And like i said earlier, even post a yes vote to lisbon that proposal would have to get the support of a majority of MEP's, the leader of all 27 nations and their respective parliments (or by referenda). I really don't see us playing ball with the french, nor the english. I imagine it's a very unpopular proposal.

As to why it's been postponed, i have no idea. But as much as you think it has something to do with our no vote i think it's equally likely to have nothing to do with it.

Nehaxak

Can we have a seperate forum please for all the yes campaigners to blabber away to themselves ? Nobody else is listening anyway.

Run_to_da_hills

Bambi wrote: »

How dare you compare the third reich to our glorious european superstate project with it's puppet parliament and unelected president. Outrageous :pac:

And even if the comparison was valid, once we sign up to lisbon (on the thrid or fourth go if necessary) then we will have in our hands a piece of paper that will ensure.. emmmm

Ireland MUST vote yes......Sarkozy.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy praised the Irish Government's 'courageous' decision to re-run the Lisbon Treaty referendum as he said goodbye to European Parliament this morning.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/1216/eulisbon.html

I think we should vote no just to alienate the rest of Europe during what could be the worst downturn in a century. Its not as if they had anything better to do with all their structural funds anyway.

Yeah that sounds like a great idea.

Sam Vimes

Nehaxak wrote: »

Can we have a seperate forum please for all the yes campaigners to blabber away to themselves ? Nobody else is listening anyway.

good point. you've shown me the error of my ways and you have made it clear to all that the no campaign is completely right with that well thought out and well research rebuttal

Ckal

Sam Vimes wrote: »

and "deciding their fate" is a bit dramatic.

Exactly why I said it. That is the same bull**** that was flung at us by Yes voters - "You're deciding the fate of nearly 500 million people blah blah." Thank you.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

if you want a better deal ask for an additional treaty. loads of people are giving out that that treaty doesn't do this and that but that's not a reason to vote against it.

If you don't like the sound of it and you don't agree with it, then you vote no.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

no voters have many many reasons to vote no but many of them are lies and many more have nothing to do with the treaty. i have seem very very few actual valid objections to the treaty and personally i don't have a problem with any of them. i can't even remember what they were now tbh

I know that many no voters were fed lies, I'm not denying that at all. But you'd (not you) swear ALL no voters were idiots who believed these lies. It's not the case.

My three main reasons why voting no:

• European President - In theory, it's not a bad idea. But I think every person over the age of 18 in the EU should be able to vote for their EU President. This should be a requirement if they want the EU to be "more democratic than ever"

• The fading of borders which the Lisbon Treaty takes great pride in. Yes, it may have it's benefits for trade etc. But there is a national identity that a country would like to maintain. And when your borders begin to fade, this identity is at risk. And in about twenty years, Hello EU Superstate.

• Taxes. Yes, taxes. A lot of jobs are provided for Irish people by MNCs who are attracted to Ireland thanks to our very low corporation tax. Uniform taxes within the EU would mean all these MNCs will pack up and leave... making a lot of Irish people unemployed. If this is a guaranteed amendment, then I will rule my reason out.

Nehaxak

Sam Vimes wrote: »

good point. you've shown me the error of my ways and you have made it clear to all that the no campaign is completely right with that well thought out and well research rebuttal

All you're doing though is yourself and a few others are basically just blabbering on about how amazing you are, how the yes vote is the right thing for yore ma, how everyone that voted no in Ireland is a retard and something about kneecapping people if they don't vote yes.
:rolleyes:

Nehaxak

Nehaxak wrote: »

All you're doing though is yourself and a few others are basically just blabbering on about how amazing you are, how the yes vote is the right thing for yore ma, how everyone that voted no in Ireland is a retard and something about kneecapping people if they don't vote yes.
:rolleyes:

Have you ever considered politics?

Nehaxak

ronoc wrote: »

Have you ever considered politics?

Reported for serious personal abuse.








:P

tolosenc

Ckal wrote: »

My three main reasons why voting no:

• European President - In theory, it's not a bad idea. But I think every person over the age of 18 in the EU should be able to vote for their EU President. This should be a requirement if they want the EU to be "more democratic than ever"

• The fading of borders which the Lisbon Treaty takes great pride in. Yes, it may have it's benefits for trade etc. But there is a national identity that a country would like to maintain. And when your borders begin to fade, this identity is at risk. And in about twenty years, Hello EU Superstate.

• Taxes. Yes, taxes. A lot of jobs are provided for Irish people by MNCs who are attracted to Ireland thanks to our very low corporation tax. Uniform taxes within the EU would mean all these MNCs will pack up and leave... making a lot of Irish people unemployed. If this is a guaranteed amendment, then I will rule my reason out.

Regards the fading borders: We're lucky we're on an island then.

Taxes have nothing to do with the Lisbon treaty, from all my readings. Point me to the article in the treaty that says they do, then I'll read it, make up my own mind and maybe believe you.

Sam Vimes

Ckal wrote: »

Exactly why I said it. That is the same bull**** that was flung at us by Yes voters - "You're deciding the fate of nearly 500 million people blah blah." Thank you.

well i never said anything about deciding their fate. and just because it's not as dramatic as deciding their fate doesn't mean it's ok to not bother your hole and just vote no to it

Ckal wrote: »

If you don't like the sound of it and you don't agree with it, then you vote no.

absolutely. my point was that people are going on about everything it doesn't do as if that's a problem with it. the problem should be with stuff it does, not stuff that you might want it to do.

my analogy would be refusing to buy a car because it doesn't include a toaster

Ckal wrote: »

[*]European President - In theory, it's not a bad idea. But I think every person over the age of 18 in the EU should be able to vote for their EU President. This should be a requirement if they want the EU to be "more democratic than ever"

the no side are going on about how we'd lose power due to qmv but what you're suggesting there would dwarf our input into insignificance. the whole point of qmv is to give the smaller countries a voice. if it was one man one vote it'd basically be a german president until the end of time

edit: or do you mean that the people vote in a country and then the country uses its "vote share" towards the president, something like the electoral college in america?

Ckal wrote: »

The fading of borders which the Lisbon Treaty takes great pride in. Yes, it may have it's benefits for trade etc. But there is a national identity that a country would like to maintain. And when your borders begin to fade, this identity is at risk. And in about twenty years, Hello EU Superstate.

tbh i saw no fading of borders mentioned at all and if you think it might happen in 20 years, then it can't be lisbon causing it

Ckal wrote: »

Taxes. Yes, taxes. A lot of jobs are provided for Irish people by MNCs who are attracted to Ireland thanks to our very low corporation tax. Uniform taxes within the EU would mean all these MNCs will pack up and leave... making a lot of Irish people unemployed. If this is a guaranteed amendment, then I will rule my reason out.
[/LIST]

lisbon gave the eu no extra competence in the area of tax whatsoever

Sam Vimes

Nehaxak wrote: »

All you're doing though is yourself and a few others are basically just blabbering on about how amazing you are, how the yes vote is the right thing for yore ma, how everyone that voted no in Ireland is a retard and something about kneecapping people if they don't vote yes.
:rolleyes:

this will be my last response to you in this thread.

Jimpsta

Sam Vimes wrote: »

tbh i saw no fading of borders mentioned at all and if you think it might happen in 20 years, then it can't be lisbon causing it

This comment bleats of short sighted and closed mindedness.

Are you saying that something that happens or changes now can not possibly affect time in 20 years. Are you saying that the future is not written by the past? IS that it?

Valmont

Ckal wrote: »

• The fading of borders which the Lisbon Treaty takes great pride in. Yes, it may have it's benefits for trade etc. But there is a national identity that a country would like to maintain. And when your borders begin to fade, this identity is at risk. And in about twenty years, Hello EU Superstate.

That just seems like a thinly veiled 'keep the fordeners out' rant.

Ckal wrote: »

• Taxes. Yes, taxes. A lot of jobs are provided for Irish people by MNCs who are attracted to Ireland thanks to our very low corporation tax. Uniform taxes within the EU would mean all these MNCs will pack up and leave... making a lot of Irish people unemployed. If this is a guaranteed amendment, then I will rule my reason out.

I completely agree on this point though. Our corporation tax has been behind the creation of a lot of jobs and I wouldn't like having to increase so as to be fair to other states. This is a point I hope will be answered before the next referendum.

WooPeeA

Pangea wrote: »

Those that voted yes first time round should vote no this time in spite. Just for making us vote twice shows the the voice of the people doesnt matter when we give the wrong answer.

Do you vote on government inside problem or on the treaty?

Sam Vimes

Jimpsta wrote: »

This comment bleats of short sighted and closed mindedness.

Are you saying that something that happens or changes now can not possibly affect time in 20 years. Are you saying that the future is not written by the past? IS that it?

no that's not what i'm saying. i'm saying that if it took 20 years to become apparent then it's most likely the eu was just going that way anyway and that lisbon didn't cause it

Sam Vimes

Valmont wrote: »

I completely agree on this point though. Our corporation tax has been behind the creation of a lot of jobs and I wouldn't like having to increase so as to be fair to other states. This is a point I hope will be answered before the next referendum.

it has been answered. anyone who was suggesting that lisbon affected our tax in any way was lying. it's as simple as that

whatisayis

thelordofcheese wrote: »

As to why it's been postponed, i have no idea. But as much as you think it has something to do with our no vote i think it's equally likely to have nothing to do with it.

The French finance minister obviously does:

Financial Times June 19th, 2008
The French Finance Minister Christine Lagarde says France has put plans for changes in the EU system of taxing company profits on hold
The relegation of the tax base proposal – a long-standing French objective – is seen as the first sign the Irish No vote is having a knock-on effect on the EU’s policy
agenda, particularly on those issues deemed to encroach on national sovereignty
The Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCTB) would create a pan-European method of calculating how much tax companies should pay
The landscape has slightly modified because of good old Ireland Lagarde said, while insisting that“the imperatives are the same"

Jimpsta

Sam Vimes wrote: »

no that's not what i'm saying. i'm saying that if it took 20 years to become apparent then it's most likely the eu was just going that way anyway and that lisbon didn't cause it

What if, without the Lisbon treaty the inevitable was no longer inevitable then?

Sam Vimes

Jimpsta wrote: »

What if, without the Lisbon treaty the inevitable was no longer inevitable then?

ok then, what if?

do you have anything to show that this might in fact be the case, ie:

1. that it's avoidable now
2. that it won't be avoidable if lisbon is passed
3. that it's going to happen even if lisbon is passed
4. that it's going to happen whether lisbon is passed or not
5. that it's an inherently bad thing

Jimpsta

Sam Vimes wrote: »

ok then, what if?

do you have anything to show that this might in fact be the case, ie:

1. that it's avoidable now
2. that it won't be avoidable if lisbon is passed
3. that it's going to happen even if lisbon is passed
4. that it's going to happen whether lisbon is passed or not
5. that it's an inherently bad thing

Can you show that it wont be?

Sam Vimes

Jimpsta wrote: »

Can you show that it wont be?

and that right there is how libertas won. have you heard of the flying spaghetti monster btw?

whatisayis

Sam Vimes wrote: »

it has been answered. anyone who was suggesting that lisbon affected our tax in any way was lying. it's as simple as that

The French Finance Minister announces days after the rejection of the Treaty that The Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCTB) plan was being put on hold and then says "The landscape has slightly modified thanks to good old Ireland".

One could possibly think the timing of this announcement was just a coincidence and if she hadn't added on the bit about "good old Ireland", some people would even believe it.

Ckal

obl wrote: »

Taxes have nothing to do with the Lisbon treaty, from all my readings. Point me to the article in the treaty that says they do, then I'll read it, make up my own mind and maybe believe you.

Article 113. Ireland will lose control of their taxes under mandatory tax harmonization to defeat competition. We will also lose the right to attract foreign investment, as we see fit (Article 207)

Article 113
“The Council shall, acting unanimously in accordance with a special legislative procedure and after consulting the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee, adopt provisions for the harmonisation of legislation concerning turnover taxes, excise duties and other forms of indirect taxation to the extent that such harmonisation is necessary to ensure the establishment and the functioning of the internal market and to avoid distortion of competition.”

Article 207
The Lisbon Treaty streamlines EU external trade policy by confirming that all key aspects of trade are exclusive EU competence and bringing an end to mixed agreements. The treaty brings all services and trade related aspects of intellectual property into EU competence, thus bringing to an end the long standing debate on competence in these fields. In a major innovation the treaty also brings foreign direct investment into EU competence

Valmont wrote: »

That just seems like a thinly veiled 'keep the fordeners out' rant.

I meant Law. All foreigners are welcome. The more the merrier, I say. Maybe 'National Identity' were not the right words on my part. What I meant was that I want to abide to Irish laws, not EU laws. It should be up to each member state which laws they set for their own country, IMO. If the EU keeps heading the way it is, then we'll hardly have any Irish laws left. Therefore, approving this treaty would take one giant leap in that direction.

Sam Vimes

whatisayis wrote: »

The French Finance Minister announces days after the rejection of the Treaty that The Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCTB) plan was being put on hold and then says "The landscape has slightly modified thanks to good old Ireland".

One could possibly think the timing of this announcement was just a coincidence and if she hadn't added on the bit about "good old Ireland", some people would even believe it.

yeah it's a plan. there's no harm in them talking about it and has been said they've been talking about it for years but that doesn't mean it's ever going to happen. "the climate changed" doesn't mean that the lisbon treaty would have brought in laws allowing them to force it through. it just means the climate changed

Ciaran500

Ckal wrote: »

Article 113. Ireland will lose control of their taxes under mandatory tax harmonization to defeat competition.

http://www.tax-news.com/asp/story/Irelands_Lisbon_Treaty_Tax_Fears_Unfounded_xxxx33419.html

"Mark Redmond, Chief Executive of the Irish Taxation Institute welcomed the Irish government's recent re-affirmation of Ireland's 12.5% corporate tax rate, but he also pointed out that the Lisbon Treaty would have allowed Ireland to retain its veto on tax issues, and the treaty would not have forced harmonized EU tax rates on the country."

whatisayis

Sam Vimes wrote: »

yeah it's a plan. there's no harm in them talking about it and has been said they've been talking about it for years but that doesn't mean it's ever going to happen. "the climate changed" doesn't mean that the lisbon treaty would have brought in laws allowing them to force it through. it just means the climate changed

And (as you put it) "the climate changed" because.....?