Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

Leroy42

Bambi wrote: »

This Island was not prosperous or peaceful for most of its EEC/EC/EU membership. If you're going to attribute peace and prosperity to the EU do you accept the lack of it is also the responsibility of the EU?

Large swathes of Eastern Europe have never really enjoyed prosperity since they joined the EU.

We live in an era when peace is actually the norm globally, countries borders very rarely change through war anymore, this is not the great achievement people tend to make it out to be.

You conflated the European Comission with a civil service, I wouldnt go on about people failing to understand the EU if I was you.

But the bigger and far weirder point here is this: There's some people in Ireland who have a very strange reaction to any criticism of the EU, resulting in Goebbels like rants about how wonderful everything is. Willfully sticking your head into the sand is not going to solve any of the problems Europe faces.

I think the greatest proof of the EU idea of peace through trade links is the debate over NI since the ref. That would simply never have been a consideration prior to the EU and the benefits it brings. People of both sides of the border to can that whilst nationalism is important, trade and peace is far better.

In terms of peace being the norm, I am afraid that you are letting you experience override the actual. Ask people in ME, Africa or parts of South America about peace in the last 30 years.

We in Europe tend to view the world through our own experience, we take it for granted that war is no longer likely etc. For for many billions that is simply not true. IMP, this new normal, and the feeling that it is always going to be that way, is one of the factors that let Brexit happen. People just cannot see that everything won't be roughly the same as it is now, that being part of the EU is simply something that happened alongside all the changes, not the cause of them.

Sam Russell

Bambi wrote: »

This Island was not prosperous or peaceful for most of its EEC/EC/EU membership. If you're going to attribute peace and prosperity to the EU do you accept the lack of it is also the responsibility of the EU?

The conflict in NI was a civil war within the UK, where the UK sided with one element and broke many laws trying to bring an end to the conflict. Many of their actions were contrary to the ECHR who found them guilty of torture. They opened fire on an unarmed protest. They allowed paramilitaries to run a terror campaign with their support, with both intelligence and arms. They turned a blind eye to murders committed by Loyalists, despite knowing exactly who were the guilty parties.

It was not within the EU's competence to interfere with the internal security matters of a member state, although they should have taken action over some of the illegal acts. Hungary and Poland are getting attention at the moment.

When Ireland joined the EEC, we were at 60% of the average GDP per person. We are now well over 100%. It takes time to grow an economy, and accumulate national wealth. In 2017, we were second within the EU with France in 10th and the UK in 11th place. We have done well in the EU (if GDP figures mean anything).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_in_Europe_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita

SantaCruz

Deleted User wrote: »

The Eastern members of the EU didn't enjoy rapid prosperity simply because the west robbed those countries of their most talented and motivated workers when they were given the open door treatment in Germany, UK & Ireland plus some other countries.
It's a wonder that some didn't become complete basket cases after losing so many talented people.

Yes, those Eastern European countries could have followed Albania's path. The folks in the Czech Republic and Estonia must be kicking themselves now that they can see what they are missing out on.

Imreoir2

SantaCruz wrote: »

Yes, those Eastern European countries could have followed Albania's path. The folks in the Czech Republic and Estonia must be kicking themselves now that they can see what they are missing out on.

Not to mention that they do have the option of leaving, given how badly things have gone for them one wonders whey they stick around?

First Up

Bambi wrote:

This Island was not prosperous or peaceful for most of its EEC/EC/EU membership. If you're going to attribute peace and prosperity to the EU do you accept the lack of it is also the responsibility of the EU?

For conflict I was thinking more about World Wars 1 and 2, (not to mention the Napoleonic Wars) but the EU played a significant part in the GFA.

Bambi wrote:

Large swathes of Eastern Europe have never really enjoyed prosperity since they joined the EU.

They did start after suffering devastation in WW2 followed by decades of Communism. They have improved since.

Bambi wrote:

We live in an era when peace is actually the norm globally, countries borders very rarely change through war anymore, this is not the great achievement people tend to make it out to be.

Do any reasons for that occur to you?

Bambi wrote:

You conflated the European Comission with a civil service, I wouldnt go on about people failing to understand the EU if I was you.

Is that so? Your clarification and correction is welcome.

Bambi wrote:

But the bigger and far weirder point here is this: There's some people in Ireland who have a very strange reaction to any criticism of the EU, resulting in Goebbels like rants about how wonderful everything is. Willfully sticking your head into the sand is not going to solve any of the problems Europe faces.

You find facts and historical examples strange? Fair enough.

Imreoir2

First Up wrote: »

You find facts and historical examples strange? Fair enough.

It's fairly normal for someone to fall back on ad hominem attacks when they are losing an arguement and are unabe to refute a point with actual evidence, facts or logic.

fly_agaric

RobMc59 wrote: »

Deleted User wrote:

The Eastern members of the EU didn't enjoy rapid prosperity simply because the west robbed those countries of their most talented and motivated workers when they were given the open door treatment in Germany, UK & Ireland plus some other countries.

That's a novel way to describe free movement !

Also was not quite right. Germany did not provide the accession state citizens with an "open door" on day 1. It (sensibly) had a transition period unlike the UK and ourselves.

Strazdas

Deleted User wrote: »

The Eastern members of the EU didn't enjoy rapid prosperity simply because the west robbed those countries of their most talented and motivated workers when they were given the open door treatment in Germany, UK & Ireland plus some other countries.
It's a wonder that some didn't become complete basket cases after losing so many talented people.

The citizens of the former Eastern Bloc were trapped behind the Iron Curtain for nearly 60 years and couldn't move anywhere. Many of them would strongly disagree with the notion of freedom of movement being a bad thing.

First Up

Strazdas wrote:

The citizens of the former Eastern Bloc were trapped behind the Iron Curtain for nearly 60 years and couldn't move anywhere. Many of them would strongly disagree with the notion of freedom of movement being a bad thing.

Funnily enough, seven countries that were part of the formerYugoslavia are in the queue to join. A few bits of the former Soviet Union wouldn't mind either - Turkey too.

The Kid needs to up his game.

Jim2007

Bambi wrote: »

There's some people in Ireland who have a very strange reaction to any criticism of the EU, resulting in Goebbels like rants about how wonderful everything is. Willfully sticking your head into the sand is not going to solve any of the problems Europe faces.

And then there are individuals like yourself, how mindless patter of what they are told, out of context, ignoring history, and economics, while demonstrating a complete lack of understanding of the EU and it’s jurisdiction.

If you can answer this specific question, the you might just be able to demonstrate you are not just an empty vessel:

Under which provisions of the treaty does the EU have responsibility for an internal conflict in a member state such as the UK or Spain and what are the legal options they can take to rectify that situation? And I mean actual references to the treaty not an unsubstantiated rambling opinion.

54and56

Thank Fcuk Brexit year is finally here.

Get the WA through the HoC this month at last and onto the trade agreement talks.

No more limbo!!

SantaCruz

54and56 wrote: »

Thank Fcuk Brexit year is finally here.

Get the WA through the HoC this month at last and onto the trade agreement talks.

No more limbo!!

Yup. Should be a cakewalk from here on...

Leroy42

54and56 wrote: »

Thank Fcuk Brexit year is finally here.

Get the WA through the HoC this month at last and onto the trade agreement talks.

No more limbo!!

Yeah. Sunny uplands here we come.

And cheaper tampons, can't forget that!

McGiver

Bambi wrote:

Large swathes of Eastern Europe have never really enjoyed prosperity since they joined the EU.

Specifically?

Deleted User wrote:

The Eastern members of the EU didn't enjoy rapid prosperity simply because the west robbed those countries of their most talented and motivated workers when they were given the open door treatment in Germany, UK & Ireland plus some other countries. It's a wonder that some didn't become complete basket cases after losing so many talented people.

What are you talking about? Which countries?
The only "Eastern" country with significant emigration was and is Poland. Did you mean Poland actually? Why using a blanket term then?

Also, you are incorrect about open door treatment - Germany used maximum legal transitional period of 7 years for its labour market after A8 countries ascension in 2004 and so did Austria. UK, Sweden and Ireland were the only countries not to implement any transitional period.

McGiver

Leroy42 wrote:

In terms of peace being the norm, I am afraid that you are letting you experience override the actual. Ask people in ME, Africa or parts of South America about peace in the last 30 years.

Or people in the Balkans. Two countries which were at war less than 20 years ago are now EU members and other are waiting to join.

McGiver

Sam Russell wrote:

When Ireland joined the EEC, we were at 60% of the average GDP per person. We are now well over 100%. It takes time to grow an economy, and accumulate national wealth. In 2017, we were second within the EU with France in 10th and the UK in 11th place. We have done well in the EU (if GDP figures mean anything).

Irish GDP is useless, not usable for any meaningful comparisons. You have to use GNI. But your point is stands even if we do use GNI. By GNI Ireland is 7th between Sweden and Belgium. Ireland went from 60% of EU average to 115%.

brickster69

McGiver wrote: »

Or people in the Balkans. Two countries which were at war less than 20 years ago are now EU members and other are waiting to join.

Of course Albania and Kosovo want to join. Anyone would join a Golf club if they were paid to and got free drinks at the bar.

Big question is who is going to pay for them ?

First Up

brickster69 wrote:

Of course Albania and Kosovo want to join. Anyone would join a Golf club if they were paid to and got free drinks at the bar.

Big question is who is going to pay for them ?

They already get lots of donor funding - its Kosovo's biggest (only) industry.

The main incentive for the Balkan countries (those two especially) is free movement so they can emigrate.

But they are a long way from being ready; Macron has made it clear they ain't even being considered until they get crime and corruption under some control.

McGiver

brickster69 wrote:

Of course Albania and Kosovo want to join. Anyone would join a Golf club if they were paid to and got free drinks at the bar.

As did Ireland 47 years ago. Anything else apart from europhobic gaffe?

fash

Bambi wrote: »

Large swathes of Eastern Europe have never really enjoyed prosperity since they joined the EU.
.

I assume you agree that joining the EU has meant that vast amounts of wealth have poured into Eastern Europe- and vastly greater amounts than would otherwise have been the case- even if as you suggest those states haven't spread that wealth equally?
E.g.:
https://www.ft.com/content/82ae58be-dbbe-11e9-8f9b-77216ebe1f17
https://www.ft.com/content/5ad40460-15e3-11ea-9ee4-11f260415385

Imreoir2

brickster69 wrote: »

Of course Albania and Kosovo want to join. Anyone would join a Golf club if they were paid to and got free drinks at the bar.

Big question is who is going to pay for them ?

The member states that make a net contribution to the EU, like Ireland. But you already knew that, right?

The rationale for doing this is solid if you ask me. In the recent past those countries were riven with instability and conflict and were used by international crime organisations as staging posts to traffic and smuggle into the EU. Retreating into isolationism and building a big wall is not an effective way to deal with such issues. You need to tackle the causes of the instability and the drivers of crime.

Once those countries are willing to sign up to the rules of the club, I would much rather invest in those countries, develop peace and stability through prosperity, deal with the factors that push people into crime and work with them to degrade and push out the crime organisations operating there. People with nothing have nothing to lose. Membership of the EU and the benefits that go along with it means those countries have something to lose and have every reason to play by the rules, making Europe a more prosperous, stable, and safer place in the process.

Ireland more than almost any country has benefited from this approch and now the EU has a peaceful, stable, and prosperous member which has gone from a net drain on EU funds to a net contributor. Having just climbed the ladder, it would be a rather poor show for us to try to pull it up after ourselves.

CelticRambler

When comparing the delay in reaping the benefits of EU membership with nation-state sovereignty, it might be worth remembering that the architects of Brexit suggest it'll take 50 years for the English goose to start laying its golden eggs. By that yardstick, Ireland should be set for a whacking great EU membership windfall in 2023! Good times ahead, lads!

boring accountant

Strazdas wrote: »

Indeed, the UK cabinet is not hired or elected by the British electorate. People merely vote to send an MP to Parliament, nothing else.....they have absolutely zero input to who the PM or cabinet ministers are.

Complete and utter twaddle. People vote for an MP who represents a party that has a leader. Everyone in the British election knew that a vote for a Tory candidate was a vote for Boris Johnson. People know what they're getting. No one wakes up on the morning after an election to find out that someone completely unknown to them the day before has just been appointed PM, but that's what happens with the Commission President.

Professor Moriarty

boring accountant wrote: »

Complete and utter twaddle. People vote for an MP who represents a party that has a leader. Everyone in the British election knew that a vote for a Tory candidate was a vote for Boris Johnson. No one knows how their votes in a General Election will impact on the decisions taken at the EU level.

Did people in the 2017 British GE know that Johnson would become their PM? Did people in the 2016 Irish GE know that Varadkar would become their taoiseach?

boring accountant

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Did people in the 2017 British GE know that Johnson would become their PM? Did people in the 2016 Irish GE know that Varadkar would become their taoiseach?

Again this is an extremely hollow argument and not even worth engaging with for the 3rd time.

Professor Moriarty

boring accountant wrote: »

Again this is an extremely hollow argument and not even worth engaging with for the 3rd time.

Just two facts. Feel free to disprove them.

boring accountant

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Just two facts. Feel free to disprove them.

If those are your two best facts I think we can move on.

Professor Moriarty

boring accountant wrote: »

If those are your two best facts I think we can move on.

No problem. Off you go.

boggerman1

Have disengaged with the whole brexit **** storm since the exit poll was released on election nite.even stopping listening to James O’Brien or definitely not as much as pre election.thank god they are “leaving” this month and that big Phil will lead the hammering out of their much vaunted fta they so want.when u see David Davis still peddling the whole they need us more than we need them rubbish u know they are desperate for any positive from brexit.

Strazdas

boring accountant wrote: »

Complete and utter twaddle. People vote for an MP who represents a party that has a leader. Everyone in the British election knew that a vote for a Tory candidate was a vote for Boris Johnson. People know what they're getting. No one wakes up on the morning after an election to find out that someone completely unknown to them the day before has just been appointed PM, but that's what happens with the Commission President.

In the prediction polls at the start of 2019, nobody saw the rise of Boris Johnson. Everyone assumed he was a busted flush and his resignation as Foreign Secretary in summer 2018 was the end of his career. He was elected by the right wing of the Tory Party, not made PM by the electorate.