Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "nightjar" wrote in message ... On 28/12/2020 20:20, Tim Lamb wrote: ... Would a federal state be such a bad thing? Lots of negatives above but with a different structure, could it work? It probably could, but the difficult bit would be getting there. The EU took a while to get where it is now and, while the Brexiteers like to pretend it hasn't changed since the 1990s, Thats a lie. it does work a lot better than it did. The majority of those who bothered to vote disagree. Plenty were quite happy with the EEC and object to the EU it morphed into. The American set up clearly has issues but I don't see Higher courts than ours being the end of my world or the ability of other citizens to compete for work here being so terrible. The ECJ only has limited jurisdiction anyway. In 2014, just 29% of the laws and regulations in force in the UK were in any way influenced by EU legislation. The rest were entirely the work of the national governments and outside the scope of the ECJ. You can claim higher levels of EU influence, but only by counting laws and regulations passed and ignoring those that have been superseded or expired; for example a regulation on fruit and vegetables imported into the EU is amended daily. That was issued thousands of times while we were in the EU, but only ever accounted for a single piece of active legislation. There is also no evidence that freedom of movement caused any unemployment in the UK. Before Covid-19, we had around 4% unemployment; one of the lowest in the EU. One of the two with slightly lower unemployment was Germany, which has even higher numbers of immigrant workers. Irrelevant to what the majority who bothered to vote voted for. Several years of discussion where loss of sovereignty is apparently a disaster but why? We haven't been a significant world power since Suez. Falklands excepted. Making decisions for ourselves? What decisions do we want to make that clash with the rest of the EU? To me, loss of sovereignty has always been the weakest argument - apparently throw in to enrage the Colonel Blimp types. Thats dishonest. It is what plenty care about. To be fair, we have actually opposed 2% of EU legislation, some of which did end up in the 29% mentioned above. Not wishing to contribute to capital improvements in other member countries. Why? Nobody objected to objective 5B (was it) investment here. A general objection to helping anybody but themselves. An opinion they are entitled to, even if you dont agree. Thats how democracy works. Foreign Aid is another thing that gets a lot of opposition, despite the fact that it has been shown to reduce the risk of terrorists targetting the UK. See above. EU army. Nobody has explained why this is so terrible. Colonel Blimp strikes again. Bull****. Impact on the Commonwealth? I don't see the likes of Canada, Australia, New Zealand caring much either way. Left of centre politics? Is that so bad?... It is to those who see Genghis Khan as a social reformer. And there is a real sense in which he was. |
#2
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 02:40:16 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again: FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest troll**** unread -- Website (from 2007) dedicated to the 86-year-old senile Australian cretin's pathological trolling: https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/r...d-faq.2973853/ |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|