"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, it does work a lot better than
it did.

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regulations passed and ignoring those that have been superseded or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.

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. 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. 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.

EU army. Nobody has explained why this is so terrible.

Colonel Blimp strikes again.

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.

Its obvious why you prefer the EU. You couldnt
care less what the general public wants, you want
to impose what you prefer on them regardless.

Just like the unelected bureaucrats deciding policy in the EU.

On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 04:34:51 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest troll**** unread

--
Bod addressing abnormal senile quarreller Rot:
"Do you practice arguing with yourself in an empty room?"
MID: