By: charliehunt
- 11th March 2016 at 12:49Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
When I read that it pretty much determined me to do an about turn and vote to stay In. Then I read Mario Draghi's latest desperate announcement ( is the 56th or the 57th?) to save the Eurozone and I decided on balance to sacrifice dearer hosiery in favour of an economy over which we will have a measure of control in the future as opposed to remaining hitched to the biggest economic and fiscal disaster story in the developed world.
By: Amiga500
- 11th March 2016 at 13:24Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
How about this for thought.
In an era of unprecedented information and connectivity.... do we still need a representative democracy to take care of absolutely everything about the country? [This extends to local councils as well as parliament.]
A simple example would be a decision to go to war - this could fairly easily be done with an eVote.
Obviously, with increasing complexity of decision comes increasing complexity of voting. Taxes and spending would take some thought.
[Or are there still too many people who aren't online and wouldn't be able to have their say?]
By: charliehunt
- 11th March 2016 at 13:41Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
[QUOTE=Amiga500;2300051]How about this for thought.
In an era of unprecedented information and connectivity.... do we still need a representative democracy to take care of absolutely everything about the country? [This extends to local councils as well as parliament.]
A simple example would be a decision to go to war - this could fairly easily be done with an eVote.
Obviously, with increasing complexity of decision comes increasing complexity of voting. Taxes and spending would take some thought.
[Or are there still too many people who aren't online and wouldn't be able to have their say?][/QUOTE
I assume you are being serious. A recipe for disaster I would have thought. It might have worked in Athens over 2,000 years ago with a small population and even then there were checks and balances. And in Switzerland there are many nationally important subjects on which the Swiss do not vote in a referendum. A referendum on whether or not to go to war at the click of a mouse by 35 million people - doesn't bear thinking about....
Notwithstanding you last point which, unless every single voter was equipped, would not be democratic. Maybe it all will have changed in a couple of generations but then might so much else!!!!
By: TonyT
- 11th March 2016 at 15:07Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
A simple example would be a decision to go to war - this could fairly easily be done with an eVote.
The first EMP wave would wipe that little idea out, and prior to that at three minutes warning of impending doom, the whole system would crash ...
You do realise that is how they attack institutions by bombarding them with millions of emails etc, you would be in effect doing their job for them..
I could imagine a civil servant sitting in a little office with a swingometer on the screen and a big red button on the desk awaiting the swingometers decision prior to banging the launch button, though the launch signal would'nt get through to the subs, as all the lines would be jammed with the crew voting.
By: alarm
- 12th March 2016 at 17:46Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Cameron's latest pronouncement in "Project Fear"...
If we leave Europe, gloves and socks could cost more !!.... no comment.
****** I went out today to try and buy a couple dozen pairs of gloves and socks in Somerset and low and behold i was told in one store there has been a run on both lots of items and i will have to wait until after the referendum before they can get any more,so I am spending hours looking for them on the tinternet but apparently some wide boy from the tory party (I heard on the grapevine his name is Boris has bought all the UK stock just in case!!).
By: John Green
- 14th March 2016 at 19:13Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
[QUOTE=Planemike;2300584]
A jarring and relatively recent innovation is the expression of distances in kilometres (note spelling!!:eek:) rather than miles in many documentaries - usually BBC home grown affairs on almost any subject.[/QUOT
The kilometre is widely used throughout the world: perfectly valid unit of measurement.
Except for the BBC and some ITV documentaries, not in this country. The statute mile and the nautical mile are the common currencies.
Yes, the French kilometer is used in much of the rest of the world apart from America and other countries where local measurements are still to be found.
Social engineering underpins the use of French measurements as it does with a majority of the advertising images that are to be found on our TV screens.
Hang on to your native culture, soon, it might be all that is left.
By: charliehunt
- 14th March 2016 at 19:19Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Planemike - I am not disputing that. I am talking about programmes made in English by British companies for British consumption. In Britain the mile is in common currency not the kilometre. I refer you to the signposting should you be in any doubt.
By: snafu352
- 21st March 2016 at 15:45Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Some people aren't going to like this suggestion...
Perhaps there should be an age cut off beyond which people are not allowed to vote on certain things.
The future that the younger generations will live in for example.
Reading this it is rather clear that there are a hard core of, shall we say, older folk who are naturally more conservative and reactionary who wish to return the world (and Britain) to some utopian vision of a past that did not exist.
It merely seems a shame to me that the young folk will potentially have to suffer the consequences of the baby boomers selfish decisions long past the time when that self serving and overly entitled generation has shuffled off this mortal coil.
By: John Green
- 21st March 2016 at 16:54Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The usual farrago of pyscho babble !
One of the many advantages of the -shall we refer to - more mature people in any society, is that they fairly obviously have a foot in the past and one in the near future. This should make for an understanding and an appreciation of what has gone before and the lessons to be drawn - if they've got the intelligence and an interest to apply those lessons - and their relevance to the future, and especially if the next generation, who have next to zero connection with the past, can apply them.
Idyllic, if it works. That is the problem. Mankind, it seems is doomed to repeat the mistakes made in the past because the people who have more future than past, cannot completely learn from those mistakes.
I write 'completely'. There is some evidence to suggest that all is not lost. Some percentage of past errors can be and is corrected by the next generation. Three steps forward and two back.
Most societies in the world no matter how primitive or advanced, cherish the sagacity of their aged. Tribal elders are authority figures and esteemed for their wisdom and restrained counselling - except here in the West. Here we shovel them into 'care homes' and reject any responsibility for their welfare as they continue into old age. That is a matter for shame.
Care of the political elderly is one reason why we have an Upper Chamber; the House of Lords. Aeldermenn, ealdormen, aldermen, oldermen to give the derivative descriptions thru' the ages are, on the whole, of advanced age and form the Upper Chamber with the brief to scrutinise the offerings of the Lower Chamber of the House of Commons.
By: charliehunt
- 21st March 2016 at 17:23Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
"It merely seems a shame to me that the young folk will potentially have to suffer the consequences of the baby boomers selfish decisions long past the time when that self serving and overly entitled generation has shuffled off this mortal coil."
What an amazingly arrogant assumption to make. Quite apart from the fact that it seems to have escaped your attention that the EU is run by large numbers of "baby boomers" (never quite sure what that means) who have brought the EU to the mess it is in and intend to carry on their "good works" until it is utterly destroyed.
By: Meddle
- 22nd March 2016 at 11:01Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
One of the many advantages of the -shall we refer to - more mature people in any society, is that they fairly obviously have a foot in the past and one in the near future.
Surely one foot in the past and one foot in the grave, John? :highly_amused:
Other than that, I'm wryly amused that those that were so stringently opposed to Scottish independence are now, in some quarters, recycling the same emotive and grievance-driven arguments the nats put to such good use in 2014.
By: brewerjerry
- 23rd March 2016 at 02:56Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Hi
My slight worry of thought is no brexit, and turkey joins the EU,
( I have nothing against turkey or its people)
it makes possible an almost open door for more 'trouble' to come into europe.
EU has done a lot for workers rights, but also swamped the labour market.
A very tough choice for all voting, and I hope we all vote after making ourselves fully educated on the options.
cheers
jerry
By: charliehunt
- 23rd March 2016 at 06:12Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Well that's the problem for both sides in the debate. None of us actually knows what the future holds, apart from making a series of educated guesses.
I am voting leave because I don't believe the European project as driven by its leadsrship has a future. If the vote is to leave then Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty has to be invoked as the UK gives notice to leave the EU. There will follow two or three years of negotiations to detach ourselves from all of our EU relationships and put in place new agreements.
Only at the end of this will we all know what the world outside the EU will mean. Then we can educate ourselves.
Mud is being slung on both sides because neither side has many certainties to offer. So scare stories, obfuscation and unsubstantiated threats and promises are splashed across the media to our mutual disadvantage.
By: Shorty01
- 23rd March 2016 at 23:49Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
What we all seem to lack is the cold hard facts of what's good and what's bad.
Here's my contribution fwiw. I can only add to the industry/trade part of the argument.
Having worked in the Aerospace industry for 25 years I see on a daily basis how integrated our trade is with Europe. I work in an office which is mainly British but has a fair number of French, Spanish and other Europeans in it. We are a multinational company as are a lot of our competitors, suppliers and customers. Based on my experience moving around various parts of Europe following various projects we would be destroying a significant amount of trade and further crippling what industry we have left in this country if we leave. I have friends who work in the automotive industry and they have similar experience of this. I appreciate the concerns about our country's ability to absorb other Europeans who may not be contributing to our country's financial well being, though a lot of them do, but we should try to address this from within the EU first.
One significant conversation I had with some of my German and French friends/colleagues occurred in a pub in Germany where I was living at the time the Euro came in. I asked them what other Europeans though of the UK. The response was that they saw us as a somewhat troublesome island off the coast of Europe proper that only joined in when it suited, we only got a look in on some trade because we were in the gang. If we weren't in the gang (the EU) then we wouldn't be included. A bit like the unpopular kid at school who only got picked for the football team cos he was in the class. Come playtime, everyone ignored him and had a kick about without him.
So the question is do we lose more from staying in with dodgy rules about the shape of Bananas and foreigners sending child benefit back home (that's my tax money !) but still have jobs for our youngsters to go into cause we don't have an empire anymore and we're not big enough to go it alone or do we pull up the drawbridge and stagnate ?
Also, If we do leave what do we do about foreign nationals that are already here ? My children have a significant number of first generation British classmates who's parents are not indigenous but only know the UK as home. As a result of my wandering around Europe my children are half German as well !
Leaving the EU will be a costly mess, it won't be like changing your bank. If we had a stronger manufacturing industry we might get away with Brexit, but we don't. Based on my experiences I think it's too risky.
By: charliehunt
- 24th March 2016 at 06:01Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Re your first paragraph - because the facts of what is good and what is bad are open to interpretation. What is good for one is bad for another and vice versa.
Your personal experience of your dealings in the EU are just that. And you will find a hundred and a thousand other examples of pub talk in pubs across the EU where there is agreement with your experience to those in complete disagreement with it. I have experienced the latter with disaffected Euro members from Denmark to Italy.
Posts: 6,535
By: John Green - 9th March 2016 at 19:17 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
She exists always to protect her position - at all costs.
Posts: 851
By: trekbuster - 9th March 2016 at 20:46 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
On a different note.
"what has the EU ever done for us?"
Well, it seems to have ensured that flags are fireproof, or at least very fire resistant
http://youtu.be/Vae11y-9AX0
And before any one says so, Yes, I am aware that it is a spoof........probably.
Posts: 4,996
By: AlanR - 11th March 2016 at 10:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Cameron's latest pronouncement in "Project Fear"...
If we leave Europe, gloves and socks could cost more !!.... no comment.
Posts: 11,141
By: charliehunt - 11th March 2016 at 12:49 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
When I read that it pretty much determined me to do an about turn and vote to stay In. Then I read Mario Draghi's latest desperate announcement ( is the 56th or the 57th?) to save the Eurozone and I decided on balance to sacrifice dearer hosiery in favour of an economy over which we will have a measure of control in the future as opposed to remaining hitched to the biggest economic and fiscal disaster story in the developed world.
Posts: 2,163
By: Amiga500 - 11th March 2016 at 13:24 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
How about this for thought.
In an era of unprecedented information and connectivity.... do we still need a representative democracy to take care of absolutely everything about the country? [This extends to local councils as well as parliament.]
A simple example would be a decision to go to war - this could fairly easily be done with an eVote.
Obviously, with increasing complexity of decision comes increasing complexity of voting. Taxes and spending would take some thought.
[Or are there still too many people who aren't online and wouldn't be able to have their say?]
Posts: 11,141
By: charliehunt - 11th March 2016 at 13:41 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
[QUOTE=Amiga500;2300051]How about this for thought.
In an era of unprecedented information and connectivity.... do we still need a representative democracy to take care of absolutely everything about the country? [This extends to local councils as well as parliament.]
A simple example would be a decision to go to war - this could fairly easily be done with an eVote.
Obviously, with increasing complexity of decision comes increasing complexity of voting. Taxes and spending would take some thought.
[Or are there still too many people who aren't online and wouldn't be able to have their say?][/QUOTE
I assume you are being serious. A recipe for disaster I would have thought. It might have worked in Athens over 2,000 years ago with a small population and even then there were checks and balances. And in Switzerland there are many nationally important subjects on which the Swiss do not vote in a referendum. A referendum on whether or not to go to war at the click of a mouse by 35 million people - doesn't bear thinking about....
Notwithstanding you last point which, unless every single voter was equipped, would not be democratic. Maybe it all will have changed in a couple of generations but then might so much else!!!!
Posts: 8,983
By: TonyT - 11th March 2016 at 15:07 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The first EMP wave would wipe that little idea out, and prior to that at three minutes warning of impending doom, the whole system would crash ...
You do realise that is how they attack institutions by bombarding them with millions of emails etc, you would be in effect doing their job for them..
I could imagine a civil servant sitting in a little office with a swingometer on the screen and a big red button on the desk awaiting the swingometers decision prior to banging the launch button, though the launch signal would'nt get through to the subs, as all the lines would be jammed with the crew voting.
:highly_amused:
..
Posts: 1
By: alarm - 12th March 2016 at 17:46 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
****** I went out today to try and buy a couple dozen pairs of gloves and socks in Somerset and low and behold i was told in one store there has been a run on both lots of items and i will have to wait until after the referendum before they can get any more,so I am spending hours looking for them on the tinternet but apparently some wide boy from the tory party (I heard on the grapevine his name is Boris has bought all the UK stock just in case!!).
Posts: 2,248
By: snafu352 - 14th March 2016 at 15:32 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Your main reason for voting leave is based on a (wilful?) complete and utter lack of knowledge of the thing you criticise.
There's no such thing as an unelected eurocrat.
MEP's are elected by the European population, if you can be bothered to vote.
Members of the commission are appointed by the national governments as elected by their population.
These are both supported by an administration which is the same as the UK government being supported by the civil service.
The EU is not perfect and requires work. Once upon a time the Brits would have stepped up and provided the leadership that requires.
Posts: 1,813
By: Planemike - 14th March 2016 at 15:49 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The kilometre is widely used throughout the world: perfectly valid unit of measurement.
Posts: 6,535
By: John Green - 14th March 2016 at 19:13 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
[QUOTE=Planemike;2300584]
Except for the BBC and some ITV documentaries, not in this country. The statute mile and the nautical mile are the common currencies.
Yes, the French kilometer is used in much of the rest of the world apart from America and other countries where local measurements are still to be found.
Social engineering underpins the use of French measurements as it does with a majority of the advertising images that are to be found on our TV screens.
Hang on to your native culture, soon, it might be all that is left.
Posts: 11,141
By: charliehunt - 14th March 2016 at 19:19 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Planemike - I am not disputing that. I am talking about programmes made in English by British companies for British consumption. In Britain the mile is in common currency not the kilometre. I refer you to the signposting should you be in any doubt.
Posts: 2,248
By: snafu352 - 21st March 2016 at 15:45 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Some people aren't going to like this suggestion...
Perhaps there should be an age cut off beyond which people are not allowed to vote on certain things.
The future that the younger generations will live in for example.
Reading this it is rather clear that there are a hard core of, shall we say, older folk who are naturally more conservative and reactionary who wish to return the world (and Britain) to some utopian vision of a past that did not exist.
It merely seems a shame to me that the young folk will potentially have to suffer the consequences of the baby boomers selfish decisions long past the time when that self serving and overly entitled generation has shuffled off this mortal coil.
Posts: 6,535
By: John Green - 21st March 2016 at 16:54 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The usual farrago of pyscho babble !
One of the many advantages of the -shall we refer to - more mature people in any society, is that they fairly obviously have a foot in the past and one in the near future. This should make for an understanding and an appreciation of what has gone before and the lessons to be drawn - if they've got the intelligence and an interest to apply those lessons - and their relevance to the future, and especially if the next generation, who have next to zero connection with the past, can apply them.
Idyllic, if it works. That is the problem. Mankind, it seems is doomed to repeat the mistakes made in the past because the people who have more future than past, cannot completely learn from those mistakes.
I write 'completely'. There is some evidence to suggest that all is not lost. Some percentage of past errors can be and is corrected by the next generation. Three steps forward and two back.
Most societies in the world no matter how primitive or advanced, cherish the sagacity of their aged. Tribal elders are authority figures and esteemed for their wisdom and restrained counselling - except here in the West. Here we shovel them into 'care homes' and reject any responsibility for their welfare as they continue into old age. That is a matter for shame.
Care of the political elderly is one reason why we have an Upper Chamber; the House of Lords. Aeldermenn, ealdormen, aldermen, oldermen to give the derivative descriptions thru' the ages are, on the whole, of advanced age and form the Upper Chamber with the brief to scrutinise the offerings of the Lower Chamber of the House of Commons.
That seems to work - after a fashion !
Posts: 11,141
By: charliehunt - 21st March 2016 at 17:23 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
"It merely seems a shame to me that the young folk will potentially have to suffer the consequences of the baby boomers selfish decisions long past the time when that self serving and overly entitled generation has shuffled off this mortal coil."
What an amazingly arrogant assumption to make. Quite apart from the fact that it seems to have escaped your attention that the EU is run by large numbers of "baby boomers" (never quite sure what that means) who have brought the EU to the mess it is in and intend to carry on their "good works" until it is utterly destroyed.
Posts: 1,613
By: Meddle - 22nd March 2016 at 11:01 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Surely one foot in the past and one foot in the grave, John? :highly_amused:
Other than that, I'm wryly amused that those that were so stringently opposed to Scottish independence are now, in some quarters, recycling the same emotive and grievance-driven arguments the nats put to such good use in 2014.
Posts: 917
By: brewerjerry - 23rd March 2016 at 02:56 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Hi
My slight worry of thought is no brexit, and turkey joins the EU,
( I have nothing against turkey or its people)
it makes possible an almost open door for more 'trouble' to come into europe.
EU has done a lot for workers rights, but also swamped the labour market.
A very tough choice for all voting, and I hope we all vote after making ourselves fully educated on the options.
cheers
jerry
Posts: 11,141
By: charliehunt - 23rd March 2016 at 06:12 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Well that's the problem for both sides in the debate. None of us actually knows what the future holds, apart from making a series of educated guesses.
I am voting leave because I don't believe the European project as driven by its leadsrship has a future. If the vote is to leave then Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty has to be invoked as the UK gives notice to leave the EU. There will follow two or three years of negotiations to detach ourselves from all of our EU relationships and put in place new agreements.
Only at the end of this will we all know what the world outside the EU will mean. Then we can educate ourselves.
Mud is being slung on both sides because neither side has many certainties to offer. So scare stories, obfuscation and unsubstantiated threats and promises are splashed across the media to our mutual disadvantage.
Posts: 718
By: Shorty01 - 23rd March 2016 at 23:49 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
What we all seem to lack is the cold hard facts of what's good and what's bad.
Here's my contribution fwiw. I can only add to the industry/trade part of the argument.
Having worked in the Aerospace industry for 25 years I see on a daily basis how integrated our trade is with Europe. I work in an office which is mainly British but has a fair number of French, Spanish and other Europeans in it. We are a multinational company as are a lot of our competitors, suppliers and customers. Based on my experience moving around various parts of Europe following various projects we would be destroying a significant amount of trade and further crippling what industry we have left in this country if we leave. I have friends who work in the automotive industry and they have similar experience of this. I appreciate the concerns about our country's ability to absorb other Europeans who may not be contributing to our country's financial well being, though a lot of them do, but we should try to address this from within the EU first.
One significant conversation I had with some of my German and French friends/colleagues occurred in a pub in Germany where I was living at the time the Euro came in. I asked them what other Europeans though of the UK. The response was that they saw us as a somewhat troublesome island off the coast of Europe proper that only joined in when it suited, we only got a look in on some trade because we were in the gang. If we weren't in the gang (the EU) then we wouldn't be included. A bit like the unpopular kid at school who only got picked for the football team cos he was in the class. Come playtime, everyone ignored him and had a kick about without him.
So the question is do we lose more from staying in with dodgy rules about the shape of Bananas and foreigners sending child benefit back home (that's my tax money !) but still have jobs for our youngsters to go into cause we don't have an empire anymore and we're not big enough to go it alone or do we pull up the drawbridge and stagnate ?
Also, If we do leave what do we do about foreign nationals that are already here ? My children have a significant number of first generation British classmates who's parents are not indigenous but only know the UK as home. As a result of my wandering around Europe my children are half German as well !
Leaving the EU will be a costly mess, it won't be like changing your bank. If we had a stronger manufacturing industry we might get away with Brexit, but we don't. Based on my experiences I think it's too risky.
Posts: 11,141
By: charliehunt - 24th March 2016 at 06:01 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Re your first paragraph - because the facts of what is good and what is bad are open to interpretation. What is good for one is bad for another and vice versa.
Your personal experience of your dealings in the EU are just that. And you will find a hundred and a thousand other examples of pub talk in pubs across the EU where there is agreement with your experience to those in complete disagreement with it. I have experienced the latter with disaffected Euro members from Denmark to Italy.