The EU deal

[Seanjd]

Can you clarify whether you think this is the case in regards to EU immigrants seeing as the debate is about the EU?

Mate, cmon. All those Romanian terrorists though.. oh hang on..

 

[Seanjd]

It's a perfectly sensible statement.

What we see with immigration especially uncontrolled immigration where we take in poor people to essentially act as a slave labour class is that while the 1st generation work hard and do those jobs the 2nd generation who are born here but not of British descent grow up to be resentful that people of their race/religion/creed are essentially no better than slaves in the society and that causes all sorts of social problems. A main one being terrorism but there are others like race riots etc.

My argument has nothing to do with citizenship but the social problems caused by immigration which sometimes aren't fully realized until the next generation.

But by that point it is "home grown" and if you say it has anything to do with immigration you are a racist.

I think this post had confirmed to me that the main reason you want out of the EU is because of the immigration implications. You are writing about immigration here which has nothing to do with the EU at all, as if slipping into an anti-immigration stance which doesn't only concern the EU. Leaving the EU, to you, I believe would just mean a little less immigration which you'd be happy about. Am I right with that assumption?

 

[magicjuan]

My post was aimed at those on here waving the anti-immigration flag. If the leave vote comes through, it'll have been won by praying on people's unfounded fears of immigration. Like you say, it is what is being given air time.

What proper change do you think a leave vote might see?

As noted previously, I believe we need such a shock that it acts as a catalyst for change. In years passed any number of policies introduced would have seen action and reaction from the public. Now, through controlled information and methods, the 'rulers' can affect any change that is within their want, whether that is by the Tories at a national level or the bureaucrats throughout the EU, working in tandem to place corporate interests way ahead of those of the people.

We no longer serve nations, the concept of a nation state has dissolved to insignificance. We shouldn't be serving corporate systems, but the interests of people first and regardless of which decision is made nothing will change in that regard. An exit would send shock waves throughout the system though. It may give ambition to others outside the trough across Europe, I hope it will seed an opportunity for people to become more active and involved.

The overwhelming majority of people in this country and abroad have no issues with people from elsewhere, especially once they meet them, it's just fear based frenzy that stirs up and clouds the topic.

The EU isn't about immigration. the EU isn't really about piecemeal labour laws and human rights, it's about determination of direction by the people, what sort of society they want to live in and the ability to live peacefully and provide for their families in a fair manner. That won't happen under the current or future frameworks of the EU so something has to give. The most contentious issue must be used, spun around, and shouted down as a minor issue once it has burned itself out, allowing that seed of change to grow organically with greater public involvement.

Return the EU to a trade pact and the majority of 'issues' disappear, especially if the media can be held to account for fostering anxieties, something they will promulgate under TTIP for instance. We just need to change, not continue as we are, too many, far too many, are suffering from other problems than 'immigration'.

 

[magicjuan]

It's a perfectly sensible statement.

What we see with immigration especially uncontrolled immigration where we take in poor people to essentially act as a slave labour class is that while the 1st generation work hard and do those jobs the 2nd generation who are born here but not of British descent grow up to be resentful that people of their race/religion/creed are essentially no better than slaves in the society and that causes all sorts of social problems. A main one being terrorism but there are others like race riots etc.

My argument has nothing to do with citizenship but the social problems caused by immigration which sometimes aren't fully realized until the next generation.

But by that point it is "home grown" and if you say it has anything to do with immigration you are a racist.

That is a much wider generational issue that takes in control and access to bettering your life, tuition fees, workplace issues, pay rates, celebrity culture, abuse of workers, so many things. to highlight one area as that is disingenuous.

 

[daylightrobber]

I think this post had confirmed to me that the main reason you want out of the EU is because of the immigration implications. You are writing about immigration here which has nothing to do with the EU at all, as if slipping into an anti-immigration stance which doesn't only concern the EU. Leaving the EU, to you, I believe would just mean a little less immigration which you'd be happy about. Am I right with that assumption?

Its fairly clear isn't it? Deliberately conflating EU and non EU immigration and scaremongering about Turkey, whilst making sweeping statements in regards to British citizens of foreign heritage.

 

[Cypher]

Which I've pointed out several times is for travel across the Schengen area only, so not the UK or Ireland (or Denmark). It gives no rights to work or live. We have similar visa agreements for many other countries and surprisingly the whole populations of those haven't moved here. Scare tactics.

Stop saying everything is scare tactics when you keep going on about the fact that if we leave the EU we essentially will never be able to trade with anyone in the world.

The path of European integration (their word) is clear. They want a superstate. A super state that will include a lot of other poor countries that will have free movement to the richer countries. It might take 5 years, it might take 10, it might take 20 but it will happen and this will be our last chance to stop it.

 

[Cypher]

I think this post had confirmed to me that the main reason you want out of the EU is because of the immigration implications. You are writing about immigration here which has nothing to do with the EU at all, as if slipping into an anti-immigration stance which doesn't only concern the EU. Leaving the EU, to you, I believe would just mean a little less immigration which you'd be happy about. Am I right with that assumption?

How does immigration have nothing to do with the EU. How does the decisions by Merkel regarding the migrant crisis not effect us either today or 5 years from now. How does the fact that we have to take people from much poorer countries who are now EU members not have anything to do with the EU. How does the fear of mass immigration from Turkey not have anything to do with the EU.

Stop talking nonsense.

Immigration is a huge issue but it's also democratic control of our leaders. Right now there's too much separation between who appoints the decision makers is Brussels and the people. I understand that eventually at some point we elect someone who elects someone who elects those that make the decisions but the separation is too great. I think the main problem with the EU is that it is run by the elite for the elite and that separation is by design not by accident.

A German elite doesn't care about a German national citizen. A British elite doesn't care about a British national citizen. etc

They are globalists and if they aren't stopped Britain's poor will be facing the same problems as the poor of the rest of the world.

 

[daylightrobber]

Stop saying everything is scare tactics when you keep going on about the fact that if we leave the EU we essentially will never be able to trade with anyone in the world.

Lies.

The path of European integration (their word) is clear. They want a superstate. A super state that will include a lot of other poor countries that will have free movement to the richer countries. It might take 5 years, it might take 10, it might take 20 but it will happen and this will be our last chance to stop it.

& scare stories.

 

[magicjuan]

How does immigration have nothing to do with the EU. How does the decisions by Merkel regarding the migrant crisis not effect us either today or 5 years from now. How does the fact that we have to take people from much poorer countries who are now EU members not have anything to do with the EU. How does the fear of mass immigration from Turkey not have anything to do with the EU.

Stop talking nonsense.

Immigration is a huge issue but it's also democratic control of our leaders. Right now there's too much separation between who appoints the decision makers is Brussels and the people. I understand that eventually at some point we elect someone who elects someone who elects those that make the decisions but the separation is too great. I think the main problem with the EU is that it is run by the elite for the elite and that separation is by design not by accident.

A German elite doesn't care about a German national citizen. A British elite doesn't care about a British national citizen. etc

They are globalists and if they aren't stopped Britain's poor will be facing the same problems as the poor of the rest of the world.

If anything the way this whole campaign on both sides has been played out should unite the majority in recognising that it is the interests of the detached upper echelons that are being served. We are being 'played' as a community. divisive issues that really should be non issues are pushed to the fore and the real problems with societies, and seriously, the way the whole world is governed, should be under scrutiny.

Not many would argue that there is fast becoming a two tier system, a hive, workers, drones, and an elite minority.

It is this system that should be highlighted, not the individual consequences. Address the means to change and we all, all, have the ability to shape the world to be fairer.

 

[Cypher]

Lies.

& scare stories.

The problem with you is that you try and argue against things even most people in the remain camp know to be the truth. It makes everything you say not worth listening to.

Now you claim you don't think that Brussels want a super state. Even though it was written on every EU document and the EU keeps growing and growing.

 

[daylightrobber]

Right now there's too much separation between who appoints the decision makers is Brussels and the people.

The Council is made up of the heads of governement of each member state.

The Parliament is made up of MEPs, voted for by those who can be bothered to vote.

The Commission is made up of 28 civil servants, one from each member state. The government of each member state makes the appointment. not exactly detached.

 

[Cypher]

If anything the way this whole campaign on both sides has been played out should unite the majority in recognising that it is the interests of the detached upper echelons that are being served. We are being 'played' as a community. divisive issues that really should be non issues are pushed to the fore and the real problems with societies, and seriously, the way the whole world is governed, should be under scrutiny.

Not many would argue that there is fast becoming a two tier system, a hive, workers, drones, and an elite minority.

It is this system that should be highlighted, not the individual consequences. Address the means to change and we all, all, have the ability to shape the world to be fairer.

But the individual consequences are the things that give people the reason to need to stop it. That's why they are important and need to be highlighted. The overall reason is too detached from people's normal lives and as a result they are allowing it to slide to it's inevitable result.

Its regrettable that immigration has to be a main issue due to the consequences then experienced by immigrants but needs must.

 

[Cypher]

The Council is made up of the heads of governement of each member state.

The Parliament is made up of MEPs, voted for by those who can be bothered to vote.

The Commission is made up of 28 civil servants, one from each member state. The government of each member state makes the appointment. not exactly detached.

So the council isn't directly elected.
The Parliament have little power.
The commission isn't directly elected.
The Presidents aren't directly elected and sometimes twice removed i.e. being elected by those who themselves who weren't elected.

Nevermind about the fact that there's no manifesto for anyone to vote for or against. Explain to me how the people have any control over these people.

 

[daylightrobber]

So the council isn't directly elected.
So the council isn't directly elected.
The Parliament have little power.
The commission isn't directly elected.
The Presidents aren't directly elected and sometimes twice removed i.e. being elected by those who themselves who weren't elected.

Nevermind about the fact that there's no manifesto for anyone to vote for or against. Explain to me how the people have any control over these people.

I agree that the council member isn't directly elected in that we don't choose our PM. However we choose the party, who choose the leader.
The parliament have plenty of power.

Budgetary: together with the Council of Ministers, the Parliament agrees on the budget.

• The Commission drafts the budget and in April each year sends it to the Council of Ministers and the Parliament
• The Parliament debates it and, if needed, proposes changes. The draft is sent to the Council, which can propose its own changes, if required, and forwards it back to the Parliament for the second reading.
• The Parliament can reject it (as it did it in 1979, 1982, and 1984) or adopt it .

Scrutiny: the Parliament has powers over the European Commission and the Presidency of the Council.

• It can dismiss the Commission and the Commission needs to submit to the European Parliament regular reports, annual legislative programmes and reports on the implementation of the budget. The Council’s nominations for the positions of the President of the European Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy must be confirmed by the European Parliament. Finally, the College of Commissioners must be approved by the European Parliament.
• The Presidency of the Council needs to report to the EP on its priorities and progress.
• The Parliament monitors the work of the Council of Ministers.

Appointments. The European Parliament :

• Appoints the President of the Commission, approves the appointment of the Commission and has power to dismiss it.
• Confirms the appointment of the president and vice-president of the European Central Bank.
• Appoints the European Ombudsman.
• Consults on the appointments of the Court of Auditors.

The positions of commissioners must be able to work closely with EU and domestic. An appointment is the sensible way forward.

Presidents are elected by the institutions they preside over.

We don't need to waste our money running campaigns and elections for any of these positions (outside of parliament) when there fair and democratic ways of selecting personnel.

MEPs generally do have a European Manifesto. Parliament is represented proportionally. If you don't like the policies don't vote for the candidate. If they align with others you don't like, vote them out next time.

It is nonsense to suggest that the EU isn't democratic.

 

[cduff]

I don't live in the UK, so maybe I don't have a right to comment, but as an outsider I will anyway. The whole Brexit campaign has a "Trump" feel about it. You have some right winger who is exploiting the fact that people are worried/disenfranchised and offering them some glib and easy scapegoat (in this case the EU) to further his own personal advancement.
I know that there are plenty of issues with the EU but compared to other countries UK has a pretty good deal with their own currency and controls on social welfare payments etc. I think that you would be mad to leave. Apart from trade, finance, political influence etc I wonder what the implications for the UK itself will be. Good chance that Scotland will exit the UK in order to rejoin the EU. Where does that leave NI?