Eu referendum whats your vote

OUT OF HOURS BULLY'S TRUCKSTOP BAR (INTERACTIVE)
1541

Franglais:

Carryfast:
it’s obvious that like all remainers underneath it all you’re really a Soviet style Federalist who just likes the idea of Soviet style rule imposed across Europe. :unamused:

I was trying to make the point that Farage can freely criticise as he has no responsibility in the exit talks. I also said that may be a cross party team (maybe including him) should have been used. Too late for that now. Maybe we agree that he should have had a place there? There is a valid argument for that.
Yes, you and Rjan debated the aspects of having local vetoes in national Gov systems, and you made your views plain. I think you and Rjan know more about that than me. I do come down more with his/her views than yours.
What I was trying to do is show the UK and EU systems are both flawed systems. But that the popular shout of “unelected commissioners” isn’t IMHO quite as bad as it first sounds.
In the Real World perfect systems of government don’t exist.

My point about you and all the other remainers obviously being Soviet style Federalists stands.

Firstly as I said it’s a bit hypocritical for you to moan about Farage when he’s been elected to the the very chamber that you’re defending.

As for VETO no that obviously isn’t the same tool as the national right of opt out and substitution within the group.Because VETO by definition stops the others ‘moving on’ as you would call it.While opt out or substitution obviously doesn’t.While it’s equally obvious that you and those like you are deliberately confusing the difference.While it’s obvious that even the right of VETO within the EU has now been reduced to being virtually useless with the majority of EU decisions now made by Commissioner dictat and foreign majority ( QMV ) rubber stamp.

In which case tell us what it is it that you’re so afraid of in a Europe based on consenting Nation States.Which all have the democratic right to agree or to agree to disagree and to do something different or not at all if their respective national votes so choose ?.That’s a lot closer to so called bleedin ‘perfect’ than the backward failed Soviet style dictatorship that you’re obviously all about. :imp: :unamused:

1542

Carryfast:

Franglais:

Carryfast:
it’s obvious that like all remainers underneath it all you’re really a Soviet style Federalist who just likes the idea of Soviet style rule imposed across Europe. :unamused:

I was trying to make the point that Farage can freely criticise as he has no responsibility in the exit talks. I also said that may be a cross party team (maybe including him) should have been used. Too late for that now. Maybe we agree that he should have had a place there? There is a valid argument for that.
Yes, you and Rjan debated the aspects of having local vetoes in national Gov systems, and you made your views plain. I think you and Rjan know more about that than me. I do come down more with his/her views than yours.
What I was trying to do is show the UK and EU systems are both flawed systems. But that the popular shout of “unelected commissioners” isn’t IMHO quite as bad as it first sounds.
In the Real World perfect systems of government don’t exist.

My point about you and all the other remainers obviously being Soviet style Federalists stands.

Firstly as I said it’s a bit hypocritical for you to moan about Farage when he’s been elected to the the very chamber that you’re defending.

As for VETO no that obviously isn’t the same tool as the national right of opt out and substitution within the group.Because VETO by definition stops the others ‘moving on’ as you would call it.While opt out or substitution obviously doesn’t.While it’s equally obvious that you and those like you are deliberately confusing the difference.While it’s obvious that even the right of VETO within the EU has now been reduced to being virtually useless with the majority of EU decisions now made by Commissioner dictat and foreign majority ( QMV ) rubber stamp.

In which case tell us what it is it that you’re so afraid of in a Europe based on consenting Nation States.Which all have the democratic right to agree or to agree to disagree and to do something different or not at all if their respective national votes so choose ?.That’s a lot closer to so called bleedin ‘perfect’ than the backward failed Soviet style dictatorship that you’re obviously all about. :imp: :unamused:

Youre right. I misused the word "veto". Sorry. Yes, I should have said opt out. Clearly I dont agree with Farage, but he is currently able to stand criticizing the negotiations when he has no formal responsibilities in them. Whatever happens in the talks he can (and will!) say “If I was there, we would have done better” or "If I was in charge it wouldnt have turned into the fiasco we have". Federal or ConFederal or whatever system*, isnt as important to me as actually being in it, not being a non voting, regulation taker on the outside, rather than one of the regulation makers on the inside. Move the balance more towards National than SupraNational, and I`m equally happy.

  • Im certainly not any form of expert on this, (or anything else!) but arent Federal and Confederal systems differently weighted sides of the same system? Federal more centrally controlled, Confereral less so? In any of those systems there will be tensions between Central and Regional governments. There are tensions in the UK between what is good for any region and what is good for the country as a whole. Weve had this argument in the past about planning permission for wind turbines, nuclear plants and closing mines havent we? No need to do it again is there?
    The EU isnt a true Federal or Confederal system at all is it? It is a hybrid system. Not perfect, but it is what is. And it remains plastic. Some critics (yourself maybe?) say its moving too far towards centralisation. So it is evolving. By the same token can`t it be moved the other way too? If the consensus agrees it will move towards more state autonomy surely?
1543

Franglais:

Carryfast:
In which case tell us what it is it that you’re so afraid of in a Europe based on consenting Nation States.Which all have the democratic right to agree or to agree to disagree and to do something different or not at all if their respective national votes so choose ?.That’s a lot closer to so called bleedin ‘perfect’ than the backward failed Soviet style dictatorship that you’re obviously all about. :imp: :unamused:

Youre right. I misused the word "veto". Sorry. Yes, I should have said opt out. Clearly I dont agree with Farage, but he is currently able to stand criticizing the negotiations when he has no formal responsibilities in them. Whatever happens in the talks he can (and will!) say “If I was there, we would have done better” or "If I was in charge it wouldnt have turned into the fiasco we have". Federal or ConFederal or whatever system*, isnt as important to me as actually being in it, not being a non voting, regulation taker on the outside, rather than one of the regulation makers on the inside. Move the balance more towards National than SupraNational, and I`m equally happy.

  • Im certainly not any form of expert on this, (or anything else!) but arent Federal and Confederal systems differently weighted sides of the same system? Federal more centrally controlled, Confereral less so? In any of those systems there will be tensions between Central and Regional governments. There are tensions in the UK between what is good for any region and what is good for the country as a whole. Weve had this argument in the past about planning permission for wind turbines, nuclear plants and closing mines havent we? No need to do it again is there?
    The EU isnt a true Federal or Confederal system at all is it? It is a hybrid system. Not perfect, but it is what is. And it remains plastic. Some critics (yourself maybe?) say its moving too far towards centralisation. So it is evolving. By the same token can`t it be moved the other way too? If the consensus agrees it will move towards more state autonomy surely?

Why would/should there be any ‘tensions’ in the type of Confederal system that I’ve described ?.As for the requirement for group consensus and the permission of the Politburo required to pass a constitution based on individual democratic state supremacy that’s obviously a contradiction and an oxymoron.On that note no the EU is to all intents and purposes already a Soviet style Federal dictatorship ruled by Politburo dictat and in which no individual state has the right to say no but you can if you want to.While if the EU was ever going to go along the lines of Confederation in which state sovereignty is supreme v Federation it would have done so long before now with a constitution drafted to match.So my question still stands what is it that you’re so afraid of in a Confederal Europe in which the individual states retain their sovereignty and the right to say no thanks not for us but you can go ahead if you choose ?.

1544

Carryfast:
Why would/should there be any ‘tensions’ in the type of Confederal system that I’ve described ?.As for the requirement for group consensus and the permission of the Politburo required to pass a constitution based on individual democratic state supremacy that’s obviously a contradiction and an oxymoron.On that note no the EU is to all intents and purposes already a Soviet style Federal dictatorship ruled by Politburo dictat and in which no individual state has the right to say no but you can if you want to.While if the EU was ever going to go along the lines of Confederation in which state sovereignty is supreme v Federation it would have done so long before now with a constitution drafted to match.So my question still stands what is it that you’re so afraid of in a Confederal Europe in which the individual states retain their sovereignty and the right to say no thanks not for us but you can go ahead if you choose ?.

The tensions arise from what is best for an individual Nation as this may be different for what is best for the Federation or Confederation.
Similarly the rights of the individual may be different to what is best for the society they are a member of.
There you are: two lines, solve them and you`l be Professor of Philosophy anywhere!

1545

Franglais:

Carryfast:
Why would/should there be any ‘tensions’ in the type of Confederal system that I’ve described ?.As for the requirement for group consensus and the permission of the Politburo required to pass a constitution based on individual democratic state supremacy that’s obviously a contradiction and an oxymoron.On that note no the EU is to all intents and purposes already a Soviet style Federal dictatorship ruled by Politburo dictat and in which no individual state has the right to say no but you can if you want to.While if the EU was ever going to go along the lines of Confederation in which state sovereignty is supreme v Federation it would have done so long before now with a constitution drafted to match.So my question still stands what is it that you’re so afraid of in a Confederal Europe in which the individual states retain their sovereignty and the right to say no thanks not for us but you can go ahead if you choose ?.

The tensions arise from what is best for an individual Nation as this may be different for what is best for the Federation or Confederation.
Similarly the rights of the individual may be different to what is best for the society they are a member of.
There you are: two lines, solve them and you`l be Professor of Philosophy anywhere!

So why do you think that just because something suits the wishes of a number of ‘the group’ the group then has the right to force those wishes onto others who wish to follow a different route.IE we’re talking about a widespread group of different nations with different ideas on how they wish to run their affairs and it’s those individual nations that are the definition of seperate individual free thinking ‘societies’ in question here.Not the bleedin group.

IE the ‘Confederation’ should just be limited in powers to nothing more than a talking shop in which some,or even all might agree on certain ideas and ways forward,but not on others,or maybe not even on any.In which case that’s what the definition of consent means and where the right to agree to disagree fits in.Not your stinking idea of what you say and want goes for all and has to be enforced on all.

As I said you’re just a dictatorial Federalist of the type which has ravaged Europe from the zb Romans to Napoleon to the Austro Hungarian Empire,to the Soviet Union and the Third Reich to the Yugoslav Federation.Usually always ending up with the same result needed to rightly smash such a stinking oppressive ideology. :unamused:

1546

Far to many fancy words and all going arround in circles, this says enough for all not suffering from verbal diarrhoea. Harvey

brexit.jpg
brexit.jpg960×568 37.3 KB

1547

HRS:
Far to many fancy words and all going arround in circles, this says enough for all not suffering from verbal diarrhoea. Harvey

Unfortunately it’s the so called ‘fancy words’ which will matter more in defeating the remainers in this case than the number of votes,in a deliberately formulated to be ‘non binding’ on the government,‘referendum’.( Opinion poll ) :unamused:

1548

HRS:
Far to many fancy words and all going arround in circles, this says enough for all not suffering from verbal diarrhoea. Harvey

Twenty people in group in a pub.
All have a drink when one says “let’s move on.” So they have a vote and 12 of them vote leave. After get all well out the door the arguments really start. 4 want to go home. 5 want to go to another pub. The other 11 want to go to a restaurant, but even they can’t agree on Italian, Chinese or Indian.
So if the 11 who wanna now go to a resto next, maybe only 7 are those who voted to leave the pub initially. The other 4 are those who wanted to stay but agreed to leave with the rest. They’ll stay with the group but want a say on where they’re going next.

So everyone stands on the pavement getting cold, arguing, with no drink and no food.

Sent from my SM-G361F using Tapatalk

1549

Franglais:

HRS:
Far to many fancy words and all going arround in circles, this says enough for all not suffering from verbal diarrhoea. Harvey

Twenty people in group in a pub.
All have a drink when one says “let’s move on.” So they have a vote and 12 of them vote leave. After get all well out the door the arguments really start. 4 want to go home. 5 want to go to another pub. The other 11 want to go to a restaurant, but even they can’t agree on Italian, Chinese or Indian.
So if the 11 who wanna now go to a resto next, maybe only 7 are those who voted to leave the pub initially. The other 4 are those who wanted to stay but agreed to leave with the rest. They’ll stay with the group but want a say on where they’re going next.

So everyone stands on the pavement getting cold, arguing, with no drink and no food.

Sent from my SM-G361F using Tapatalk

Is this a true story or something you made up Franglais ? bit like our government at the moment, some in gear some not. Should have direct drive no clutch and lets get on with it, OUT and upwards no time to waste any more gotta GEL ON, Buzzer.

1550

Buzzer:

Franglais:

HRS:
Far to many fancy words and all going arround in circles, this says enough for all not suffering from verbal diarrhoea. Harvey

Twenty people in group in a pub.
All have a drink when one says “let’s move on.” So they have a vote and 12 of them vote leave. After get all well out the door the arguments really start. 4 want to go home. 5 want to go to another pub. The other 11 want to go to a restaurant, but even they can’t agree on Italian, Chinese or Indian.
So if the 11 who wanna now go to a resto next, maybe only 7 are those who voted to leave the pub initially. The other 4 are those who wanted to stay but agreed to leave with the rest. They’ll stay with the group but want a say on where they’re going next.

So everyone stands on the pavement getting cold, arguing, with no drink and no food.

Sent from my SM-G361F using Tapatalk

Is this a true story or something you made up Franglais ? bit like our government at the moment, some in gear some not. Should have direct drive no clutch and lets get on with it, OUT and upwards no time to waste any more gotta GEL ON, Buzzer.

So the group get into the bus they’ve hired for the night. The bus driver, was the one who called for the vote although he really wanted to stay. Anyway, when they get in the bus Dave throws a moody and refused to drive.
“Go on”, shouts someone, “let the woman have a go”! So Tess gets to drive. She fumbles with the keys, then gets the bus going.
At the first roundabout she indicates for an exit.
“No” shouts Nigel, “not that way.”
She approaches the next exit.
“No” crys out Jake, “take the road on the right.”
“Left turn only” says Jeremy.
“When we voted to leave, it was bleedin’ obvious we were going to the place of MY choice.” Said young Cary in a quiet voice. “That last pub was a stinking den of thieves”.
“I didn’t want to leave the pub in the first place”, says Frank.
“I don’t care where we go”, calls out John, “so long as we don’t stay in that last pub”.

An angry publican, Mike, chases the bus down the road “Oi Stop!” “Some of you lot ordered food but didn’t pay”.
“We haven’t eaten any”.
“No, but it’s on the stove, you gotta pay”.

“Stop shouting at me”, says our driver, “I’m doing the best I can.”
“We never decided which route to take, when we decided to leave.”
“Left” says Jeremy.
“Right” answers Jake.
“Faster” says John, “Gel on, girl”!

“I’ll help you Tess” says a tubby blonde boy, walking up the aisle in the bus. He carries a knife in one hand, and a cardboard cap with a plastic “Driver” badge on it, in his other hand…
“I’m everyone’s friend” he chuckles.

No offence to any TNUK members intended. :slight_smile:

Sent from my SM-G361F using Tapatalk

1551

Franglais are you ■■■■■■ up, bin in the bar too long you best book into rehab PDQ, your going down the road of old CF where what you write is a load of cobbler’s and it becomes boring in the end and not many want to read what input you have. IMHO you need to contribute something better rather than an episode which sounds like its from a Famous Five book, reminds me of my school reports " must try harder " and I did in the end, Buzzer.

1552

Unfortunately, I didn’t, Buzzer.

And ended up being a lorry driver! :unamused: :unamused:

1553

Your humorous analogy is not lost on me Franglais, well written!

1554

HRS:
Far to many fancy words and all going arround in circles, this says enough for all not suffering from verbal diarrhoea. Harvey

  • 1 The overall vote was to leave, So why dont the rsoles that voted to stay just ■■■■■■■ shut up & let T May get on with her role as PM , FFS She has a hard job to please all & sundrie, & The turn coates in her Party are doing the cause no flaming good at all in my book, If the British people want out so be it, Regards Larry.
1555

Franglais:
So the group get into the bus they’ve hired for the night. The bus driver, was the one who called for the vote although he really wanted to stay. Anyway, when they get in the bus Dave throws a moody and refused to drive.
“Go on”, shouts someone, “let the woman have a go”! So Tess gets to drive. She fumbles with the keys, then gets the bus going.
At the first roundabout she indicates for an exit.
“No” shouts Nigel, “not that way.”
She approaches the next exit.
“No” crys out Jake, “take the road on the right.”
“Left turn only” says Jeremy.
“When we voted to leave, it was bleedin’ obvious we were going to the place of MY choice.” Said young Cary in a quiet voice. “That last pub was a stinking den of thieves”.
“I didn’t want to leave the pub in the first place”, says Frank.
“I don’t care where we go”, calls out John, “so long as we don’t stay in that last pub”.

An angry publican, Mike, chases the bus down the road “Oi Stop!” “Some of you lot ordered food but didn’t pay”.
“We haven’t eaten any”.
“No, but it’s on the stove, you gotta pay”.

“Stop shouting at me”, says our driver, “I’m doing the best I can.”
“We never decided which route to take, when we decided to leave.”
“Left” says Jeremy.
“Right” answers Jake.
“Faster” says John, “Gel on, girl”!

“I’ll help you Tess” says a tubby blonde boy, walking up the aisle in the bus. He carries a knife in one hand, and a cardboard cap with a plastic “Driver” badge on it, in his other hand…
“I’m everyone’s friend” he chuckles.

No offence to any TNUK members intended. :slight_smile:

More like a group book a coach trip and the driver stops at an expensive rip off cafe where they didn’t want to stop and which offers zb food that none of them want and they’re not even hungry yet anyway and where he gets a kick back for every coach party that he brings in.While to add insult to injury the time wasted means that there’s now no time to get to the nice country hotel restaurant destination they actually wanted and booked to go to.Then when they complain and ask for their money back he sets fire to the coach telling them they’ll all have to walk home or pay for a taxi.Having made enough money in kick backs to no longer need the job.No offence to Tony Blair among others intended.

1556

Franglais:
So the group get into the bus they’ve hired for the night. The bus driver, was the one who called for the vote although he really wanted to stay. Anyway, when they get in the bus Dave throws a moody and refused to drive.
“Go on”, shouts someone, “let the woman have a go”! So Tess gets to drive. She fumbles with the keys, then gets the bus going.
At the first roundabout she indicates for an exit.
“No” shouts Nigel, “not that way.”
She approaches the next exit.
“No” crys out Jake, “take the road on the right.”
“Left turn only” says Jeremy.
“When we voted to leave, it was bleedin’ obvious we were going to the place of MY choice.” Said young Cary in a quiet voice. “That last pub was a stinking den of thieves”.
“I didn’t want to leave the pub in the first place”, says Frank.
“I don’t care where we go”, calls out John, “so long as we don’t stay in that last pub”.

An angry publican, Mike, chases the bus down the road “Oi Stop!” “Some of you lot ordered food but didn’t pay”.
“We haven’t eaten any”.
“No, but it’s on the stove, you gotta pay”.

“Stop shouting at me”, says our driver, “I’m doing the best I can.”
“We never decided which route to take, when we decided to leave.”
“Left” says Jeremy.
“Right” answers Jake.
“Faster” says John, “Gel on, girl”!

“I’ll help you Tess” says a tubby blonde boy, walking up the aisle in the bus. He carries a knife in one hand, and a cardboard cap with a plastic “Driver” badge on it, in his other hand…
“I’m everyone’s friend” he chuckles.

No offence to any TNUK members intended. :slight_smile:

More like a group book a coach trip and the driver stops at an expensive rip off cafe where they didn’t want to stop and which offers zb food that none of them want and they’re not even hungry yet anyway and where he gets a kick back for every coach party that he brings in.While to add insult to injury the time wasted means that there’s now no time to get to the nice country hotel restaurant destination they actually wanted and booked to go to.Then when they complain and ask for their money back he sets fire to the coach telling them they’ll all have to walk home or pay for a taxi.Having made enough money in kick backs to no longer need the job.No offence to Tony Blair among others intended.

1557

Lawrence Dunbar:

HRS:
Far to many fancy words and all going arround in circles, this says enough for all not suffering from verbal diarrhoea. Harvey

  • 1 The overall vote was to leave, So why dont the rsoles that voted to stay just [zb] shut up & let T May get on with her role as PM , FFS She has a hard job to please all & sundrie, & The turn coates in her Party are doing the cause no flaming good at all in my book, If the British people want out so be it, Regards Larry.

You might not have noticed but the reason that T May is PM is because she is a committed Europhile remainer and her ‘role’ is to sabotage Brexit. :wink: :unamused: :laughing:

1558

gazzer:
Your humorous analogy is not lost on me Franglais, well written!

At risk of upsetting some, so you remember the old saying about
“You can please some people all of the time.
You can please all the people some of the time.
But you can’t please all the people all the time”?

Looks like there may be a new line to add:
Brexit looks like displeasing all the people all the time!
It’s either happening when it shouldn’t or is too hard, or too soft, or is too slow, or is. …
Well. No offence meant to any one here as I said. :slight_smile:

Sent from my SM-G361F using Tapatalk

1559

Franglais:

gazzer:
Your humorous analogy is not lost on me Franglais, well written!

At risk of upsetting some, so you remember the old saying about
“You can please some people all of the time.
You can please all the people some of the time.
But you can’t please all the people all the time”?

Looks like there may be a new line to add:
Brexit looks like displeasing all the people all the time!
It’s either happening when it shouldn’t or is too hard, or too soft, or is too slow, or is. …
Well. No offence meant to any one here as I said. :slight_smile:

Sent from my SM-G361F using Tapatalk

You’re flogging a dead horse here Franglais. Sorry and sad to see Laurence Dunbar, whose views I have appreciated and respected over the years, join the ranks of the mob trying to drown out any reasoned arguement.

Why do you try to stop us putting forward our views, could it possibly be that you don’t have any reasoned arguement of your own?

1560

Spardo:
Why do you try to stop us putting forward our views, could it possibly be that you don’t have any reasoned arguement of your own?

There’s not much point in reasoned argument with anyone who thinks that paying for the privilege of being ruled by the EU and being a net importer of EU goods to the point of a massive trade deficit which we again have to pay for is supposedly good for us.

On that note any ‘views’ that involve selling out your country to the type of dictatorial undemocratic Soviet style foreign rule and disadvantageous for it economic regime that is the EU Federation,for personal self interest reasons in whatever form,need to be stopped.Preferably to the point of a charge of treason if the country is worth saving.