This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - More Than Mortal
Pages: 1 ... 575859 6061 ... 502
1741
« on: June 16, 2016, 06:08:02 AM »
To be honest, I kind of want to vote Leave just to see the look on that cunt Osborne's face when house prices don't collapse and the world doesn't end.
Have you actually decided which way you're going to vote yet?
I'm mildly on the Leave side. But I'm not a MAKE BRITAIN GREAT AGAIN Brexiteer. I honestly doubt it will make that much of a difference to the economy, or how the UK governs itself. I do believe that a "democratic restoration"--or whatever you want to call it--is one of the genuine benefits of leaving the EU. It also means we aren't going to be on the losing side of Council votes so often, especially on foreign policy, development, agriculture and employment law ( source). The problem is that the British people voted to remain in the prior economic union because we were told by our politicians (well, I wasn't born then, but y'know) that it would never be a political union. And what is it? It's unabashedly a political union that makes no secret of its ultimate end-goal of federalism; this has been the goal since its inception. And even if federalism is never reached, it's quite clear that those at the top of the EU are committed to ever-closer political union. Not something I'd like to see. I don't viscerally hate the EU. I think a lot of the shit it does is whacky--like that quote in their visitor's centre--but maybe that's because I'm British; Continentals might be less enamoured on average with concepts like national sovereignty. I'd also add that the smugness and arrogance with which the Remain campaign has conducted itself, virtually across the board, has been vile. Since the new parliament, and since the campaigns kicked off, I've not only lost respect for both Cameron and Osborne but I've also lost some for organisations like the IMF.
1742
« on: June 16, 2016, 05:39:27 AM »
Both the outcome of the referendum and what will actually happen afterwards are very unclear at this point.
Do you think there's a chance that Brexit would spark morre exits from the EU?
I read somewhere that Netherlands might hold a referendum if you guys leave.
#NEXIT
1743
« on: June 16, 2016, 05:24:45 AM »
Both the outcome of the referendum and what will actually happen afterwards are very unclear at this point.
Do you think there's a chance that Brexit would spark morre exits from the EU?
1744
« on: June 16, 2016, 05:17:02 AM »
Of course, simply ignoring a massive victory for either side would probably be practically unworkable for the government, but they are under no obligation to follow the outcome.
Especially given who is more likely to vote for Leave: working-class people. There have been rumblings that the government might flat-out reject a Leave vote. If that happens, I'm pretty certain there'll be a lot of demonstrations and probably some rioting.
1745
« on: June 16, 2016, 05:14:42 AM »
To be honest, I kind of want to vote Leave just to see the look on that cunt Osborne's face when house prices don't collapse and the world doesn't end.
1746
« on: June 16, 2016, 05:03:45 AM »
but to create very detailed economic analysis, predictions and impact assessments.
I'm on board with that. I just find it amusing that countries get notifications when the paperwork is late.
1747
« on: June 15, 2016, 06:22:55 PM »
(think a Commission notification to Portugal for being late in submitting their information on the economics of the olive oil sector)
. . .
1748
« on: June 15, 2016, 06:21:03 PM »
FullFact
I concede that the 10pc figure is most likely horseshit; that said, I took it upon myself to look it up after your prior comment and came across a different FullFact article which links this report. The 70-75pc figure only refers to EU directives. When including other kinds of European laws, the figure drops to 28pc. Article here.I'd also point out that, even if we do leave, then yeah we will have to abide by certain regulations even if we aren't in the EEA. This isn't a big deal, at all; it's true for any country which exports to any other country, and recent trade deals have moved towards creating the largest free trade bloc the world has ever known, as well as pushing forward with regulatory harmonisation. I'd respond to the rest of it but I'm too busy watching Michael Gove telling us how we can MAKE BRITAIN GREAT AGAIN. I'll look over the rest of your comments and digest it properly tomorrow.
1749
« on: June 15, 2016, 10:55:14 AM »
There is literally nothing wrong with national sovereignty.
Fuck national sovereignty National Sovereignty = Narrow mindedness
- Leads to people only giving a shit about "their people". I can't stand it.
How does wanting your government to be sovereign encourage narrow-mindedness? That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.
1750
« on: June 15, 2016, 09:46:55 AM »
still abide by just about every European rule regarding commerce and trade in Europe.
I'll let you revise, but I will say this is false to my knowledge. The "No to EU" Norwegian campaign has pointed out that claims by the British government that Norway must accept and implement 75pc of EU laws are not true; the EEA agreement with Norway has a clause which allows them to refuse the implementation of new EU rules should they so desire, and they claim to have implemented just 10pc of new EU laws over the 2003-2013 period.
1751
« on: June 15, 2016, 09:03:03 AM »
BELGIUM STRONG.
 Keep telling yourself that.
1752
« on: June 15, 2016, 08:56:03 AM »
From what I've read, a sizable majority of economists, major businesses, banks, governmental institutions, think-tanks, international financial organizations, research institutions and economic magazines seem to support the notion that a Brexit is much more likely to be bad for the UK than it would allow the country to flourish.
What you say is correct, in that--at least it seems to me--a majority of publications are coming out in support of Remain. However, academics have criticised the Treasury for essentially acting as a "propaganda machine", with one Professor David Blake claiming that the models used in Treasury analysis predict that the UK would be better off joining the Euro, and that every country in the world would be better off in the EU. I haven't had a chance to read Blake's report, but if it's true then it is very damning. Not to mention the obviously ridiculous claims from the Treasury and politicians that Brexit would lead to an immediate recession, or that it would necessitate a fiscal adjustment of ~£40bn. I would also point out that saying "economists think X about Brexit" isn't very useful, even if the claim is technically true. Economics is a big field; when polled on whether or not Britain should join the Euro, most economists said yes. The only group to say no were monetary economists, the most qualified group to answer the question. I'd like to see a specific breakdown of which sub-fields lean which way before I can commit to saying the field is broadly united. Not only that, but if we look at reports commissioned by investment funds--who, if anybody, have something to lose from Brexit-- such as this one there tends to be a general agreement that, economically, Brexit will be neither extraordinarily bad or extraordinarily good.
1753
« on: June 15, 2016, 08:20:57 AM »
Note: I am posting this before I watch it.
1754
« on: June 15, 2016, 06:06:47 AM »
And then there's the comments about how the EU is sclerotic and unable to change, which conveniently ignore that the Union is working on improving its institutions and changing the way they work pretty much constantly, as illustrated by many gradual changes to several of its organs and arguably one of the biggest changes in the EU's history being introduced just a few years ago to give significantly more power to the directly elected Parliament. I would mention, however, that--AFAIK--the Parliament still does not have legislative initiative. The representatives sit in the Parliament not by country but by ideological blocs. The ratio of MEPs to Britons is something like one-to-one million. And, at least according to Daniel Hannan, neither the Parliament nor the Council is permitted to discuss something unless the Commission has expressly called for it to be discussed. Correct me if any of these are wrong, but they are all (at least for me) fundamental problems with the Union. And it doesn't look like the third one can be fixed in any significant way. And, of course, there are rumblings about the EU keeping plans on hold until after the referendum, lest they swing the decision towards Leave. Most notably, the plans for a European Army, among some other things. I don't know whether this is true, but it nicely highlights the fact that the only way forward is either the dissolution of the monetary union or greater fiscal integration. And, let's be honest, the latter is most likely; I don't want to see the UK on the periphery of a two-speed Europe, dominated by the Germans and the French. I have seen 3 people who legitimately seem to think that the President of the Commission is some sort of illegitimate dictator who rules the EU with an iron fist forcing refugees into the UK and singlehandedly imposes arbitrary laws on Britain to fuck people over.
This is not a widespread opinion; the most widespread negative opinion of Juncker is as him being an ineffectual drunkard.
1755
« on: June 14, 2016, 05:59:15 PM »
The polls are useless
I wouldn't go that far. Polls across the board are showing increasing momentum for the Leave campaign--both phone and online--and if anything could be underestimating the Leave vote due to flaws in the way the data is collected.
1756
« on: June 14, 2016, 05:57:16 PM »
I'm fairly resigned to it at this point.
Likewise. I more or less assumed that the righteous and godly side of Remain would just win, but the sheer amount of populism on both sides of the debate has really disappointed me. Even parts of what Meta just quoted make me facepalm at the populist discourse in it.
I should point out that, as a rule, I don't like Peter Hitchens. (As an aside, I wouldn't generally think of him as populist either). That said, would you mind pointing out the specific passages of populism in the article?
1757
« on: June 14, 2016, 05:43:18 PM »
Isn't that illegal?
Further updates indicate that the wife of the shooter knew of his plans at the nightclub, did not alert the authorities. Pretty sure that makes her an accomplice, at least.
1758
« on: June 14, 2016, 05:24:43 PM »
Why would I be mean to you when I agree?
1759
« on: June 14, 2016, 05:14:33 PM »
I don't tip waiters. I'm not being rude, I just don't believe in tipping. It's their job to serve customers. I'm a customer. They want more money? Do a better job and ask their boss for a raise. It's not my problem that restaurants are too cheap to properly pay them.
1760
« on: June 14, 2016, 05:07:32 PM »
5 minutes in I just confirmed that I rused all of you and you're still mad.
None of us are mad, though. It's just tragically funny; the entire reason you fucking suck at trolling us is because you're so dumb that anything you say might as well be taken at face value.
1761
« on: June 14, 2016, 05:04:12 PM »
>Just confirmed that I trolled everyone.
>People still take this seriously.
Lol lord this is too funny.
Constantly telling us how hilarious this ruse is will only make it seem like you're trying to back-pedal. Maybe you were fucking with us, but goddamn you suck at it.
1762
« on: June 14, 2016, 05:02:22 PM »
race
Two wrongs don't make a right.
1763
« on: June 14, 2016, 04:58:34 PM »
The official national language is English here.
The sad thing is that I can believe you really are this uninformed.
1764
« on: June 14, 2016, 04:54:25 PM »
“National sovereignty is the root cause of the most crying evils of our times….The only final remedy for this evil is the federal union of the peoples.” And, in that same visitor's centre, the information section on the U.K. mentions Edinburgh and Harry Potter for like 20 seconds before going on to talk about classic, non-British stories from other countries. I actually didn't think I could be any more amazed by some of the shit the European Union does, but I stand corrected.
For anybody interested, I'm currently watching a documentary by Jeremy Paxman (one of the most well-known presenters in the country) on the EU. If anybody wants to better understand the EU--or, more specifically, Eurosceptics' grievances--then give it a watch.
1765
« on: June 14, 2016, 03:16:47 PM »
1766
« on: June 14, 2016, 12:54:52 PM »
It's all in English, actually.
Cultural superiority: confirmed.
1767
« on: June 14, 2016, 11:24:25 AM »
On an unrelated note, anyone who wants to see me defend my thesis against the University's cybercrime and data protection panel is more than welcome to come see. It is public, after all.
And travel to the heart of the EU to hear somebody speak frog? No thank you. Spoiler On a serious note, good luck with your defence.
1768
« on: June 14, 2016, 08:49:37 AM »
Peter Hitchens.I think we are about to have the most serious constitutional crisis since the Abdication of King Edward VIII. I suppose we had better try to enjoy it.
If – as I think we will – we vote to leave the EU on June 23, a democratically elected Parliament, which wants to stay, will confront a force as great as itself – a national vote, equally democratic, which wants to quit. Are we about to find out what actually happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?
I am genuinely unsure how this will work out. I hope it will only destroy our two dead political parties, stiffened corpses that have long propped each other up with the aid of BBC endorsement and ill-gotten money.
I was wrong to think that the EU referendum would be so hopelessly rigged that the campaign for independence was doomed to lose. I overestimated the Prime Minister – a difficult thing for me to do since my opinion of him was so low. I did not think he could possibly have promised this vote with so little thought, preparation or skill.
I underestimated the BBC, which has, perhaps thanks to years of justified and correct criticism from people such as me, taken its duty of impartiality seriously.
Everything I hear now suggests that the votes for Leave are piling up, while the Remain cause is faltering and floundering. The betrayed supporters of both major parties now feel free to take revenge on their smug and arrogant leaders.
It has been a mystery to me that these voters stayed loyal to organisations that repeatedly spat on them from a great height. Labour doesn’t love the poor. It loves the London elite. The Tories don’t love the country. They love only money. The referendum, in which the parties are split and uncertain, has freed us all from silly tribal loyalties and allowed us to vote instead according to reason. We can all vote against the heedless, arrogant snobs who inflicted mass immigration on the poor (while making sure they lived far from its consequences themselves). And nobody can call us ‘racists’ for doing so. That’s not to say that the voters are ignoring the actual issue of EU membership as a whole. As I have known for decades, this country has gained nothing from belonging to the European Union, and lost a great deal.
If Zambia can be independent, why cannot we? If membership is so good for us, why has it been accompanied by savage industrial and commercial decline? If the Brussels system of sclerotic, centralised bureaucracy is so good, why doesn’t anyone else in the world adopt it?
As for the clueless drivel about independence campaigners being hostile to foreigners or narrow-minded, this is mere ignorant snobbery. I’ll take on any of them in a competition as to who has travelled most widely, in Europe and beyond it. Good heavens, I’ve even read Tolstoy and like listening to Beethoven. And I still want to leave the EU.
Do these people even know what they are saying when they call us ‘Little Englanders’?
England has never been more little than it is now, a subject province of someone else’s empire.
I have to say that this isn’t the way out I would have chosen, and that I hate referendums because I love our ancient Parliament. And, as I loathe anarchy and chaos, I fear the crisis that I think is coming.
I hope we produce people capable of handling it. I wouldn’t have started from here. But despite all this, it is still rather thrilling to see the British people stirring at last after a long, long sleep.
1769
« on: June 14, 2016, 08:00:00 AM »
For example, Bernie Sanders being labeled a socialist would seem more (negatively) impactful than say a negative article on Clinton's handling of Benghazi. So while Clinton might have received more "negative" press than anyone else,
As to your claim that Sanders being labelled a socialist would harm his chances, I highly doubt that, given that a majority of both self-identified Democrats and liberals have a favourable view of socialism. Despite what most people seem to think--and would have you believe--America has a pretty rich history with socialism. wouldn't you say the degree to which it's negative should also be considered? How would you quantify that?
1770
« on: June 14, 2016, 07:33:17 AM »
that's the most incorrect thing i've read all month
Clearly not.
That seems to only mention online articles. I think what the others were talking about was TV Broadcasting.
True, I should've made that clear. Although not only did she get the most negative coverage, she also got the least positive coverage. And given the importance of electronic media to today's political cycles, it's not as if my position is made significantly weaker, nor does it seem likely that those companies broadcast significantly different coverage--tonally--on television than they do online. A Harvard study of the invisible primaries tells the same story: Clinton had bad coverage.
Pages: 1 ... 575859 6061 ... 502
|
Show Posts