Europe III: April F-EU-Ls

[gIzzE]

But you're basing the EU on what it has been so far, and I'm afraid no one knows what it will be in 5 or 10 years time.

The EU is now at breaking point financially with more and more countries in a debt trap, then we have Target2 helping hide the amount of borrowing that is still going on, and the EU have said that the only way forward for the project to work is for all countries to relinquish sovereignty in the long term. Macron and Merkel have both said again recently that nation states must be prepared to give up sovereignty.

I don't think that is the right direction to go, each State needs to be fully sovereign to be able to work through difficult times and do what is needed when things are not going well. Just look at how much Greece or Italy have struggled being bound in EU red tape.
It will benefit Germany and France and us no doubt as we are a strong country financially, but I don't feel it fair that we grow at the expense of some of the poorer nations, it is just making the have and have not divide even wider.


This is where the middle ground lies, simply that people think differently from each other, you say huge financial and political mess leaving, I think we will see a huge financial and political mess if we remain.
I think the UK will have to bail out the project if we remain, and I think we will fall out with the EU politically within a few years anyway if we stay as the UK won't want to give up the sovereignty that is needed for the project to work going forward.

I just wish we had not had the referendum, I truly believe if we hadn't the EU would have started to show the cracks by 2025 anyway, and it would have had to change.
What will no doubt happen now is we will leave, the EU will then stop printing money and over lending to Greece and Italy etc. and there will be some serious economic issues across the EU with unemployment and a recession we have not seen since the 1930s, which will all be blamed on Brexit.

[charlesr]

https://metro.co.uk/2018/12/29/britain-set-scrap-changing-clocks-eu-rule-change-despite-brexit-8290929/?ito=social

This demonstrates why leaving the EU is barely worth it. We'd still have to do the same stuff as the rest of Europe.

I think it's time we thought bigger and start another EU - "Earth Union". Everyone, including Europe would want to join it. One world currency. One language. Ban religion (or at least just decide on one so people stop fighting over it). All humans welcome.

[gIzzE]

Keeping the clocks on BST is a good thing, not so dark in the evening in winter and you don't want to have different time zones really, especially not between NI and Eire.

A good decision by the EU, drat, maybe I should have voted remain?


Your new EU sounds good.
I'd be happy with one language, I presume it would be German, I can speak that, and obviously religion will be Islam, which hopefully we will all be practising anyway by 2040, if not sooner, but not sure on the currency, that is what is causing so many issues in Europe, but in for a penny as they say.

Happy New Year All!

Kul aam wa anatom bekhayr!

Frohes Neues Jahr!

[EvilBoris]

Your new EU sounds good.
I'd be happy with one language, I presume it would be German, I can speak that, and obviously religion will be Islam, which hopefully we will all be practising anyway by 2040, if not sooner
Kul aam wa anatom bekhayr!

oh...

[Asura]

each State needs to be fully sovereign to be able to work through difficult times and do what is needed when things are not going well.

I think this is the core issue, though, right?

I mean surely the ethos of the EU is that when things go badly, we don't all split apart and just look after our own interests. Historically that led to division and, ultimately, war. I'm not saying there's a war on the horizon, but certainly there are problems that will rear up in the future.

Problems like the environment, climate change, automation, resource shortages - and the hope, I guess, was we might try to forge a unified nation before we get hit by something that needs a more united humanity in order to resolve it. If we just split apart when things get tough, it's never going to happen.

Obviously there are specifics you can debate, such as the whole argument that Greece should never have been let into the EU, and how the EU's membership rules should've always been stricter.

That being said, we can debate that until the cows come home. I think that's one of the "big debates", whether humanity's future should be more "big government" or "small government". Like for some people, the "end goal" of civilisation is to allow them to govern themselves, whereas for others, the end goal of civilisation is to have one government that works for everyone. I think this is a pretty fundamental thing which isn't easily resolved. It's a philosophical issue, not a pragmatic one.

[gIzzE]

I think this is the core issue, though, right?

I mean surely the ethos of the EU is that when things go badly, we don't all split apart and just look after our own interests. Historically that led to division and, ultimately, war. I'm not saying there's a war on the horizon, but certainly there are problems that will rear up in the future.

Problems like the environment, climate change, automation, resource shortages - and the hope, I guess, was we might try to forge a unified nation before we get hit by something that needs a more united humanity in order to resolve it. If we just split apart when things get tough, it's never going to happen.

Obviously there are specifics you can debate, such as the whole argument that Greece should never have been let into the EU, and how the EU's membership rules should've always been stricter.

That being said, we can debate that until the cows come home. I think that's one of the "big debates", whether humanity's future should be more "big government" or "small government". Like for some people, the "end goal" of civilisation is to allow them to govern themselves, whereas for others, the end goal of civilisation is to have one government that works for everyone. I think this is a pretty fundamental thing which isn't easily resolved. It's a philosophical issue, not a pragmatic one.

I do agree with you in that regard, the points you mention are all something I do agree with.

I was meaning more the lack of financial sovereignty is where the issues arise.

Until we have have sovereign control over finances though we can't really have a fair central government, there is too much backlash when those in trouble feel those governing them are not doing what is best for them.

Chicken and egg.

[endo]

Your new EU sounds good.
I'd be happy with one language, I presume it would be German, I can speak that, and obviously religion will be Islam, which hopefully we will all be practising anyway by 2040, if not sooner, but not sure on the currency, that is what is causing so many issues in Europe, but in for a penny as they say.

Even when we leave, English will remain the predominant language used within the EU. The French would love it to be French, but have you ever tried to source a Maltese>French translator? I have, in my 2 decades of EU translation, and it’s ****ing murder let me tell you. Any more exotic combinations are basically impossible to resource: not many Lithuanian>Greek translators knocking about. English is, and will remain, a vital pivot language. The Irish can draft legislation in Gaelic. No ****er can read it though, so it has to be drafted in English.

As for the bit about Islam, which EU Member States are pushing for Islam to be the predominant religion in their country/the union?

[endo]

I’ve just noticed the bit where you mention you hope we’re all practising Islam by 2040, my mistake. There’s no debating with you if you honestly believe that.

[Brad]

Brad, I know you’re just playing peacemaker here and I love you for it but I have to call you out on this statement because I’ve seen it become damaging with this, Trump, modern Nazis and a whole bunch of stuff. It is not the case that there are two extremes and the desired point is right in the middle.

Dude! That's not what I said at all. I was talking about the effects of a) staying in the EU or b) leaving it:

Those that want to remain will exaggerate the effects of leaving e.g. financial meltdown, holidays restricted to Bognor Regis
Those that want to leave will exaggerate the effects of remaining e.g. all our laws governed by Brussels, overwhelming immigration

I'm saying the actual effects in either case are watered down versions of the above. EU travel becomes a bit more awkward, financial markets becomes unstable for a period / We do have to adopt some new EU laws (usually for the better) and we continue to have free movement of people (in both directions!)

So, not saying the desired point it in the middle of two extremist views; I'm saying both sides exaggerated (LIED!) to try to make their argument more compelling.

[Dogg Thang]

Sorry, I misinterpreted that... but you did say “as with all things” and that definitely had me thinking you were applying this as a general statement. Nevertheless, I’d still maintain the two positions aren’t equal in this case either. One outcome was entirely knowable because we were already living it while the other was not and it has become all the clearer that there was no vision for it whatsoever - if anything, Brexit has been shown to be more chaotic and unplanned for than we could have anticipated. And if you were to draw up two lie columns, I’d be fairly certain that one will massively outweigh the other.

But yeah, I misinterpreted you and thought you were applying this as a general rule. My apologies.

[MartyG]

we continue to have free movement of people (in both directions!)

Nope, that is one thing we definitely lose, whether it's the current May's withdrawal agreement or a no deal exit version: freedom of movement ends after the transition period finishes in December 2020 under the WA and immediately with no deal.

[Brad]

Ugh those two sentences referred to the remain scenario. I’m not being clear enough it seems. My bad.

[cutmymilk]

Guzzle is trollmaster with that Islam comment! Truly means all of his posts have been jokes.

[Neon Ignition]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/02/most-labour-members-believe-corbyn-should-back-second-brexit-vote

Nearly 90% of Labour members would vote Remain in a second referendum. 72% believe Corbyn should support the option

[gIzzE]

I’ve just noticed the bit where you mention you hope we’re all practising Islam by 2040, my mistake. There’s no debating with you if you honestly believe that.

I was being a twat and taking the piss out of the Tommy Robinson crew who say **** like "We will all be practising Islam in 20 years if we don't stop them 'invading' us now!" and "If we don't leave the EU the Germans will be in control and we will all have to speak German.".


It was in response to Charlser's post about a new EU, Earth Union, which I presumed was also tongue in cheek.