The EU debate - Part III

I've already addressed it in the post you replied to with waffle, as your selective editing in the post last night missed the salient point Adolf.

The ultimate 'salient point' is that you're a Nazi ****.

 

You voted remain and they lost
You did not want Trump to win and he won
You dont like Le Pen and she.....

Do you see where I am coming from

 

He got nothing.
No cap on immigration, no deal on CAP, what he got was worse than nothing and then the other EU members had to agree for him to do it.

 

If there's a strawman, it's yours.

You've done your usual trick of taking a single item form a wider point, tried to make it about that and then insisting that yours is the only view and everyone else is foolish.


For all your words, you can't deny that there are other options, which was my claim. You also shouldn't be so certain that the deals within the EU won't alter.

Over and above that, it's been discussed several times, and even if we stay in the single market, and even if that means free access, there are still options available to limit the probability of getting flooded by EU citizens, to the detriment of the colonials that have done so much for us, as well as the other 90% of the world. Out of the EU, we can simply adjust our benefits system to be more in line with other member states, so that it's simply not attractive to come to our damp soggy island unless you can support yourself.

 

A special needs school?...

 

Disagreements about what needs to change and how it needs to be done, for the most part.
Crappy obstructionist MEPs, like the UKIP mob, haven't helped things, of course.

 

Thank you for your summary from the ExpressMail.

 

Is Le Penn's policy for a death penalty, or for a referendum on a death penalty. I answered the question on her policies, saying I would be in favour of a referendum you seem to have answered something else.

You made a bold comment on her policies, so you either know about them, but seem afraid to discuss them, or you just posted an opinion from ignorance. I was simply honest in saying I didn't know much about them.

 

Except that this isn't true, is it? It's also suggesting that the Tories have even attempted to tax the rich, when they lowered them.
Austerity is ideological and damaging. It hasn't worked and it isn't supposed to.
Starve the beast, lie to the population.

 

The death penalty is ineffective, expensive rubbish. We got rid of it for a reason.

 

I didn't see that as an option in the Policies that was being responded to.

 

What are they? You've still not answered & how can these options make the country as prosperous as it is under the current single market arrangement? Which was my original question

Why would the EU single market change btw?

 

Why would you be happy for the possibility of an objectively crap piece of legislation to go a referendum?
Should we have one about shoving a hot poker up your arse? It's democratic!

 

I know you are a special case, but did you really go to such a school?

 

So what did he get?

 

You're doing your usual trick of adding to the original claim. I pointed out that that there were other options, which is obvious, as 90% of the worlds population exist outside the EU. Take your pick of which method they use.

The EU single market could be reviewed for a variety of reasons. Various key officials in the EU are concerned about its condition and fearful for its future, not just because the Euro is widely agreed to be a failure, and liable to help the EU collapse.

 

A free pig's head. Allegedly.

Various things. Have a Tory link: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...d-cameron-asked-for-and-what-he-actually-got/

 

This was my response to your 'salient point', which you flat out ignored, despite me calling you out for it a few times now. Taking the 'salient' part from the article, pasting it here and saying 'See, this is what you're doing Adolf!' isn't properly addressing my response...

"Then we get on to the justification of this pathetic piece of literature – ‘cultural racism’. Culture is formed by ideas, and ideas are formed by debate, if the argument is ‘racism now means culture’, then how can a culture ever change for fear of being called racist? Are all of the Muslim reformers that receive death threats from other Muslims racists? Did our country become racist in 1948 when it decided that our culture could do with a change and offer free healthcare to all citizens? Were the Germans who turned away from the culture under Literally Hitler racist for doing so? Were the Republicans racist for deciding to change their culture and releasing the slaves? Do you see the hole you’ve dug for yourself?"

I don't know why you are doing this to yourself.

 

Because over the years, a polls show that a decent percentage of the population seem to disagree with you. Whether that's a majority or not is debatable, but a referendum would inform that.

Do you know many people proposing shoving hot pokers up arses?