It was very vague in the letter. I don't quite understand what he's planning. Irish PM just said the same and asked to look at the details more closely. Also backed up my concern earlier about single parties having a veto.
Thank you, it’s reassuring to know that in debate such as this we can still have conversations even when we may disagree. To be clear, I did not vote for Johnson, I also voted remain, reluctantly I admit because I believe the EU is in fact getting less democratic. I perfectly understand why others will disagree with that view, but will always respect and support the that inalienable right. I’m not prepared to have any friendship destroyed by this debate, nor personally alienate those with a different view. I also know that post this debate we all have to get on with each other and hence my lack of enthusiasm for hostility either physically or verbally.
The best way to change the EU is from within. Actually, that’s the only place to be if you want to change it.
I agree, and if there are areas where we are getting a raw deal, it is because of the incompetence and lack of negotiating and influencing ability of our politicians and diplomats involved.
Have a look at some of those MEPs... would you want to have a serious negation with someone like Farage?
757000 or 28% of the vote v SNP 977000 or 36% of the vote. HMRC will be busy then? Not sure they’re not all as rich as you suggest.
I can understand why rich people vote Tory. I can even understand why comfortably off people who are nowhere near as wealthy as they aspire to be, vote Tory; the clue is in the aspiration. I can never understand how people with children in state schools, who have family members receiving treatment from the NHS, and who live in communities where there are too few police to protect them from rising crime, would ever think of voting Tory. And yet they do, in great numbers. I don’t intend to be insulting btw. It just seems so obvious to me, that every time this country has a Tory Government, the streets fill up with homeless people, schools and hospitals end up in crisis, crime increases, and the gulf between rich and poor widens dramatically. The very wealthy can probably insulate themselves from this, but the red of us can’t; and it happens every time we have a Tory Government.
Could it be that the alternative, especially now just doesn’t tick the voters boxes? I recognise your dilemma but regret fall into your final group and there’s no chance of me changing to the current alternatives. That does not mean I’m blinded to the many mistakes the tories make, but still feel more confident in the long run.
Well put Archers. I know Tory voters in Aberdeen, who never want to engage in healthy debate about politics - not because they think it improper, but because they are embarrassed about their snobbery, and hopeful for their greed. Its a perceived class issue. I don`t have any class, so I despise it totally.
Yeah I never get the argument that leaving will make things more democratic. Inside the EU when we come up with agreements regarding customs that effects the whole EU and UK, all our countries get together come up with ideas, put them up for scrutiny infront of democratically elected officials to approve with the details published to the public. And importantly have mutually pre-agreed rules to ensure a fair agreement is reached. Now we have negotiators in place we haven't heard of with so little democratic oversight we cant even see the contents of the agreement that will affect the laws of our country(due to it harming our negotiating position apparently) until after they have been agreed. Or we fail to agree and end up with something no countries population wants, and some people say that's more democratic? Its cutting off your nose to spite your face. We have all the ingredients in the EU to be able to do things democratically. Let's elect MEPs who actually want to work with Europeans to make that democratic system continue to improve.
I know what you are saying but Mrs F19, a mild mannered school teacher of some 40 years has expressed an intention of giving up her organ donor card "in case a Leaver benefits". I have pointed out the folly of this but she's pretty unhappy about things and has already fallen out with a brother-in-law. ( admittedly he is an arse) so as regards personal alienation that ship weighed anchor in late June 2016.
I guess that’s probably what it is. I’m a lifelong socialist and trade unionist myself, but even I recognise what a hard sell JC is to some sections of the British public. That still leaves the Lib Dems though.
You and me both. For me, much of it is down to what paper you read. I have said it before but if you read every day for umpteen years, Tory good, Labour bad, it will stick and affect voting intention, unless you are extremely open minded and seek alternative views from elsewhere. It doesn’t help that the same papers will never publish the good intentions of their opposition, thus denying their readers of receiving a balanced view. With regards to the overall impact of a Tory government, I consider them to be the equivalent of a house owner that doesn’t put enough effort or money into maintaining or improving his home, leading to it falling into disrepair. Then, when Labour do get back in, they plough billions into trying to get the “home” back to a decent state, whilst the same pro Tory papers slaughter them for overspending, with all the good they do undone by the next Tory government.
Two sides of the same coin. Tories like to build their bank balance, meanwhile the kids go to school with empty bellies and leaky shoes. Labour spend the money on food and shoes and so have an empty bank account. It's up to voters to decide which is better. The trouble is the bulk of the media constantly tell them to let the kids go hungry.
The EU has to protect the Single Market, so there will have to be Customs checks somewhere on one or both sides of the border. The only parallel situation we have to compare things to is the border between Norway and Sweden. Norway is a member of the Single Market but not in the EU, Sweden is in the EU. All lorries crossing that border have to be checked, with an average waiting time of 20 minutes. The checks will have to be more rigorous for goods crossing from North to South in Ireland, but at present there are no border posts on any of the 200 or so crossing points, and no technology to check things remotely. So Johnson’s proposals are pie-in-the-sky and will not be acceptable to the EU, as he knows very well.
In the US, a lot of it comes down to religion. Anything good that happens is credited to God because God is good, and anything bad that happens is credited to man (with government being the ultimate representative of man's power) because people are wicked. So it doesn't really matter where or how they get their money. Just the final equation. They don't want to be rich. They just want enough to live their small town lives like their parents and grandparents. I talk to people from coal mining towns and their understanding is that they are good, righteous, hardworking Christians and therefore they should be able to make a humble living. If that means getting black lung and dying at 50, they're ok with that because that's the bargain with God. Within that 50 years, they get married, they have kids, they do all cultural things that have value to them, then they go to heaven. If the government gives them $35K a year in welfare, that's not $35k they got from the government. That's $25k the government has taken from them because they're not able to make the living that God had in plan for them. This is why the message that Clinton and other liberals send them is so fatal to their chances. They're telling these people "Hey, stop being coal miners. It's a dead end. Go learn some tech skills and get off welfare and earn $60k a year." To them, that's not the deal. Trump speaks their language. It's not just that he falsely promises they can be small farmers, or coal miners, or factory workers and make a good wage. It's how he speaks about it. He makes it a good vs evil thing. The Democrats are the forces of evil. Trump-- even if he himself is a rather ****ty person-- is on the side of good. To most people, Trump seems the epitome of an authoritarian figure. To them, they're fine with Trump being an authoritarian, because ultimately Trump's power is bestowed upon him by God, the ultimate authoritarian. They don't give a **** about the economics, logic, or practicality. They really don't even care that much if Trump's policies end up hurting them (as they have). They're willing to take the hurt in order to be good people and go to heaven. I used to deal with these people all the time. It's immensely frustrating. I'd tell fisherman "Look. You guys are catching too many striped bass, and decimating the population. Catch fewer fish, and the government will compensate you for the lost revenue. When the population goes back up, you can fish again." "Who is the government to try and control the fish? There will be fish if God wills it, and no fish if God does not." Even most of the liberals in those towns were the same. They were environmentalists. But in their minds, it was still based on religion. God told them to be stewards of the Earth, and over-fishing is being greedy and bad stewards, so God is punishing them with fewer fish, and if they stop over-fishing God will reward them. You couldn't just be like "You catch X less fish, the population increases by Y." They completely rejected any scientific approach whereby humans could control nature or man's ultimate fate. That's how it works. They don't reject reason, science or economics per se. It just takes a back seat to moral righteousness and the power of God. You ask them what is "1 + 1" they'll say "Of course it's 2." If you ask them "If Jesus needs three fish, but he can only get 1 from here and 1 from there, so how many fish does have?" The answer is 3 ****ing fish. Jesus has as many fish as he needs. If Jesus can rise from the dead, then God can make more fish if He wants to, regardless of what man does. God can build a wall and make Mexico pay for it. If he doesn't, it's because the moral people didn't fight hard enough. So they'll fight with everything they have.
Not going to say that I like what you say, but I can recognise this behaviour. It's totally illogical to an educated person, but it's easy to see where it is anchored and why it is so. Really good post ISIRTP, I feel like you gave me a much better insight. I think that if you educate these people out of their religion you end life for them, as they know it, which means you end it. They are as grounded in their belief as any devout across the world. They have certainty. It's very powerful. It also dooms them to eventual servitude and possibly a short life, as you point out. In contrast, here in the UK, as several of you know, I am a member of the Southampton Ramblers, and go for walks on several occasions. We also talk a lot during our walks. I remember introducing the subject of "Purpose of Life" during a walk north of Winchester, across the Downs. And I was totally underestimating my fellows. Immediately the first answer came back - "we're here to propagate the species, no more. Might as well enjoy it while we can." "other than that, there's no purpose." And also I heard, "there is no purpose to life. It just is, and on Earth we have the right conditions for it." No mention of God, but just as certain. But I think my Ramblers are freer.
