Poland - Is the EU starting to crumble

[Benroon]

20 minutes ago, 23RD said:

 

I don't often give the UK credit but when the most important decision since the end of WW2 came BREXIT we pulled it out of the bag.  

and how's that going ?  (try to avoid the 'it will be ok in time' reply as its meaningless or 'we got our sovereignty back' as again that's meaningless)- its going wrong NOW. Give us some snippets to hang onto ...

You were in the armed forces right ? So the reduced intelligence sharing - good thing ? When terrorism is a huge cancer on this planet - we now have access to less information - brilliant - why didn't I think of that !

Hugely reduced buying power as a lone nation leading to a higher cost of living just as benefits are being reduced - genius !

Send the migrants home so fruit and veg rots in the fields. healthy pigs are shot, and HGV drivers can now command football player salaries - inspired !

Give us some silver linings....

[23RD]

9 minutes ago, Benroon said:

You too !! I've always been bemused by this - I don't particularly have time for the BBC with their absurd license fee and the fleets of limos I used to see outside their offices waiting to take staff home from my office, but they are often called rabidly leftist and I don't pick that up at all

Totally agree with that post Benroon bud but I'd call the BBC rabidly leftist and and top heavy on Pedophiles Its extortion that folk in the UK have to pay £159 a year to watch there Gender Bending Marxist rubbish now BREXIT is out of the way the Government needs to step in and make them subscription only and watch them collapse quicker than CNN.

[23RD]

11 minutes ago, Benroon said:

Give us some silver linings....

There's a silver lining bud (there's not shortage of work as an HGV Driver) As for the intelligence sharing it still goes on weather the UK is in or out of the EU and most of us Brit's are still happier out than in (apart from the rabid leftist).

[JamesE]

10 hours ago, gummy said:

Tell me you like raw herring as well ?

It's not exactly raw. More along the lines of mildly fermented. Like chunky young fish sauce.

[JohninDublin]

42 minutes ago, mickkotlarski said:

Cheers John

As you have gathered I'm skeptical of the EU and I don't like some of the directions it has taken.

Still though I think that calling the Euro hierarchy corrupt is senseless. If the powers at be are truly corrupt they did a good job at hiding it. If they are innocent then whats the point accusing them when it is not relevant.  Both are possible but non confirm able.

But I do address a lack of decisiveness in regulating corruption. Even though they themselves may not have acted dishonestly or performed any shifty deals the process of law enforcement is  too sluggish and if they can appoint a Public Prosecutor many of the scams both ongoing and revealed can be hammered.

All sorts of penalties are delivered to members that "don't conform" but  so little is done to bring criminals to justice. If the EU is to survive then this is an issue that needs immediate action, not meetings and fancy drinks served while EU hierarchy clap over punishing states they don't agree with.

You may also have gathered I'm not a fan of communism but if there is a +ve to be had then its a quick speedy justice. This would be perfect as EU justice is not Kangaroo court. But by the time any sound legislation is given the rats gnaw away happily. Although relating to the US and not relevant to this discussion the open book approach to Covid treatment has seen the new drug Molnupiravir being sold at US$720 when the production cost of these 10 tablets is a very affordable US$17. The EU has similar de regulatory issues that I also voice concern over.

Some of the surveys taken of EU citizens with regard to corruption is scary. The Transparency Organization asked 44.000 people in Europe and a third believe that corruption is alive and kicking. Many more believe its not getting better. As mentioned Malta and Romania are terrible.

The EU may have actually done some good in curbing some of their corruption in these countries but they still remain the rascals in the family.

My concerns are legitimate. Should Serbia, Albania and Bosnia be included into the EU?

Though some may shout YES or NO without any real thought but I can see some heartaches following. Croatia (although nice place) hasn't exactly been a corruption free model. Yet the EU goes on its recruitment quest looking for new members. Is it to unite Europe or is it to gather safety in numbers and pass rules that may not suit all members. Or could it be that both apply simultaneously?

Fortunately as mentioned in a previous thread to PBS. Leaving the EU is not a macabre death.

There is a nation right in the middle of the continent. It is called Switzerland. It does not interfere in the politics of other countries yet has good diplomatic relations. Its citizens have the right to bear fire arms yet there is no hint of high school massacres. It has a universal health care system regardless of the citizens status in society. It  allows immigration yet denied citizenship to a Muslim that refused to shake the hands of the issuing officer because of her sex. It allows her folk to smoke pot in public without fear of incarceration but has a very low prison population while still keeping crime levels in check. It has a stable currency and good standard of life.

Should nations decide to leave the EU then what better role model. The EU offered entry but the Swiss refused it. Nations can govern themselves and still keep good relations with the EU.

Anyway old boy. Thanks for the comments. In the end time will tell and the debates will continue .

Regarding the speed of response by the EU to fraud, or more likely waste, is that is often not spotted until it reaches the Court of Auditors which is independent of the EU and can be up to three years after the cash is disbursed. By the time, the person who approved it may have moved onto fresh pastures, and the recipient has gone bust. If they suspect fraud or waste, all they can do is report it to the Commission who might then report matters to local police. If they do, because it is a fraud case, it might take a further year to investigate and maybe another year to come to trial.

Then of course there is the problem of cross-border evidentiary rules. In France, hearsay is permitted and suspects have the absolute right to silence and that cannot be held against them. In the UK hearsay is not allowed, and if you exercise your right to silence, that can be held against you. So if either accomplice incriminates the other by either of these methods, the evidence becomes inadmissible. There are 27 different jurisdictions, so that should give you a clear idea why the EU cannot appoint a prosecutor and passes this to local cops.

On the question of pricing the EU can and does carry out investigations. Where I have a problem with these, is that in certain cases, the EU grants exemptions that allow minimum prices to be fixed. One example concerned Chanel who were investigated because they refused to supply retailers who were selling their products at below their minimum recommended price. There is a process known as "block exemptions" where you can apply to the EU for this right. You have to show  them why it is not in the public interest to allow retailers to sell below the recommended price. But big businesses are investigated and punished. The most notable one is probably the Stanley Adams/Hoff laRoche case. Adams was a whistleblower who worked for the Swiss Pharma Giant. They were involved in a massive over-charging scam. SA tipped off the EU, but failed to protect his identity. He was subsequently arrested by the Swiss for Industrial Espionage and received a 6 month sentence.

Prior to his arrest, his wife was told he faced a 20 year sentence, which led to her committing suicide. SA didn't seem to have a lot of luck with his wives. He got 10 years in jail when he tried to have the next one bumped off for the insurance money.

As for the survey you quote, you seem to be concurring with me in respect of "if the powers at be are truly corrupt they did a good job at hiding it". So that raises the question that in light of such lack of evidence, why do so many people believe it"? I'd suggest that it's because they hear politicians and their pal down the pub going on about it, and then they see a story in the paper about an EU fraud that takes place in their own country, and they automatically link it Brussels. But I am not naive. The EU has £2.1 TN budget over 7 years, and there must some of that money being stolen, but there is no evidence that it's the Commissioners themselves stealing this, though employees might be. An analogy would be someone operating a till in Tesco's steals from them, so therefore Tesco's is corrupt.

On the subject of Croatia, I tend to have similar views, as I do about Bulgaria Romania etc. But there is a similar type of analogy to the one I've just give. The EU may be the parents but just because some of the kids are crooks, does not make the EU the head of a crime family.

Turning to your comments on both PBS and the Swiss, I agree that leaving the EU will not kill us, but I think it's a significant act of self harm from which we are unlikely to recover in my lifetime. There are structural problems such as the fact that we have to import food to survive, a situation that has been going on since the end of the 19th century. This was something that nearly cost us both world wars. It doesn't seem sensible to me to abandon the food mountains across the Channel, if our next nearest supermarket is in Algeria or Morocco who are both subject to volatility. I think the Swiss model is something to aspire to but that bird has flown because of our involvement in two world wars. Prior to 1914, we were the richest country on the planet. I don't say that we should have kept our noses out of it, but while the Yanks were having their finest hour with the Marshall Plan, we were on our uppers because of debt repayments to the US. More recently we have been watching a slow moving tsunami of populism descend on both the UK and much of Europe. Populism is the solvent on the glue that holds us together.

And thanks to you to. I can welcome those who I disagree with, but I do not suffer fools gladly. Clearly you are no fool and it's been a pleasure exchanging with you. 

[mickkotlarski]

1 hour ago, JohninDubin said:

They are being dictated to because they became members of a club where the agreed to abide by the rules and obtained benefits from membership, and then reneged on their obligation to abide by the rules. I don't know about you, but if I were a member of that same club, I would be protesting loudly that this was happening. Regarding my reference to Stalin etc, I was comparing the tactics not the personalities. But it's early days yet.

Regarding censorship you are well off point. When CNN, Facebook etc indulge in censorship, that is solely at the discretion of the owners of that media. How does that even compare with govs that tell you what you can or can't report and will close you down if you don't comply. With regard to FB in particular. I don't see any "liberal" credentials for Zuckerberg. He as always struck me as being the sort of person who didn't care how he got his money, as long as he got it and feign deniability over his methods.

As for the BBC, that really is a crock. For the past 30 years, I've been listening to people tell me that the BBC are biased because "They hate women". Many men say the opposite. They are "pro-gay". Many gays say the opposite. Right wing. Many of those on the left say the opposite. Pro-Union. Many trade unionists say the opposite. Elitists. Many of the elite say the opposite. Name any two opposing groups and both will claim that the BBC is opposed to them.

What conclusions can I draw from this? How about the BBC is not biased. They just happen to hate everybody equally.

Here in essence is why they are being punished. Though nations are members of the EU. It is the populace that the government represents. If they decide by democratic voice that heir ideals don't coincide with the EU's then here comes the stick. Hence a large reason why the option of Article 50 of the Lisbon treaty can be  put into affect and also why more and more want out. Exit will be painful with penalties similar to divorces but the EU has become far more political than its original format. The EU will have no choice but to take up the sword as should lets say France and or Italy depart. Others will follow. The hard part will be departing nations getting their own currency back. But the EU can crumble. Simply put what kind of Union will you have when members are not united.

I believe that if Scotland or Catalunya decided to break away from the UK and Spain respectively then would it not be better to allow it and keep amicable relations. Even if it initially painful or one may not agree. If they want to go independent or join the EU. Let the people decide. Again leave it to democratic vote.  

With regard to censorship I have heard the statement often enough about it being solely the discretion of the platform but it also shows where that platform stands on various issues. Five years ago speech was not this regulated as it is now. Very few truly allow a fully open say what you want forum. If you didn't like it or disagree then don't listen. Many are easily offended and banned for stating taboo no matter how factual it may be. Stand up comedians, critics and announcers had a much wider birth ten years ago and  peoples comments (and sometimes their jobs) can and do get terminated.

FB is itself shutting down others opinions though agreed Zuckerberg has often turned a blind eye to anybody when the cash register chimes away.

No offense about the Stalin analogy as I have used the same about Hitler and the new generation left. Just similarities in action and power acquisition not relevant to any personalities. But with regard to the BBC I have seen bias. Even though many reporters may not share equal views. Unfortunately the media is controlled by policy and not necessarily unbiased reporting.  I have seen the same in Euro news, RT, MNSBC, NHK, Sky, Fox and local channels here in Thailand and around South East Asia. When reporters read out events they do put a propaganda tale to it. Always have and always will. Even sports announcers are doing it now. 

Here in essence is why so many countries, political parties and ideologies are in conflict. From elections around the world to referendums of independence rather than folk discussing matters during an election they choose to fight. Both sides will present facts in the most biased manner and out comes the vexation. Quite often neither is wrong. 

This is one of my complaints with the EU's shortcoming. If a nation's majority (quite often not resounding) elects to have its administration enact a policy and that government does the opposite. Tensions follow. 

Should their wishes go against the majority but agree with the political bloc of which it is a member. Then her citizens will feel abandoned. Should the country disagree with the bloc but support the majority voice then the bloc will protest and find ways to punish them.

One of the reasons that the EU was far better in its early days is the members were on a far similar playing field. How can Bulgaria and Germany be put into the same boat? Why should nations be punished for not complying with rules that may be detrimental to them but beneficial for others?

This is one of the positives of ASEAN. The members are similar in economy and do not interfere in each others affairs. There is no big brother in Singapore or Jakarta spelling out the rules. Sure the level of corruption is higher and the economies not as strong but rarely have member states been at each others throats. Their issues remain in house.

John there has never been this much Euro skepticism before. The seniors are fully aware of this and have already made changes as have countries who are the EU's well behaved or preferential members.

Social divides, Immigration, Financial agreements, Environmental concerns among many other aspects are not mutual throughout the EU. The foundations are shaking and nations will choose to govern themselves. Hence my reference to Switzerland. Nobody can call them dictatorial. Nor do they interfere in the affairs of others yet they march on proudly and when International issues such as  dodgy bank accounts were addressed they responded. As they could act on their own account.  

 

 

[mickkotlarski]

19 minutes ago, JohninDubin said:

Regarding the speed of response by the EU to fraud, or more likely waste, is that is often not spotted until it reaches the Court of Auditors which is independent of the EU and can be up to three years after the cash is disbursed. By the time, the person who approved it may have moved onto fresh pastures, and the recipient has gone bust. If they suspect fraud or waste, all they can do is report it to the Commission who might then report matters to local police. If they do, because it is a fraud case, it might take a further year to investigate and maybe another year to come to trial.

Then of course there is the problem of cross-border evidentiary rules. In France, hearsay is permitted and suspects have the absolute right to silence and that cannot be held against them. In the UK hearsay is not allowed, and if you exercise your right to silence, that can be held against you. So if either accomplice incriminates the other by either of these methods, the evidence becomes inadmissible. There are 27 different jurisdictions, so that should give you a clear idea why the EU cannot appoint a prosecutor and passes this to local cops.

On the question of pricing the EU can and does carry out investigations. Where I have a problem with these, is that in certain cases, the EU grants exemptions that allow minimum prices to be fixed. One example concerned Chanel who were investigated because they refused to supply retailers who were selling their products at below their minimum recommended price. There is a process known as "block exemptions" where you can apply to the EU for this right. You have to show  them why it is not in the public interest to allow retailers to sell below the recommended price. But big businesses are investigated and punished. The most notable one is probably the Stanley Adams/Hoff laRoche case. Adams was a whistleblower who worked for the Swiss Pharma Giant. They were involved in a massive over-charging scam. SA tipped off the EU, but failed to protect his identity. He was subsequently arrested by the Swiss for Industrial Espionage and received a 6 month sentence.

Prior to his arrest, his wife was told he faced a 20 year sentence, which led to her committing suicide. SA didn't seem to have a lot of luck with his wives. He got 10 years in jail when he tried to have the next one bumped off for the insurance money.

As for the survey you quote, you seem to be concurring with me in respect of "if the powers at be are truly corrupt they did a good job at hiding it". So that raises the question that in light of such lack of evidence, why do so many people believe it"? I'd suggest that it's because they hear politicians and their pal down the pub going on about it, and then they see a story in the paper about an EU fraud that takes place in their own country, and they automatically link it Brussels. But I am not naive. The EU has £2.1 TN budget over 7 years, and there must some of that money being stolen, but there is no evidence that it's the Commissioners themselves stealing this, though employees might be. An analogy would be someone operating a till in Tesco's steals from them, so therefore Tesco's is corrupt.

On the subject of Croatia, I tend to have similar views, as I do about Bulgaria Romania etc. But there is a similar type of analogy to the one I've just give. The EU may be the parents but just because some of the kids are crooks, does not make the EU the head of a crime family.

Turning to your comments on both PBS and the Swiss, I agree that leaving the EU will not kill us, but I think it's a significant act of self harm from which we are unlikely to recover in my lifetime. There are structural problems such as the fact that we have to import food to survive, a situation that has been going on since the end of the 19th century. This was something that nearly cost us both world wars. It doesn't seem sensible to me to abandon the food mountains across the Channel, if our next nearest supermarket is in Algeria or Morocco who are both subject to volatility. I think the Swiss model is something to aspire to but that bird has flown because of our involvement in two world wars. Prior to 1914, we were the richest country on the planet. I don't say that we should have kept our noses out of it, but while the Yanks were having their finest hour with the Marshall Plan, we were on our uppers because of debt repayments to the US. More recently we have been watching a slow moving tsunami of populism descend on both the UK and much of Europe. Populism is the solvent on the glue that holds us together.

And thanks to you to. I can welcome those who I disagree with, but I do not suffer fools gladly. Clearly you are no fool and it's been a pleasure exchanging with you. 

John the feeling is mutual. Beside some disagreements and hot air my respect for you grows with each posting. Its good to have somebody disagree with my opinions yet refrain from childish antics and name calling. Hence why so many debates continue on and on because our opposition isn't necessarily wrong and a lot of what you said are things I originally praised about the EU.

Though freedom and independence is my crusade, unity has it's merits and you presented facts and reasoning.

I hope I haven't offended you or hurt you. If so it was not intentional.

Oh. In closing I hope the Hitler analogy wasn't too much as the EU is definitely not a fascist club. Its just an analogy that political parties do be they left or right wing.  

Do you realize that much of what we have said has re-enforced opposite perspectives. Who knows mate maybe there is home for man kind after all.  Walk with happiness John.

[JohninDublin]

1 hour ago, 23RD said:

I'm straight to the point I call a spade a spade.

I was a 17 year old Soldier in West Berlin when the wall came down Communism should have been consigned to history at that time however its still alive and well in the halls of the EU Headquarters in Brussels. Now the EU might not have murdered 15 million People like the Soviet Regime but it has been responsible for 1000's of deaths by its policies like the Schengen freedom off movement which has allowed the free movement of drugs, terrorist. human trafficking and un-vetted migrants throughout its member states.

Ah and lets talk about the ECHR shall we the same court that refuses to deport criminals like murderers rapist drug dealers muggers child abusers all because the the ECHR believes their entitled to a right of family life under article 8 if the above mentioned scumbags own a cat a tortoise or an underage bride.

The EU are unelected bureaucrats that make draconian laws and regulations destroy the fabric of their member states and the worse thing about it is they never asked the People if they wanted it.

I don't often give the UK credit but when the most important decision since the end of WW2 came BREXIT we pulled it out of the bag.  

Communism should have been consigned to history at that time however its still alive and well in the halls of the EU Headquarters in Brussels.

Oh yes? And you know this because....? Right now, I think I am receiving spirit messages from the ghost of Joe McCarthy. Just like you, he saw reds everywhere, but when asked to "put up" most could be placed comfortably in an average sized room. Well Joe, how many commies can you name that are working in the EC? 

As for Schengen, are you not aware that most of the trafficked women are EU nationals, and many were already engaging in prostitution in their own countries before they were being trafficked. As for most of the other undesirables you name, they too were already indulging in such nefarious activities in their own countries before they ever crossed the open borders of Schengen. Unless of course you were talking about non-EU migrants. If they are what you are talking about, then you need to be aware that Schengen did not order the borders to be opened to these people. That was a decision taken by individual states. As I've already implied, had had these ne'er-do-wells been confined to their own countries, they would have behaved exactly the same, so it's difficult to see that there has been any nett gains in  terms of the thousands of deaths you postulate. But let's say that Schengen did cause all these deaths, and then we look at the 15 mill Russians who died because of Stalin, do you really think that is an equitable comparison? Of course Joe, I recall hearing you say that the "The only good Communist was a dead Communist". These people were Russians so quite likely they were also commies. Could it be that you really admire Stalin for having killed so many of them?

Perhaps you can explain what the ECHR has to do with this? They are nothing to do with the EU whatsoever. Notwithstanding the almost hilarious content of your rant about tortoises., perhaps you can produce a link to that. Are you aware BTW, that attempts to deport those with criminal records were often applied to those who had committed crimes many years ago in another jurisdiction, and had never even been charged with crimes in the UK? I don't condone crime but how heartless do you have to be to tell a mother with a couple of kids, that "We are going to deport your husband who is the father of your children, and if you want to keep the family together, you will have to follow him"? Hammers in Foolboxes springs to mind. 

I am still waiting to hear you name these draconian laws. 

[JohninDublin]

1 hour ago, mickkotlarski said:

Here in essence is why they are being punished. Though nations are members of the EU. It is the populace that the government represents. If they decide by democratic voice that heir ideals don't coincide with the EU's then here comes the stick. Hence a large reason why the option of Article 50 of the Lisbon treaty can be  put into affect and also why more and more want out. Exit will be painful with penalties similar to divorces but the EU has become far more political than its original format. The EU will have no choice but to take up the sword as should lets say France and or Italy depart. Others will follow. The hard part will be departing nations getting their own currency back. But the EU can crumble. Simply put what kind of Union will you have when members are not united.

I believe that if Scotland or Catalunya decided to break away from the UK and Spain respectively then would it not be better to allow it and keep amicable relations. Even if it initially painful or one may not agree. If they want to go independent or join the EU. Let the people decide. Again leave it to democratic vote.  

With regard to censorship I have heard the statement often enough about it being solely the discretion of the platform but it also shows where that platform stands on various issues. Five years ago speech was not this regulated as it is now. Very few truly allow a fully open say what you want forum. If you didn't like it or disagree then don't listen. Many are easily offended and banned for stating taboo no matter how factual it may be. Stand up comedians, critics and announcers had a much wider birth ten years ago and  peoples comments (and sometimes their jobs) can and do get terminated.

FB is itself shutting down others opinions though agreed Zuckerberg has often turned a blind eye to anybody when the cash register chimes away.

No offense about the Stalin analogy as I have used the same about Hitler and the new generation left. Just similarities in action and power acquisition not relevant to any personalities. But with regard to the BBC I have seen bias. Even though many reporters may not share equal views. Unfortunately the media is controlled by policy and not necessarily unbiased reporting.  I have seen the same in Euro news, RT, MNSBC, NHK, Sky, Fox and local channels here in Thailand and around South East Asia. When reporters read out events they do put a propaganda tale to it. Always have and always will. Even sports announcers are doing it now. 

Here in essence is why so many countries, political parties and ideologies are in conflict. From elections around the world to referendums of independence rather than folk discussing matters during an election they choose to fight. Both sides will present facts in the most biased manner and out comes the vexation. Quite often neither is wrong. 

This is one of my complaints with the EU's shortcoming. If a nation's majority (quite often not resounding) elects to have its administration enact a policy and that government does the opposite. Tensions follow. 

Should their wishes go against the majority but agree with the political bloc of which it is a member. Then her citizens will feel abandoned. Should the country disagree with the bloc but support the majority voice then the bloc will protest and find ways to punish them.

One of the reasons that the EU was far better in its early days is the members were on a far similar playing field. How can Bulgaria and Germany be put into the same boat? Why should nations be punished for not complying with rules that may be detrimental to them but beneficial for others?

This is one of the positives of ASEAN. The members are similar in economy and do not interfere in each others affairs. There is no big brother in Singapore or Jakarta spelling out the rules. Sure the level of corruption is higher and the economies not as strong but rarely have member states been at each others throats. Their issues remain in house.

John there has never been this much Euro skepticism before. The seniors are fully aware of this and have already made changes as have countries who are the EU's well behaved or preferential members.

Social divides, Immigration, Financial agreements, Environmental concerns among many other aspects are not mutual throughout the EU. The foundations are shaking and nations will choose to govern themselves. Hence my reference to Switzerland. Nobody can call them dictatorial. Nor do they interfere in the affairs of others yet they march on proudly and when International issues such as  dodgy bank accounts were addressed they responded. As they could act on their own account.  

They are being punished because they wont follow the rules. For any reasonable person, the process should be to get the rules changed by whatever majority is needed, or to leave. They refuse to do either. Imagine you own a bar and someone starts swinging from the light fittings, I am sue you'd tell them to stop. What would you do if they refused to stop? Nothing? The prob with the EU is that there is no mechanism to expel members. 

Regarding Scotland in particular, and therefore Catalunya by default, I would be sad to see Scotland leave the UK, but when a marriage breaks down, I have no problem with a divorce. A referendum should determine this, but unlike the Brexit. I'd want to see a second vote to confirm the divorce once the terms of separation are confirmed. 

On censorship, I am not talking about the likes of FB. I am talking about govs that close down or censor media that they view as unfriendly to stifle free speech and prevent impartial reporting of the opposition. As for wokeness, which is what I presume you are implying about the "wider berth", I believe that much of that is about those who feel weak  or insignificant, empowering themselves by feigning outrage. In some cases, such as Trudeau in Canada, he was attacked for wearing "blackface" 20 years ago, when there was no fuss about such behaviour. I heard of a case of a footballer in his early 20's who is being investigated by the FA for comments he made on social media when he was 14. What? I don't know what was said, but I am mindful that 14 yr olds do silly or even stupid things. Ridiculous.

I don't see how a gov that makes electoral promises that contravene their prior undertakings to the EU are entitled to a free pass. I hate to say it but regarding that issue and Hungary/Poland situation, you seem to me to think that that there should be no rules or penalties for those who breach them. How can an institution function if everyone ignores the rules?

I don't say that the rules for both Germany and Bulgaria ae equally onerous, but then again, Bulgaria contributes a lot less to the budget than Germany does. OTOH, EU membership has made significant improvements to the Bulgars living standards. They obviously think the price is worth paying as do the Germans who help to subsidise the Bulgars membership.

I'm not sure how ASEAN works, but I presume there is a formal written trade agreement. The EU do not interfere in other countries except with regard to issues of membership. So what happens when an ASEAN member fails to comply their obligations under their agreement? Need I say more?

Yes. There has never been so much Euro-scepticism as there is today. But we have not seen so much populism and nationalism since before WWII, when the EU never existed. Do you think the two might be connected. There is nothing like a foreign bogeyman to unite a country, regardless of the existence of that creature. There is nothing like giving somebody the alibi that the reason why they are not a success, is not because they spent wasted ten years of a free education refusing to learn, but because foreigners are stealing his job. Bearing in mind the that the foreigners are often doing menial jobs, I often think to myself, "What a tragedy to hear of such a promising career as a toilet cleaner that never got off the ground".

[JohninDublin]

2 hours ago, mickkotlarski said:

John the feeling is mutual. Beside some disagreements and hot air my respect for you grows with each posting. Its good to have somebody disagree with my opinions yet refrain from childish antics and name calling. Hence why so many debates continue on and on because our opposition isn't necessarily wrong and a lot of what you said are things I originally praised about the EU.

Though freedom and independence is my crusade, unity has it's merits and you presented facts and reasoning.

I hope I haven't offended you or hurt you. If so it was not intentional.

Oh. In closing I hope the Hitler analogy wasn't too much as the EU is definitely not a fascist club. Its just an analogy that political parties do be they left or right wing.  

Do you realize that much of what we have said has re-enforced opposite perspectives. Who knows mate maybe there is home for man kind after all.  Walk with happiness John.

You have not offended me at all. My thanks was genuine and not just lip service.

I too appreciate that you have given reasoning to your comments. Though I am unlikely to agree with you, I can't fault your grasp of the facts. In addition, if I did find an error in these, I don't doubt that you would admit your error, as I would too. However, I'm pretty sure that I won't change your mind.

Thanks and best wishes.

[JohninDublin]

4 hours ago, Benroon said:

You too !! I've always been bemused by this - I don't particularly have time for the BBC with their absurd license fee and the fleets of limos I used to see outside their offices waiting to take staff home from my office, but they are often called rabidly leftist and I don't pick that up at all.

Perhaps your final sentence nails it and puts 30 odd years of bemusement to bed !

That was funny.  Thanks.

[gummy]

5 hours ago, JamesE said:

It's not exactly raw. More along the lines of mildly fermented. Like chunky young fish sauce.

But do you like it ?

[JamesE]

43 minutes ago, gummy said:

But do you like it ?

Of course. herring, ceviche, sushi, carpaccio, tartare. It's all on the same plate. Cooked with acid, or not cooked at all, are all lovely.

[gummy]

5 minutes ago, JamesE said:

Of course. herring, ceviche, sushi, carpaccio, tartare. It's all on the same plate. Cooked with acid, or not cooked at all, are all lovely.

Jolly good everyone doesn't like the same thing. Same can be said for Durian I guess but I love that

[Fluke]

10 hours ago, Benroon said:

Good grief - you would be an awful detective! He has appeared on TV numerous times pleading exactly as I stated - he was also on BBC's Question Time stating exactly that - in your forlorn haste to be right you've overlooked quite a lot of detail - so google this :- 

'tim wetherspoons looking for migrants' - then come back and tell us what google page you were on before you run out of links (many containing numerous interviews with the man himself) 

In order to help you further, as a member of the FTSE 250, TW has a duty of care not to spook the markets by telling it how it is, especially any negativity, but the cats out the bag. So a few seconds on google and a very limited knowledge of the markets would have helped you understand.

I did do a websearch and all those many links all quote the same one source where he was misquoted and taken out of context . 

   You are completely wrong about your last paragraph , he is legally required to make public any information which could effect the share price , if he makes false public statements that effect the share price  , he could face prosecution . 

[Fester]

12 hours ago, mickkotlarski said:

Maybe yes. Maybe no. But some clean and open referendums will help.

Won't help the EU - they hate referendums.

[Fester]

12 hours ago, Benroon said:

Why ?

Usual quip - no reposte - it's what's called trolling ! 

Ah! I knew there was another one. 

[Benroon]

1 hour ago, Fluke said:

I did do a websearch and all those many links all quote the same one source where he was misquoted and taken out of context . 

   You are completely wrong about your last paragraph , he is legally required to make public any information which could effect the share price , if he makes false public statements that effect the share price  , he could face prosecution . 

So in the  LIVE TV performances did he later retract what he was saying himself ? 

Correct thus the retraction (its ‘affect’) - you’ve agreed with me. 

[Fluke]

Just now, Benroon said:

So in the  LIVE TV performances did he later retract what he was saying himself ? 

Correct thus the retraction (its ‘affect’) - you’ve agreed with me. 

I don't know, I haven't seen that interview . 

You claimed that he was begging the Government to allow immigrants in to save his Empire and you also called me a liar when I disagreed with you  .

   It has since been shown that his Company has no job vacancies and doesn't require any workers , so your claim that he was "begging for European workers" was incorrect . 

   Brexit was all about regulating E.U workers , rather than having an open border . It wasnt about not allowing any workers into the U.K .

   You and the anti Brexit media are trying to portray this as a Brexiter who changed his mind , but that is not the situation . 

  If there are un filled work vacancies in the U.K and Europeans want to work in the U.K , yes, give them visas to work in the U.K. 

[23RD]

9 hours ago, JohninDubin said:

As for most of the other undesirables you name, they too were already indulging in such nefarious activities in their own countries before they ever crossed the open borders of Schengen.

Exactly what I'm talking about thanks for confirming Schengen is another ludicrous idea from the EU.

 

9 hours ago, JohninDubin said:

don't condone crime but how heartless do you have to be to tell a mother with a couple of kids, that "We are going to deport your husband who is the father of your children, and if you want to keep the family together, you will have to follow him"?

Typical LIBERAL thinking the the human rights of the criminal are important but no consideration to the victims of foreign criminals.

[Fluke]

9 hours ago, JohninDubin said:

I don't condone crime but how heartless do you have to be to tell a mother with a couple of kids, that "We are going to deport your husband who is the father of your children,

Having kids doesn't make people exempt from any rules or laws .

Before you decide to reproduce with someone , it may be better to check their legality ?

[AussieBob]

On 10/10/2021 at 5:46 PM, Soidog said:

100% agree on all that @AussieBob.  The left in politics have taken on this role of having the moral high ground. The only people who care about the elderly, education, immigration, the poor and the planet. The irony in the U.K. is that many of the people left of centre are people holding dinner parties in leafy suburbs of North London living in large houses, many kids and two cars outside the house. Many have no idea what the underlying challenges are and simply hold left wing politics as they see it as morally superior. 
Climate change is a particularly hot topic here as part of the governments policy to reduce carbon emissions is nuclear. There is a group called “Insulate Britain” who are demanding the government spends tens of billions further insulating our buildings. For some reason their main protests include blocking major roads and motorways. Perhaps a look at the single 4 inch walls in Thailand would be a better place to start? 

Very true - the left ahs become the self-appointed arbitrators of what is bad and what must be done to fix it. And anything said against any of what they say is either nazi or far right and must be shut down.  Certainly, the left has some valid points about what needs to be addressed and some good argument about what to do about it, but they certainly do not have all the problems or solutions - neither side does.   

[Soidog]

7 minutes ago, AussieBob said:

Very true - the left ahs become the self-appointed arbitrators of what is bad and what must be done to fix it. And anything said against any of what they say is either nazi or far right and must be shut down.  Certainly, the left has some valid points about what needs to be addressed and some good argument about what to do about it, but they certainly do not have all the problems or solutions - neither side does.   

Agreed. A good democracy has a good opposition to challenge a particular point of view. What frustrates me, is that in recent years, good and sound policies such as environmental damage through pollution, efficiency in the use of energy, better social care for elderly and people with mental illness, better employment laws and employee engagement to help companies flourish and equal rights have all been hijacked by the left. As soon as you question any aspect of how the left want to tackle these issues you get shot down. Efficiency in energy is is a great example. The left want to achieve this through carbon tax and by handing out “free” money to insulate homes. I believe this should be achieved through better technologies and creative thinking and investment by entrepreneurs. I’m regarded as a planet killing Nazi if I dare utter those words

[Fluke]

On 10/10/2021 at 2:46 PM, Soidog said:

 

Climate change is a particularly hot topic here as part of the governments policy to reduce carbon emissions is nuclear. There is a group called “Insulate Britain” who are demanding the government spends tens of billions further insulating our buildings. For some reason their main protests include blocking major roads and motorways. Perhaps a look at the single 4 inch walls in Thailand would be a better place to start? 

The insulate Briton groups ideals don't make much sense because all new build houses have insulation , as they have done for many years now and about 70 % of UK houses already are fully insulated .

Two skins of brickwork with a four inch gap in-between which is filled with two inch insulation and an important 2 inch air gap, the air also acts as an insulation .

   To insulate houses that do not already have insulation, you need to remove bricks and pump insulation into the cavity ,   completely filling it . 

  The air cavity also stops damp from  penetrating  the inner wall , with a full cavity damp from the outer wall can transfer to the inner wall and peoples houses may develop wet patches inside the walls of their house which will turn to mold and other problems like wall paper peeling off .

   Is it really worth causing such a fuss about , considering that 70 % of houses already have insulation and a certain percentage of houses do not even have a cavity that can be filled 

[Soidog]

4 minutes ago, Fluke said:

The insulate Briton groups ideals don't make much sense because all new build houses have insulation , as they have done for many years now and about 70 % of UK houses already are fully insulated .

Two skins of brickwork with a four inch gap in-between which is filled with two inch insulation and an important 2 inch air gap, the air also acts as an insulation .

   To insulate houses that do not already have insulation, you need to remove bricks and pump insulation into the cavity ,   completely filling it . 

  The air cavity also stops damp from  penetrating  the inner wall , with a full cavity damp from the outer wall can transfer to the inner wall and peoples houses may develop wet patches inside the walls of their house which will turn to mold and other problems like wall paper peeling off .

   Is it really worth causing such a fuss about , considering that 70 % of houses already have insulation and a certain percentage of houses do not even have a cavity that can be filled 

Agreed. In another post I suggested Insulate Britain becomes Insulate Thailand. Single walls and air con blasting out all day