Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Here's the difference though; the Tories won an election. Twice. It's FPTP so it's very flawed but they won. If the other parties had a clue and there wasn't a sizeable chunk of the country who voted for them then they wouldn't have won. It sucks but that's democracy.

Nobody in Greece voted for this. It's been forced upon them by the troika. This is the difference.

Actually they did vote for it less you forget. They went to polls, was it twice?, over the issue to elect a government with stated mandates where they set our what it meant for either option. They voted to stay in based on this. In some ways they were better informed than the UK was (and still is) about the implications of Wrexit.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
I know it's partially their own fault as well, but how can you europhiles in here still support the EU after the amount of misery it's inflicted upon the Mediterranean countries? If the Tories treated the UK half as bad as they've treated Greece you'd all be going ape gak, and yet here we are. Mass austerity, youth unemployment, no growth, record levels of debt...all that's acceptable?

It's all an act of sanctimonious virtue signalling snobbery I'm sure. It dosn't matter how badly the EU performs; supporting it automatically puts you on a higher plane of existence than the rest of the knuckle dragging Neanderthals out there right? You'll always get to say to yourself I'm better than you, and that's what this is really about.

And a lack of principles, don't forget the lack of principles! - why would they vote to erode the value of their vote?
These people cling to the idea that someone else will sort it all out for them - that was what a lot of remain supporters were hoping for, that someone else would do the voting, someone else would dig for the truth in the arguments and then someone else would take care of all the legal problems, corruption, revolving door of business/media/polytricks/military industrial complex and there wouldn't be any more nasty evil politicians and lords not doing whats in the best interests of the people, because the eu would stop them, right?

They ignore the funding of war-criminals by the eu..
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/eu-to-work-with-despot-in-sudan-to-keep-refugees-out-a-1092328.html
Covert creation of an EU army..
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/06/europe-forges-ahead-with-plans-for-eu-army/
Which they claimed wasn't going to happen..
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/27/is-there-a-secret-plan-to-create-an-eu-army

“There is absolutely no plan to set up an EU army with the global strategy,” a spokeswoman for Mogherini said.

And that our economy is actually doing okay..
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/09/03/brexit-shock-threatens-to-do-far-more-damage-to-the-european-eco/
Unemployment is back down to pre-financial crisis levels, consumer spending is up, and Moody's (credit rating company for countries) forecast 'no recession'...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/08/19/what-brexit-apocalypse-no-sign-of-economic-woe-after-the-referen/


Just what i've written here are grounds for breaking up the EU (it may happen without needing help).
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/684417/Brexit-beak-up-European-Union-stopped-EU-referendum-George-Soros

George soros thinks he can overturn brexit and save the EU? he may be rich, but not that rich!

 Whirlwind wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
I know it's partially their own fault as well, but how can you europhiles in here still support the EU after the amount of misery it's inflicted upon the Mediterranean countries? If the Tories treated the UK half as bad as they've treated Greece you'd all be going ape gak, and yet here we are. Mass austerity, youth unemployment, no growth, record levels of debt...all that's acceptable?

You mean other than the Tories:-

What-about-ism is not a valid counter argument.

You've missed the point. The tories have treated us worse than the EU has and much worse for some less well off people. Of course some of us have been banging the drum about what they are up to but too many people want to believe that it's all the result of EU because it's a simple solution and means we don't have to wake up to the nightmare that we have created from out voting patterns. Even when the outcome is a lot worse than brexiters hoped for someone else will still be blamed (I'm sure the papers will find a creative way of blaming those dirty rascals in Europe or the US or China) rather than looking at what we've bolloxed up because blaming someone else for our own failings is so much easier easy.

Yes, the Tories are gak. So what? We can at least vote them out of Government. We cannot however vote out the EU government.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Yes, the Tories are gak. So what? We can at least vote them out of Government. We cannot however vote out the EU government.

Well except we can vote out our MEPs if they are ineffective or go against what is best for the UK and complain to our government if their chosen representatives on the EU commission are gak.

 SirDonlad wrote:

And a lack of principles, don't forget the lack of principles! - why would they vote to erode the value of their vote?
These people cling to the idea that someone else will sort it all out for them - that was what a lot of remain supporters were hoping for, that someone else would do the voting, someone else would dig for the truth in the arguments and then someone else would take care of all the legal problems, corruption, revolving door of business/media/polytricks/military industrial complex and there wouldn't be any more nasty evil politicians and lords not doing whats in the best interests of the people, because the eu would stop them, right?

Really? Pretty much every remainer I met were fiercely arguing why to stay in the EU and not just sitting around waiting for the worst to happen. Most were pretty flabbergasted by the number of people that got duped into the thinking the EU was the result of all our woes and shocked in just how little comeback there was on politicians when they spurted any sort of nonsense to try and win a vote which they had a vested interest in.

They ignore the funding of war-criminals by the eu..
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/eu-to-work-with-despot-in-sudan-to-keep-refugees-out-a-1092328.html

So the EU is trying to help desperate people from being exploited by either the state or smugglers that doesn't sound that bad, unless of course you hate the thought of immigration. At least they aren't selling weapons so they can be used on innocent people...oh wait that is what UK government is happy to do, but then we're British and obviously allowing countries to bomb the crap out of desperate people is much more reasonable than trying to help them which is just an evil EU policy.

Covert creation of an EU army..
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/06/europe-forges-ahead-with-plans-for-eu-army/
Which they claimed wasn't going to happen..
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/27/is-there-a-secret-plan-to-create-an-eu-army

“There is absolutely no plan to set up an EU army with the global strategy,” a spokeswoman for Mogherini said.

Not this again, what is so wrong with having a coordinated task force to try and provide co-ordinated action in certain circumstances such ad against smugglers. I suppose you're against th UN peacekeepers then as well. So the approach is 'Unless it benefits Britain directly we're not interested". We might as well build a wall around the island and be done with, oh wait...that is our approach (especially ironic considering we lambast Trump for wanting to do the same thing), but then we're British and should be treated differently, yes?

And that our economy is actually doing okay..
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/09/03/brexit-shock-threatens-to-do-far-more-damage-to-the-european-eco/
Unemployment is back down to pre-financial crisis levels, consumer spending is up, and Moody's (credit rating company for countries) forecast 'no recession'...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/08/19/what-brexit-apocalypse-no-sign-of-economic-woe-after-the-referen/

Oh yes, the reality, that two months afterwards things were going to magically become a recession, erh no. The pound tanked allowing people to buy cheap from abroad whilst still having all the benefits of being in the EU. What a surprise we might have had more holiday makers from abroad turn up or that people that might have gone abroad take stay at home holidays because they can't afford the change in exchange rate. It's not today, tomorrow or even this year when the economy will hurt; it will be when the real impacts of leaving are felt, when the compromises are made, the businesses leave in 2/3 years time and when (if) we leave in actuality. If even the pm is warning of tough times ahead then you better believe that things are going to get rough, because they always understate the issue.

George soros thinks he can overturn brexit and save the EU? he may be rich, but not that rich!

At least he understands the issues and not just going 'la la la I can't hear any of the issues and everything's going to be sunny and clear whilst we dance around the May pole with flowers in our hair because we're British and we are 'great'

 Whirlwind wrote:

 SirDonlad wrote:

And a lack of principles, don't forget the lack of principles! - why would they vote to erode the value of their vote?
These people cling to the idea that someone else will sort it all out for them - that was what a lot of remain supporters were hoping for, that someone else would do the voting, someone else would dig for the truth in the arguments and then someone else would take care of all the legal problems, corruption, revolving door of business/media/polytricks/military industrial complex and there wouldn't be any more nasty evil politicians and lords not doing whats in the best interests of the people, because the eu would stop them, right?

Really? Pretty much every remainer I met were fiercely arguing why to stay in the EU and not just sitting around waiting for the worst to happen. Most were pretty flabbergasted by the number of people that got duped into the thinking the EU was the result of all our woes

Perhaps they shouldn't assign the entire opposing argument to a strawman - the uk parliment has created some laws under it's own initiative during the EU serfdom like the 'football (disorder) Act 2000'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football_(Disorder)_Act_2000

and shocked in just how little comeback there was on politicians when they spurted any sort of nonsense to try and win a vote which they had a vested interest in.

Well, they have a chance to in the next election, or are they going to dismiss it as 'futile' like i hear so many pro-eu voters say? no irony about what their vote means in the eu elections at all though.

They ignore the funding of war-criminals by the eu..
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/eu-to-work-with-despot-in-sudan-to-keep-refugees-out-a-1092328.html

So the EU is trying to help desperate people from being exploited by either the state or smugglers that doesn't sound that bad, unless of course you hate the thought of immigration. At least they aren't selling weapons so they can be used on innocent people...oh wait that is what UK government is happy to do, but then we're British and obviously allowing countries to bomb the crap out of desperate people is much more reasonable than trying to help them which is just an evil EU policy.

http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article60147

RSF Commander Mohamed Hamdan Daglo, (aka Hametti) last week said his forces lost about 150 vehicles in patrolling Sudan’s border with Egypt and Libya, stressing that Sudan is fighting illegal migration on behalf of Europe.

Those illegal migrants sure are taking out a lot of war material on the egyptian and lybian borders! It's quite scary what fear, hunger and sleep deprivation can do to an armoured vehicle at range.

Covert creation of an EU army..
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/06/europe-forges-ahead-with-plans-for-eu-army/
Which they claimed wasn't going to happen..
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/27/is-there-a-secret-plan-to-create-an-eu-army

“There is absolutely no plan to set up an EU army with the global strategy,” a spokeswoman for Mogherini said.

Not this again, what is so wrong with having a coordinated task force to try and provide co-ordinated action in certain circumstances such ad against smugglers. I suppose you're against th UN peacekeepers then as well. So the approach is 'Unless it benefits Britain directly we're not interested". We might as well build a wall around the island and be done with, oh wait...that is our approach (especially ironic considering we lambast Trump for wanting to do the same thing), but then we're British and should be treated differently, yes?

'Not this again'?! 'Whats so wrong'?! How about "We are perfectly able to look after ourselves already, why is it an advantage or better to be Europe's military stop-gap?" or "We're one of the four countries in Europe which actually meet our nato funding criteria" http://www.wsj.com/articles/nato-calls-for-rise-in-defence-spending-by-alliance-members-1434978193 the other countries are Poland, Estonia and Greece. Also, how about "why shouldn't we be interested in doing stuff which benefits us?"
The fact you seem to want the government to act other than in our best interests is quite the reveal on how you got to supporting the EU. Self sacrifice is noble, but futile dude.
Especially when it's for a political identity which you didn't create.

And that our economy is actually doing okay..
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/09/03/brexit-shock-threatens-to-do-far-more-damage-to-the-european-eco/
Unemployment is back down to pre-financial crisis levels, consumer spending is up, and Moody's (credit rating company for countries) forecast 'no recession'...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/08/19/what-brexit-apocalypse-no-sign-of-economic-woe-after-the-referen/

Oh yes, the reality, that two months afterwards things were going to magically become a recession, erh no. The pound tanked allowing people to buy cheap from abroad whilst still having all the benefits of being in the EU. What a surprise we might have had more holiday makers from abroad turn up or that people that might have gone abroad take stay at home holidays because they can't afford the change in exchange rate. It's not today, tomorrow or even this year when the economy will hurt; it will be when the real impacts of leaving are felt, when the compromises are made, the businesses leave in 2/3 years time and when (if) we leave in actuality. If even the pm is warning of tough times ahead then you better believe that things are going to get rough, because they always understate the issue.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
I know it's partially their own fault as well, but how can you europhiles in here still support the EU after the amount of misery it's inflicted upon the Mediterranean countries? If the Tories treated the UK half as bad as they've treated Greece you'd all be going ape gak, and yet here we are. Mass austerity, youth unemployment, no growth, record levels of debt...all that's acceptable?

It's all an act of sanctimonious virtue signalling snobbery I'm sure. It dosn't matter how badly the EU performs; supporting it automatically puts you on a higher plane of existence than the rest of the knuckle dragging Neanderthals out there right? You'll always get to say to yourself I'm better than you, and that's what this is really about.

Something to do with the fact that alternative is worse? Be in EU, you can change it and it WILL become better. History teaches that unity is strenght, isolation weakness. This is especially true in western system where economics run so that it's not "everybody benefits" but "while others get rich others have to be poor". Many are stronger than one and EU and UK are now fighting for same limited wealth.

UK chose to go away and they will pay for the decision. They will get screwed by it.

Nothing worthwhile ever came instantly and without problems. Critics are quick to point out problems as if there was something without problems but conveniently forget good.

Greece got into the mess by their own doings. Funny blame EU for their own screw ups. Greece has one target to blame for their mess. Themselves.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
I know it's partially their own fault as well, but how can you europhiles in here still support the EU after the amount of misery it's inflicted upon the Mediterranean countries? If the Tories treated the UK half as bad as they've treated Greece you'd all be going ape gak, and yet here we are. Mass austerity, youth unemployment, no growth, record levels of debt...all that's acceptable?

What has the EU directly done to shaft the youth and cause austerity and debt?

I get that there the EU banks provided loans that they shouldn't have, which made things worse, but they weren't the actual root of the problems.

Whereas the Tories seem to be on a campaign to cut back any kind of state aid and have directly caused austerity, unemployment, lack of growth, debt, homelessness, and likely a lot of unnecessary deaths.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/07/kremlin-backed-broadcaster-rt-offers-nigel-farage-his-own-show/

RT, the Kremlin-backed broadcaster formerly known as Russia Today, has offered Nigel Farage his own television show, as part of a major revamp of the channel's programming.

The former Ukip leader is one of a number of outspoken public figures, including the columnist Katie Hopkins, who is understood to have held talks with the pro-Moscow broadcaster.

RT executives are said to regard the US presidential elections, in November, as an opportunity to beef up its English-language programming, prompting concern in Whitehall over the increased reach of the channel, which is seen to follow a slavishly pro-Kremlin editorial line.

Sources at RT said that Hopkins, the right-wing commentator, was in advanced talks to host a lifestyle programme.

RT is also understood to have held talks with Russell Brand, the comedian, about moving his YouTube series, The Trews, onto the channel, but discussions are said to have broken down over money.

Farage is said to have discussed a number of options with the broadcaster, including acting as a roving reporter during the US presidential elections, in November.

The former Ukip leader appeared alongside Donald Trump, the Republican nominee, at a rally last month.

Mr Farage told the Telegraph that he had not agreed to front any programme for the broadcaster. He said: “I’ve appeared on RT occasionally. They are a broadcaster with an audience. They may well have a political agenda, but you can’t ignore them.”

RT has been sanctioned on 15 occasions by Ofcom, the broadcasting regulator, often for breaches of impartiality rules. In July, the channel was censured for accusing Turkey of waging a “genocidal war against the Kurds”.

Interviewed about RT in 2013, Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, said: “The channel is funded by the government, so it cannot help but reflect the Russian government’s official position on the events in our country and in the rest of the world one way or another.”

..... So the Putin fan club consists of Trump, Farage and Hopkins.

Christ almighty, last time I saw a shower of witches like recruited was in Kick Ass 2.


It's like watching the 4 horsemen assemble : War, Famine, Pestilence & Debt.

Herzlos wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
I know it's partially their own fault as well, but how can you europhiles in here still support the EU after the amount of misery it's inflicted upon the Mediterranean countries? If the Tories treated the UK half as bad as they've treated Greece you'd all be going ape gak, and yet here we are. Mass austerity, youth unemployment, no growth, record levels of debt...all that's acceptable?

What has the EU directly done to shaft the youth and cause austerity and debt?

I get that there the EU banks provided loans that they shouldn't have, which made things worse, but they weren't the actual root of the problems.

Whereas the Tories seem to be on a campaign to cut back any kind of state aid and have directly caused austerity, unemployment, lack of growth, debt, homelessness, and likely a lot of unnecessary deaths.

I'm just going to point out that the EU's Economic Policy is Austerity. So the Tories are actually doing what the EU wants them to do.

I knew it! I knew it! Farge is back, just as I predicted

If you acknowledge the fact that RT will never criticize the Kremlin or Putin, you'll be pleasantly surprised at the quality of their other stuff.

This line really cracked me up:

prompting concern in Whitehall over the increased reach of the channel, which is seen to follow a slavishly pro-Kremlin editorial line.

As opposed to the BBC that slavishly caved into 10 Downing street over WMDs in Iraq, and sacrificed the then director general Greg Dyke, and its reporter Andrew Gilligan, as a result of the whole Iraq debacle and the run up to the invasion.

And of course, let's not forget the Daily Telegrapg and its role in trying to smear the First Minister of Scotland with a pack of lies, and almost causing an international incident, as it dragged the French Ambassador into its plot...

Yeah, we're so superior to johnny foreigner when it comes to a free and unbiased press in this country

I'd say that the director general going is exactly the thing that should happen in such case (not one I'm familiar with, tbh) Kinda less Scape goat more 'the buck must stop here'

 welshhoppo wrote:

Herzlos wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
I know it's partially their own fault as well, but how can you europhiles in here still support the EU after the amount of misery it's inflicted upon the Mediterranean countries? If the Tories treated the UK half as bad as they've treated Greece you'd all be going ape gak, and yet here we are. Mass austerity, youth unemployment, no growth, record levels of debt...all that's acceptable?

What has the EU directly done to shaft the youth and cause austerity and debt?

I get that there the EU banks provided loans that they shouldn't have, which made things worse, but they weren't the actual root of the problems.

Whereas the Tories seem to be on a campaign to cut back any kind of state aid and have directly caused austerity, unemployment, lack of growth, debt, homelessness, and likely a lot of unnecessary deaths.

I'm just going to point out that the EU's Economic Policy is Austerity. So the Tories are actually doing what the EU wants them to do.

Have you got any reference to that? All I've seen is that EU's Economic response to the financial crisis was more responsible lending and controls. The Tories on the other hand are set on cutting as much public funding as they can get away with, in particular funding going towards those pesky poor and disabled.

Sure, both are technically austerity, but I really doubt the Tories are doing what the EU intended.

 Compel wrote:
I'd say that the director general going is exactly the thing that should happen in such case (not one I'm familiar with, tbh) Kinda less Scape goat more 'the buck must stop here'

If you cast your mind back 12-13 years ago, you'll remember that Gilligan accused the Blair government of "sexing up" the intelligence case for invading Iraq.

Alistair Campbell, Blair's attack dog was unleashed against the BBC, and Gilligan and Dyke walked...

Fast Forward to the Chilcott report and Gilligan is vindicated IMO, by in the inquiry's findings...

Returning to my point, yes, RT at times, is a Kremlin mouthpiece, but its silly to think that the BBC is free from government interference...

Double standards...

Herzlos wrote:

 welshhoppo wrote:

Herzlos wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
I know it's partially their own fault as well, but how can you europhiles in here still support the EU after the amount of misery it's inflicted upon the Mediterranean countries? If the Tories treated the UK half as bad as they've treated Greece you'd all be going ape gak, and yet here we are. Mass austerity, youth unemployment, no growth, record levels of debt...all that's acceptable?

What has the EU directly done to shaft the youth and cause austerity and debt?

I get that there the EU banks provided loans that they shouldn't have, which made things worse, but they weren't the actual root of the problems.

Whereas the Tories seem to be on a campaign to cut back any kind of state aid and have directly caused austerity, unemployment, lack of growth, debt, homelessness, and likely a lot of unnecessary deaths.

I'm just going to point out that the EU's Economic Policy is Austerity. So the Tories are actually doing what the EU wants them to do.

Have you got any reference to that? All I've seen is that EU's Economic response to the financial crisis was more responsible lending and controls. The Tories on the other hand are set on cutting as much public funding as they can get away with, in particular funding going towards those pesky poor and disabled.

Sure, both are technically austerity, but I really doubt the Tories are doing what the EU intended.

I found this table rather quickly. http://www.europeaninstitute.org/index.php/112-european-affairs/special-g-20-issue-on-financial-reform/1180-austerity-measures-in-the-eu

But basically, most of the Countries in the UK fall short of the actual requirements. So the EU wants them to reduce their deficits and their national debt.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
I knew it! I knew it! Farge is back, just as I predicted

If you acknowledge the fact that RT will never criticize the Kremlin or Putin, you'll be pleasantly surprised at the quality of their other stuff.

This line really cracked me up:

prompting concern in Whitehall over the increased reach of the channel, which is seen to follow a slavishly pro-Kremlin editorial line.

As opposed to the BBC that slavishly caved into 10 Downing street over WMDs in Iraq, and sacrificed the then director general Greg Dyke, and its reporter Andrew Gilligan, as a result of the whole Iraq debacle and the run up to the invasion.

And of course, let's not forget the Daily Telegrapg and its role in trying to smear the First Minister of Scotland with a pack of lies, and almost causing an international incident, as it dragged the French Ambassador into its plot...

Yeah, we're so superior to johnny foreigner when it comes to a free and unbiased press in this country

At least we don't shoot so many of our journalists.

 welshhoppo wrote:

I found this table rather quickly. http://www.europeaninstitute.org/index.php/112-european-affairs/special-g-20-issue-on-financial-reform/1180-austerity-measures-in-the-eu

But basically, most of the Countries in the UK fall short of the actual requirements. So the EU wants them to reduce their deficits and their national debt.

The actual requirements are just to cap deficit to 3% of GDP and not have a debt of more than 60% of GDP. There's no instructions there as to how to go about meeting those targets.

There's nothing in there that says the UK is to reduce its budget by shafting the less well off.

I don't like the conservative party's attitude towardthe economy generally and historically, but why did the EU demand that we drastically change our debt levels etc? Because they were no longer able to achieve what they wanted financially (a new economic super-power) because the collective economic problems in the EU
https://www.rt.com/news/338201-wikileaks-imf-greece-event/

Another possibility, on which both agreed, was to tell Germany that IMF will abandon the Troika group (IMF, European Commission and the European Central Bank) if the fund and the Commission fail to reach an agreement on Greek debt relief.

Here's some good info on debt levels since 2004..
http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&language=en&pcode=teina225&plugin=1
Funny that belgium has more than 100% debt levels.

The info here is quite interesting - Germany is doing quite well out of this EU thing comparatively to everyone else.
http://www.bloomberg.com/markets/european-debt-crisis/

Errr, the EU is an economic Superpower. Even with the problems it is facing now, it is the second largest economy in the world (and will remain so even after the UK leaves).

Maybe queloclially so and in your opinion, but until it has eu-only citizens paying eu taxes, full control over the economic dealings and an independent military response capability it is not
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superpower

Superpower is a word used to describe a state with a dominant position in international relations and which is characterised by its unparalleled ability to exert influence or project power on a global scale. This is done through the combined-means of technological, cultural, military and economic strength, as well as diplomatic and soft power influence. Traditionally, superpowers are preeminent among the great powers.

The EU army plan is key to that accolade of 'superpower'.

The eu is listed as a 'potential superpower' along with china and russia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potential_superpowers

The European Union (EU) has been called an emerging superpower by academics.[6][42] Many scholars and academics like T. R. Reid,[43] Andrew Reding,[44] Andrew Moravcsik,[45] Mark Leonard,[46] Jeremy Rifkin,[47] John McCormick,[48] and some politicians like Romano Prodi[49] and Tony Blair,[50] believe that the EU either is, or will become, a superpower in the 21st century.

 SirDonlad wrote:
I don't like the conservative party's attitude towardthe economy generally and historically, but why did the EU demand that we drastically change our debt levels etc? Because they were no longer able to achieve what they wanted financially (a new economic super-power) because the collective economic problems in the EU
https://www.rt.com/news/338201-wikileaks-imf-greece-event/

Another possibility, on which both agreed, was to tell Germany that IMF will abandon the Troika group (IMF, European Commission and the European Central Bank) if the fund and the Commission fail to reach an agreement on Greek debt relief.

Here's some good info on debt levels since 2004..
http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&language=en&pcode=teina225&plugin=1
Funny that belgium has more than 100% debt levels.

The info here is quite interesting - Germany is doing quite well out of this EU thing comparatively to everyone else.
http://www.bloomberg.com/markets/european-debt-crisis/

Italy, Greece and Portugal all running debt 100% of GDP since 2004. I bet legislation for all EU members will ensure a sustainable debt to GDP level, there's no way such a process could be ignored..........

 SirDonlad wrote:
I don't like the conservative party's attitude towardthe economy generally and historically, but why did the EU demand that we drastically change our debt levels etc?

Presumably for stability within the EU; debt levels of 60%+ of GDP and climbing fast is hardly sustainable.

I don't see a problem with a union requiring it's members to be financially responsible, especially after a global financial crisis.

The problem is people don't want to be in the EU and then look for reasons.

The UK government doesn't want our national debt to be too high and has imposed austerity in a failed attempt to reduce it.

Why is this OK but it's not OK for the EU to want member nations not to have too high national debts?

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The problem is people don't want to be in the EU and then look for reasons.

The UK government doesn't want our national debt to be too high and has imposed austerity in a failed attempt to reduce it.

Why is this OK but it's not OK for the EU to want member nations not to have too high national debts?

Because member nations are independent sovereign nations in their own right, and their fiscal affairs are a matter for their respective populations, and not bureaucrats in Brussels.

I know what you're saying, and I know these nations agreed to any EU rules, but to ordinary people, the distinction between a country and a membership block made up of lots of countries, is an important distinction.

If I join a golf club, I'd agree to their rules, but I would find it odd if they wanted a say on my household spending.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

If I join a golf club, I'd agree to their rules, but I would find it odd if they wanted a say on my household spending.

No, but a professional body, like a financial charter association may validly have conditions about your financial status (i.e. no defaults or bankrupcy). Plus, if you signed up to a golf club that had a say on your personal spending, it'd be up to you to agree to the terms.

I just don't see the EU requiring member countries to have some financial stability as an issue, especially when the member country itself wants the same thing.

Plus, you realise our fiscal decisions are made by beurocrats in London, rather than by the population? You seem to be setting a double standard where UK rules are democratic but EU rules are autocratic. They are exactly as democratic just at different levels; we have electric representatives at both levels, although we've managed to hire some UKIP MEPs who don't actually do any representing for us but that's not the fault of Europe.

Herzlos wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

If I join a golf club, I'd agree to their rules, but I would find it odd if they wanted a say on my household spending.

No, but a professional body, like a financial charter association may validly have conditions about your financial status (i.e. no defaults or bankrupcy). Plus, if you signed up to a golf club that had a say on your personal spending, it'd be up to you to agree to the terms.

I just don't see the EU requiring member countries to have some financial stability as an issue, especially when the member country itself wants the same thing.

Plus, you realise our fiscal decisions are made by beurocrats in London, rather than by the population? You seem to be setting a double standard where UK rules are democratic but EU rules are autocratic. They are exactly as democratic just at different levels; we have electric representatives at both levels, although we've managed to hire some UKIP MEPs who don't actually do any representing for us but that's not the fault of Europe.

I get the gist of what you're saying but ultimately, it's easier for the British people to get rid of pen pushers in London than pen pushers in Brussels.

In Britain, the people don't have to worry about the views of 27 other nations when it comes to making decisions. In Brussels, they'd only be 1 in 27.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The problem is people don't want to be in the EU and then look for reasons.

The UK government doesn't want our national debt to be too high and has imposed austerity in a failed attempt to reduce it.

Why is this OK but it's not OK for the EU to want member nations not to have too high national debts?

Look at the figures KilKrazy. Greece,Portugal and Italy were all way past the danger zone in 2004.
It's an open secret that the EU deliberately engineered the means for countries who were not suitable, by the EU's own measures, to join the single Currency.

Do you really support an EU which contradicts and lies to itself? Seems bonkers to me.

 Mr. Burning wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The problem is people don't want to be in the EU and then look for reasons.

The UK government doesn't want our national debt to be too high and has imposed austerity in a failed attempt to reduce it.

Why is this OK but it's not OK for the EU to want member nations not to have too high national debts?

Look at the figures KilKrazy. Greece,Portugal and Italy were all way past the danger zone in 2004.
It's an open secret that the EU deliberately engineered the means for countries who were not suitable, by the EU's own measures, to join the single Currency.

Do you really support an EU which contradicts and lies to itself? Seems bonkers to me.

Romano Prodi is on record as saying that a Eurozone crisis would be a good thing as member nations would have to surrender some economic sovereignty in order to make the Eurozone work better or to resolve the crisis.

Draw your own conclusion from that.