Off Topic Thread 3.0

Zzippy · 25-06-2016 12:48pm #1

All things non-rugby related here.

irishbucsfan · 25-06-2016 12:52pm

molloyjh wrote: »

The treaties that predates it are the only existing legal frameworks we have to go on. The Swiss may have voted to curtail EU immigration but they have yet to implement laws to do so. That isn't due to happen until next year. And based on the existing treaties it's contrary to their agreements with the EU. AFAIK there has been no deal done to date that will continue to allow them free access to the EU market while also allowing them limit immigration.

They will pass their laws, they will have provisions to restrict some immigration (and won't be the first to have this provision) and they'll remain part of the market. And Britain will come to the point it needs to negotatiate with the EU and they'll be in a far stronger position to do that than Switzerland are have been while they've done it (throughout discussions regarding Croatia and Turkey).

Britain won't reduce the amount of immigration though, I'd be shocked if they actually end up doing that unless something completely unexpected happens, they'll just gain the ability to control the source of it, which is what the people obviously want.

25-06-2016 12:55pm

irishbucsfan wrote: »

maybe the press will spend their time engaging on what happens next. Or at least ask the people to deal with their own promises. Ask Farage how on earth he's going to do anything about immigration, and ask Hannan about the new relationship and it's implications on sovereignty, the budget (NHS) and trade.

Loughborough university did a short study and 83% of the mainstream media articles in the 4 weeks to the vote were pro leave.

Journalistic integrity is dead in the UK, it was murdered violently a decade ago and is unlikely to seek accountability from leave. Right now it's firmly at the smug stage and if things don't go well it will be straight back to Europe's fault and probably now Scotland fault.

Little Britain.

molloyjh · 25-06-2016 12:57pm

irishbucsfan wrote: »

They will pass their laws, they will have provisions to restrict some immigration (and won't be the first to have this provision) and they'll remain part of the market. And Britain will come to the point it needs to negotatiate with the EU and they'll be in a far stronger position to do that than Switzerland are have been while they've done it (throughout discussions regarding Croatia and Turkey).

Britain won't reduce the amount of immigration though, I'd be shocked if they actually end up doing that unless something completely unexpected happens, they'll just gain the ability to control the source of it, which is what the people obviously want.

Oh well ok, if you say so Mystic Meg.....

irishbucsfan · 25-06-2016 12:59pm

molloyjh wrote: »

Oh well ok, if you say so Mystic Meg.....

There's absolutely no way that the EU would come close to allowing Switzerland to leave the single market, not given the people who hold sway in Brussels who are very fond of Switzerland for some very strange reason.

Zzippy · 25-06-2016 1:01pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Loughborough university did a short study and 83% of the mainstream media articles in the 4 weeks to the vote were pro leave.

Journalistic integrity is dead in the UK, it was murdered violently a decade ago and is unlikely to seek accountability from leave. Right now it's firmly at the smug stage and if things don't go well it will be straight back to Europe's fault and probably now Scotland fault.

Little Britain.

They have Rupert Murdoch, we have he who shall not be named. We have as much journalistic integrity in this country...

irishbucsfan · 25-06-2016 1:04pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Loughborough university did a short study and 83% of the mainstream media articles in the 4 weeks to the vote were pro leave.

Journalistic integrity is dead in the UK, it was murdered violently a decade ago and is unlikely to seek accountability from leave. Right now it's firmly at the smug stage and if things don't go well it will be straight back to Europe's fault and probably now Scotland fault.

Little Britain.

I certainly wouldn't disagree with that, although I'd still hope the BBC would be capable of remembering who actually said what given they were often the ones asking them!

I like Dimbleby and Question Time though so I hope his questions are directed a little bit more accurately when he's on next (tomorrow I think)

molloyjh · 25-06-2016 1:05pm

irishbucsfan wrote: »

There's absolutely no way that the EU would come close to allowing Switzerland to leave the single market, not given the people who hold sway in Brussels who are very fond of Switzerland for some very strange reason.

And what kind of a message would that send, not just to the UK but to every other European country out there? Free trade with the free movement of people is one of the main tenants of the EU. Allow one without the other for anyone and the whole thing will collapse. Especially now that the UK has pulled out. It makes absolutely zero sense to do it.

irishbucsfan · 25-06-2016 1:11pm

molloyjh wrote: »

And what kind of a message would that send, not just to the UK but to every other European country out there? Free trade with the free movement of people is one of the main tenants of the EU. Allow one without the other for anyone and the whole thing will collapse. Especially now that the UK has pulled out. It makes absolutely zero sense to do it.

They actually do already allow it for someone, the village of Liechtenstein. Switzerland's mini-me.

But the EU won't get very far sacrificing free trade to save the free movement of people. If unconditional free movement needs to be forced upon member states of the EEC then it is a doomed concept anyway, it will just take longer to die.

The fact the concept was omitted from negotations with Turkey entirely says a lot I think. Longer term I think we'll see an alternative offered to member states (perhaps conditions in return for further subsidies) to ensure the integrity of the union.

swiwi_ · 25-06-2016 3:01pm

irishbucsfan wrote: »

There's absolutely no way that the EU would come close to allowing Switzerland to leave the single market, not given the people who hold sway in Brussels who are very fond of Switzerland for some very strange reason.

Why would Switzerland leave the single market? Switzerland is economically much more important to the Euro than Ireland. A lot of freight passes through those tunnels linking Europe with Italy etc, not to mention the banks. Ireland is basically a hub for multinationals to avoid tax, other than that I doubt Ireland brings much GDP to Europe. It's politically important to have Ireland involved but not at all economically.

irishbucsfan · 25-06-2016 3:06pm

swiwi_ wrote: »

Why would Switzerland leave the single market? Switzerland is economically much more important to the Euro than Ireland. A lot of freight passes through those tunnels linking Europe with Italy etc, not to mention the banks. Ireland is basically a hub for multinationals to avoid tax, other than that I doubt Ireland brings much GDP to Europe. It's politically important to have Ireland involved but not at all economically.

The Scottish might be about to challenge Ireland as an English speaking EU backdoor. I reckon Edinburgh could be the new Dublin in the next decade.

But as to your main point, yes exactly, there's no way that Switzerland leaves the single market so they'll come to some accomodation with them.

Felix Jones is God · 25-06-2016 3:42pm

What a goal by Switzerland!

wp_rathead · 25-06-2016 3:47pm

I can't even do that in FIFA

swiwi_ · 25-06-2016 3:53pm

With each iteration of the off-topic thread, I give a little thanks to Ugo Monye Spacecraft Experience for suggesting the thread. Keep well big man.

Felix Jones is God · 25-06-2016 4:58pm

swiwi_ wrote: »

With each iteration of the off-topic thread, I give a little thanks to Ugo Monye Spacecraft Experience for suggesting the thread. Keep well big man.

I quite like my name changes, but that fecker has me beaten hands down for the nearest handle ever

TICKLE_ME_ELMO · 25-06-2016 5:32pm

Driving from Donegal to Dublin today and while passing through Northern Ireland I realised that Ulster now exists in the Republic of Ireland, Northern Ireland, the UK, and both in and out of the EU.

That's a future pub quiz tie breaker.

Neil3030 · 25-06-2016 8:03pm

Anyone UK based that has broadband, Sky and BT Sports? What's the cheapest way to do it? No interest in a landline phone or any movie packages etc.

Synode · 25-06-2016 9:54pm

I reckon if they ran the referendum again next week, remain would win

awec · 25-06-2016 9:57pm

Synode wrote: »

I reckon if they ran the referendum again next week, remain would win

I reckon if they had ran another vote at 11am Friday morning remain would have won.

Synode · 25-06-2016 10:01pm

Agreed. Not sure what the lesson there is though. Democracy shouldn't be left to the people?

Swan Curry · 25-06-2016 10:09pm

swiwi_ wrote: »

With each iteration of the off-topic thread, I give a little thanks to Ugo Monye Spacecraft Experience for suggesting the thread. Keep well big man.

as we speak he's out there somewhere having meltdowns about zebo, may the greatest name in the history of the rugby forum live on in our hearts

Neil3030 · 25-06-2016 10:09pm

Synode wrote: »

Agreed. Not sure what the lesson there is though. Democracy shouldn't be left to the people?

Maybe the actions of the people don't necessarily reflect the will of the people. If the majority of the UK wants to leave the EU, they could hold the referendum 100 times and it wouldn't make a difference. But if an initial wakeup call is needed for the country to actually decide that, on the whole, they don't want to leave, I think it's fair enough to get another chance to say so.

Buer · 25-06-2016 10:11pm

Neil3030 wrote: »

Maybe the actions of the people don't necessarily reflect the will of the people. If the majority of the UK wants to leave the EU, they could hold the referendum 100 times and it wouldn't make a difference. But if an initial wakeup call is needed for the country to actually decide that, on the whole, they don't want to leave, I think it's fair enough to get another chance to say so.

There would be an absolute meltdown and, I'm quite sure, massive legal challenges to any attempt to hold another referendum.

Neil3030 · 25-06-2016 10:18pm

Buer wrote: »

There would be an absolute meltdown and, I'm quite sure, massive legal challenges to any attempt to hold another referendum.

Probably, but this petition thing seems to be doing well.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO · 25-06-2016 10:36pm

I don't think this referendum is legally binding though?

They don't have to activate the article 50 thing, although the EU seem to be implying they want it to happen right now.

Cameron stepping down puts Boris and Co in a real pickle too. The only questions that will be asked in the Tory leadership campaign now will be will you activate article 50 and when? They then have to be the one to try to negotiate a million things with the EU or be the ones to say it's just not going to work and not actually push the button.

Synode · 25-06-2016 10:45pm

The way things are going, I wouldn't be at all surprised if they run the referendum again

DGRulz · 26-06-2016 8:58am

Neil3030 wrote: »

Probably, but this petition thing seems to be doing well.

While a good idea, it's kind of useless. You or I could sign it right now without being in the UK. Someone said to me earlier that Scotland apparently has something like a veto so they can probably use that as a means to trigger a second Scottish referendum.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO · 26-06-2016 12:03pm

Just reading about Cornwall this morning. Receive something like £60 million a year in EU funding, resounding Leave vote from them and the next morning they want reassurance that they'll still get the EU funding. A local politician said they were told by leave campaigners that they'd still get their EU funding even if they left and now they're not so sure.

Maybe they've never had a referendum in the UK so people aren't aware of how they work but there seems to have been some extremely misguided, at best, ridiculously stupid, at worst, decision making happening across the board.

swiwi_ · 26-06-2016 12:15pm

Don't think this forum should be preachy given Ireland had 2 goes at each of the Lisbon treaties IIRC. The moral high ground is barely more than a mound.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO · 26-06-2016 12:50pm

swiwi_ wrote: »

Don't think this forum should be preachy given Ireland had 2 goes at each of the Lisbon treaties IIRC. The moral high ground is barely more than a mound.

There was nothing wrong with having a second referendum there.

It was obvious from the first one that most of us didn't have a clue what we were voting on. People thought their kids were going to be conscripted into an EU army and all sorts of nonsense.

You can say if people are dumb enough to vote on something without actually finding out hard facts about the issue that they deserve what they get. Or, you could say that they deserve a second chance to make a more informed decision. If that second decision is the same as the first one then so be it.

Neil3030 · 26-06-2016 1:09pm

If the will of the people is a certain way, you can have 100 referenda, it won't change the outcome. Have 100 referenda on introducing the death penalty, for example, and you'll see it beaten every time.

BUT, if the will of the people is unreliable, transient and easily manipulated, and if the issue is complex, I have no logical or moral opposition to several referenda being carried out.

If one study says a drug works you don't just dust your hands and assume it will always work, you carry out follow up confirmation studies to make sure.

Neil3030 · 26-06-2016 1:12pm

swiwi_ wrote: »

Don't think this forum should be preachy given Ireland had 2 goes at each of the Lisbon treaties IIRC. The moral high ground is barely more than a mound.

There was only one Lisbon treaty. We rejected Nice and Lisbon, once each.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO · 26-06-2016 1:16pm

Neil3030 wrote: »

If the will of the people is a certain way, you can have 100 referenda, it won't change the outcome. Have 100 referenda on introducing the death penalty, for example, and you'll see it beaten every time.

BUT, if the will of the people is unreliable, transient and easily manipulated, and if the issue is complex, I have no logical or moral opposition to several referenda being carried out.

If one study says a drug works you don't just dust your hands and assume it will always work, you carry out follow up confirmation studies to make sure.

The thing I don't get though is why were these politicians and other people deliberately misleading the people? I genuinely don't get what the benefits are for them to leave the EU. Leave people have already admitted there probably won't be any change in immigration numbers, trade agreements aren't as clear cut as they implied they would be, Scotland are kicking off, the Northern Ireland issue is very messy, the Torys and Labour are imploding off the back of the result, not to mention the list of projects, local and nationwide, that will now have EU funding cut.

Leaving aside the reasons that the public voted to leave... I genuinely don't see why some people in positions of power were campaigning so strongly to leave.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO · 26-06-2016 1:18pm

Neil3030 wrote: »

There was only one Lisbon treaty. We rejected Nice and Lisbon, once each.

There were 2 Lisbon treaty referendums. We rejected the first one and passed the second one, which we had renegotiated some of the terms.

mfceiling · 26-06-2016 1:30pm

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

There were 2 Lisbon treaty referendums. We rejected the first one and passed the second one, which we had renegotiated some of the terms.

And there in lies the problem for a lot of people. Have a referendum and you don't get the result...hold it again til you get what you want.

A lot of the brits were sick of the nonsense from Europe and wanted more controls over their own administration.

You looked at Germany opening up their arms to welcome refugees and then panic a few weeks later when huge numbers arrived and they wondered how they could care for them. In the Sunday Times a couple of weeks ago there was a story from an Iraqi refugee who was returning to Iraq because he felt the food in Germany was poor and he was disappointed with his accommodation. These stories just stoked the fire for the leave campaign.

What happens if they do hold the referendum again and they get the same result? Keep holding til they vote to remain in?

Podge_irl · 26-06-2016 1:35pm

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Leaving aside the reasons that the public voted to leave... I genuinely don't see why some people in positions of power were campaigning so strongly to leave.

A desire for more power mostly I think. Johnson was purely an internal power play move. Farage was a naked appeal to populism.

And I'm sure some of it was honest, if in my opinion misguided, desire to be able to control things themselves.

Podge_irl · 26-06-2016 1:37pm

The second Lisbon and nice referenda technically contained assurances or provisions to assuage the main (made up) concerns of the no voters.

There is nothing inherently wrong with them though admittedly the optics are poor.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO · 26-06-2016 1:40pm

mfceiling wrote: »

And there in lies the problem for a lot of people. Have a referendum and you don't get the result...hold it again til you get what you want.

A lot of the brits were sick of the nonsense from Europe and wanted more controls over their own administration.

You looked at Germany opening up their arms to welcome refugees and then panic a few weeks later when huge numbers arrived and they wondered how they could care for them. In the Sunday Times a couple of weeks ago there was a story from an Iraqi refugee who was returning to Iraq because he felt the food in Germany was poor and he was disappointed with his accommodation. These stories just stoked the fire for the leave campaign.

What happens if they do hold the referendum again and they get the same result? Keep holding til they vote to remain in?

The two referendums aren't really comparable though. We were voting to agree to new things the EU wanted implemented. We didn't agree with all of them and we negotiated on it. The UK already did their negotiating and by all accounts the EU were pretty good to them about it, and they still voted to leave.

Britain happily refused to take 2000 child refugees a few months ago, it's not like they were actually being forced to take them, as far as I know? They can't stroll into the UK either as there's no land border with mainland Europe, they're stopped when they get as far as the French ports, which is also an issue that could be up for debate now they've left the EU. France say it will stay the same but who knows?

Immigration from Africa, Asia and various commonwealth countries won't be changed by them leaving the EU either. I'm sure there are plenty of people from EU countries creaming the welfare system in the UK but there's plenty of their own doing it too. I saw someone on the news last week make the point that a lot of these issues are they fault of successive governments and they should be held accountable for it, not the EU. Which is a fair point. If it's that easy to cream your welfare system do something about it.

A lot of it sounds like treating the symptoms rather than the cause, if that's the right expression.

I'd assume with so many seemingly intelligent people pushing for the Leave vote that there are some valid reasons for it, I just haven't heard any yet.

Neil3030 · 26-06-2016 1:53pm

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

There were 2 Lisbon treaty referendums. We rejected the first one and passed the second one, which we had renegotiated some of the terms.

I know, I was responding to this:

Ireland had 2 goes at each of the Lisbon treaties IIRC

Unless "Lisbon treaty" is some Kleenex/Tayto/Hoover propriety eponym phenomenon to describe any international agreement that requires constitutional ratification.

Neil3030 · 26-06-2016 2:01pm

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

The thing I don't get though is why were these politicians and other people deliberately misleading the people? I genuinely don't get what the benefits are for them to leave the EU. Leave people have already admitted there probably won't be any change in immigration numbers, trade agreements aren't as clear cut as they implied they would be, Scotland are kicking off, the Northern Ireland issue is very messy, the Torys and Labour are imploding off the back of the result, not to mention the list of projects, local and nationwide, that will now have EU funding cut.

Leaving aside the reasons that the public voted to leave... I genuinely don't see why some people in positions of power were campaigning so strongly to leave.

Well for some politicians like Hannan, they have always branded themselves as eurosceptic and now was their time to shine. For Boris Johnson, this was a straight shoot at the Tory throne. For Farage, see Hannan, but with a primary motivation to establish himself as a leading populist figure, and UKIP as a serious player in UK politics. For Labour members supporting Leave there are probably a few reasons - undermine Corbyn on the one hand, but also establish support amongst the core of Labour voters around the North who really only vote Labour because they aren't the Tories, but otherwise hold none of Labour's social values - the kind of people UKIP have been appealing to. It's an area Labour critically need to deal with, and perhaps a subsection of the party think this would be good way to win them back.

Politics is predominantly a game for careerist sociopaths so a bunch of them conning the general public into potentially jeapordising their future is not the least bit surprising.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO · 26-06-2016 2:14pm

Neil3030 wrote: »

Well for some politicians like Hannan, they have always branded themselves as eurosceptic and now was their time to shine. For Boris Johnson, this was a straight shoot at the Tory throne. For Farage, see Hannan, but with a primary motivation to establish himself as a leading populist figure, and UKIP as a serious player in UK politics. For Labour members supporting Leave there are probably a few reasons - undermine Corbyn on the one hand, but also establish support amongst the core of Labour voters around the North who really only vote Labour because they aren't the Tories, but otherwise hold none of Labour's social values - the kind of people UKIP have been appealing to. It's an area Labour critically need to deal with, and perhaps a subsection of the party think this would be good way to win them back.

Politics is predominantly a game for careerist sociopaths so a bunch of them conning the general public into potentially jeapordising their future is not the least bit surprising.

Yeah, I agree with all of that but it still sounds like people wanting to vote leave for a number of reasons none of them having anything to do with the actual question on hand. I was reading there about a town in Wales that has almost no immigration and is funded to a huge degree by the EU and they voted to leave. It just makes no sense to me how these people rationalise their decision?

Ian Duncan Smith is now saying that the promises they made were actually more like a list of possibilities. How people are still fooled by these guys is beyond me.

Neil3030 · 26-06-2016 2:16pm

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

I was reading there about a town in Wales that has almost no immigration and is funded to a huge degree by the EU and they voted to leave. It just makes no sense to me how these people rationalise their decision?

That happened because Wales.

Ian Duncan Smith is now saying that the promises they made were actually more like a list of possibilities. How people are still fooled by these guys is beyond me.

Yup. It is dispiriting how easily people get conned, but in a land of 60+ million people you are going to get some very very convincing sociopaths.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO · 26-06-2016 2:19pm

Neil3030 wrote: »

Yup. It is dispiriting how easily people get conned, but in a land of 60+ million people you are going to get some very very convincing sociopaths.

The other thing is they're only 18 months out from a bunch of politicians lying through their teeth to influence a referendum vote and yet they're now acting like it's a shocking thing.

swiwi_ · 26-06-2016 2:46pm

10/10 to Martin o'neill so far. Tactics spot on when you're side is less technically proficient: slowing it down. Playing it long. Etc. Nice to have a proper ref too who isn't showing the French "big team" favouritism.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO · 26-06-2016 3:04pm

Not sure who he was talking to on this one, but wow....

https://twitter.com/PED7/status/747063871765086208

I don't know why they're surprised at the SNP being the most organised. The night the Scottish referendum results were coming in the experts were already saying that the only way there'd be another Independence referendum would be if Cameron gave the UK the EU referendum, which was already an almost certainty at that point. The SNP have probably had this sorted out and sitting ready a year ago.

irishbucsfan · 26-06-2016 3:09pm

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Not sure who he was talking to on this one, but wow....

https://twitter.com/PED7/status/747063871765086208

I don't know why they're surprised at the SNP being the most organised. The night the Scottish referendum results were coming in the experts were already saying that the only way there'd be another Independence referendum would be if Cameron gave the UK the EU referendum, which was already an almost certainty at that point. The SNP have probably had this sorted out and sitting ready a year ago.

That's, frankly, a thick question. The only people who have any power to enact a plan are the government.

The media have been depressingly useless over the past couple of days in their rush to generate as much content as they can out of the voids that have appeared in the leadership of the two major British parties.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO · 26-06-2016 3:10pm

irishbucsfan wrote: »

That's, frankly, a thick question. The only people who have any power to enact a plan are the government.

The media have been depressingly useless over the past couple of days in their rush to generate as much content as they can out of the voids that have appeared in the leadership of the two major British parties.

What's a thick question?

irishbucsfan · 26-06-2016 3:14pm

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

What's a thick question?

Asking anyone outside the government "what's the plan".

TICKLE_ME_ELMO · 26-06-2016 3:15pm

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Asking anyone outside the government "what's the plan".

Maybe I missed it but I can't hear who they were asking it to.

The government was being led by a man who didn't want to leave, and his party seems very much split on it. Surely those who wanted to leave should be the ones with a plan, Johnson and Gove, for example?

irishbucsfan · 26-06-2016 3:16pm

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Maybe I missed it but I can't hear who they were asking it to.

The government was being led by a man who didn't want to leave, and his party seems very much split on it. Surely those who wanted to leave should be the ones with a plan, Johnson and Gove, for example?

What are you looking for exactly? What would such a plan consist of?

TICKLE_ME_ELMO · 26-06-2016 3:22pm

irishbucsfan wrote: »

What are you looking for exactly? What would such a plan consist of?

Well, when are they going to actually pull out, for starters. Who/where/when will negotiations regarding trade deals take place, have they already got provisional deals in the works? What's happening with Northern Ireland and the land border with the EU? How are they going to replace all the funding that the EU currently gives to various projects, payments to farmers, research grants etc.

Even a vague timeline for these some of these things would be better than saying they've nothing at all.

Off Topic Thread 3.0

Comments