nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

General EU discussion thread

pixelburp

There are fewer more tedious and disingenuous political urban myths than the "Ireland voted on the Lisbon Treaty 'til we said 'yes'". In fact I think it's such a blatant myth and falsehood, IMO it should be red flagged as conspiracy theory. It's well documented the second vote came after Ireland secured a bunch of concessions, and voted on that revised form (plus, didn't the Dutch & French also reject one of the Lisbons?).

But reality doesn't seem to deter those with an inherently anti-EU confirmation bias threading their thinking. Or possess any paranoia towards conspiracy, and that they are the keepers of "the truth", against all those "sheeple" that voted for Lisbon II. It's a broken record, disproven by facts, but hey ho.

Should every referendum then be subject to this same bias? Presumably then the Abortion referendum can be considered hostile to democracy as we voted TWICE(!) on the same issue. The divorce amendment too perhaps.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Podge_irl

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

France isn't introducing parallel currency! That is a precursor to leaving the Euro and a direct challenge to the legitimacy of the ECB.

Neither is anyone else.

Ultimately the EU is not some kind of overlord and it makes no sense to talk of it in that fashion. We are the EU, and ultimately any decisions about moving towards a superstate will be the decision of the member states (not that I expect it to happen anyway).

It's not Skynet.

PeadarCo

Kermit.de.frog wrote:

We are stuck in an economic prison which allows us ONLY devalue through our budgets. Meanwhile Germany has the full backing of the ECB!...how is this in any of our interests?

Germany doesn't have the full backing of the ECB. The most recent appointment to the head of the ECB Draghi was not a German appointment and many of the measures he took were not exactly in line with German's views. The ECB is not a German conspiracy.

Also in Ireland case pre EU the punt was pegged to the sterling and a punt nua would end up being pegged to the euro/dollar/sterling (that's when ever the currency got to the point of actually being meaningful tender) none of whose central banks or governments Ireland would have any influence over. Ireland has a voice at the ECB which is far far greater than it had at the bank of England before breaking the link with sterling and moving towards the euro.

Wheety

SNIP. Do not just paste tweets here please.

ancapailldorcha

Ok, this warrants a thread IMO. I can amend the title if it becomes necessary.

Kermit.de.frog

CelticRambler wrote: »

France has disobeyed the EEC/EC/EU's budgetary rules for decades, and now they've got one of their own nominated to head the ECB ... :rolleyes:

France isn't introducing parallel currency! That is a precursor to leaving the Euro and a direct challenge to the legitimacy of the ECB.

Kermit.de.frog

PeadarCo wrote: »

So what you are saying here is that there will never be a European super state and its not something anyone should worry about. Fiscal transfers between rich and poor area's are a key part of any state.

Not at all.

There will be a super state, at least that's the end goal, that will suit Germany. Not France btw. The Germans allow France to pretend it's a power but the real power lies with the EU and that lies with Germany.

Why would we or any other peripheral country think that is in our interest?

This is why countries would leave. The economic and societal impacts are too great.

We are stuck in an economic prison which allows us ONLY devalue through our budgets. Meanwhile Germany has the full backing of the ECB!...how is this in any of our interests?

CelticRambler

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

You must not be aware of how the Italian government is disobeying the budgetary rules of the Commission and threatening the ECB.

France has disobeyed the EEC/EC/EU's budgetary rules for decades, and now they've got one of their own nominated to head the ECB ... :rolleyes:

Kermit.de.frog

Podge_irl wrote: »

They voted against the EU Constitution - the EU does not now have a constitution.

ALL the features of the constitution remained and were enacted.

Calling it something else changes nothing.

PeadarCo

Kermit.de.frog wrote:

This is a disaster. We will forever be the debtor countries. The Germans will NEVER sign up to fiscal transfers for the feckless countries.

So what you are saying here is that there will never be a European super state and its not something anyone should worry about. Fiscal transfers between rich and poor area's are a key part of any state.

CelticRambler

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

unless the course is changed, the EU will end in separation, public disorder and economic pain.

Given that Brexit is already effecting (sic) that scenario in the UK as we speak, you seem to be saying that any country that stays in the EU will suffer the same fate as if it were to leave. So, in fact, EU membership has no significant impact on the sovereignty or socio-economic status of any particular country.

Or is the break-up of the UK one of your measures of success?

Podge_irl

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Are people forgetting the French and Dutch said no and did not get another vote? The public couldn't be trusted to vote the right way.

They voted against the EU Constitution - the EU does not now have a constitution.

The Lisbon Treaty was mostly passed without referendums. That is because that is the job of governments to do as you so nicely put it yourself

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Of course even if views were not ignored most people are not diplomats so presenting them with 100's of pages of diplomatic text is never right.

Kermit.de.frog

kunst nugget wrote: »

They voted no against the Constitution, the constitution was scrapped. Why would they have to vote again for something that was already gone?

Italy's support for the EU stands at over 70% currently. I sincerely doubt they are gong to leave anytime soon.

You must not be aware of how the Italian government is disobeying the budgetary rules of the Commission and threatening the ECB.

Even if Italy left in 20 years the result is still the same - the PIIGS countries are stuck in an economic prison that suits German exports - we can't devalue our currency or have normal access to Central Bank tools.

This is a disaster. We will forever be the debtor countries. The Germans will NEVER sign up to fiscal transfers for the feckless countries.

That is why this is doomed in the medium term.

Ignoring it is like ignoring the existence of gravity.

fash

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

So we’re headed for an EU federal superstate or the EU is doomed to break up.

Which is it?

The enemy is both overwhelmingly powerful and at the same time brittle and weak.
The fascist mantra.
how to Id a fascist

kunst nugget

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Are people forgetting the French and Dutch said no and did not get another vote? The public couldn't be trusted to vote the right way.

Again most likely in my view, unless the course is changed, the EU will end in separation, public disorder and economic pain.

Brexit is the start but it really happens when a Euro member leaves. When one leaves (likely Italy in my opinion) the economic contagion to the other weak countries will be too hard for those countries to take.

It doesn't have to be that way but that's where we are going unfortunately.

They voted no against the Constitution, the constitution was scrapped. Why would they have to vote again for something that was already gone?

Italy's support for the EU stands at over 70% currently. I sincerely doubt they are gong to leave anytime soon.

Stop moaning ffs

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Are people forgetting the French and Dutch said no and did not get another vote? The public couldn't be trusted to vote the right way.

Again most likely in my view, unless the course is changed, the EU will end in separation, public disorder and economic pain.

Brexit is the start but it really happens when a Euro member leaves. When one leaves (likely Italy in my opinion) the economic contagion to the other weak countries will be too hard for those countries to take.

It doesn't have to be that way but that's where we are going unfortunately.

So we’re headed for an EU federal superstate or the EU is doomed to break up.

Which is it?

Kermit.de.frog

Are people forgetting the French and Dutch said no and did not get another vote? The public couldn't be trusted to vote the right way.

Again most likely in my view, unless the course is changed, the EU will end in separation, public disorder and economic pain.

Brexit is the start but it really happens when a Euro member leaves. When one leaves (likely Italy in my opinion) the economic contagion to the other weak countries will be too hard for those countries to take.

It doesn't have to be that way but that's where we are going unfortunately.

jm08

MrMusician18 wrote: »

To be fair, the concessions won by Ireland were fairly meaningless, and related to things that weren't in the treaty anyway. i.e. one confirming that abortion policy was a domestic competence. There was some other BS about neutrality too afaik.

The only meaningful concession that was won was after Nice rejection, that every country got a commissioner. It was an easy sell since most countries were a little miffed by that lost opportunity for patronage, even if it did make the commission more workable.

As far as I recall the biggie was the assurances that tax was a domestic competence, particularly in light of some (like Sarkozy) wanting to trade it in for the bailout.

Podge_irl

MrMusician18 wrote: »

To be fair, the concessions won by Ireland were fairly meaningless, and related to things that weren't in the treaty anyway. i.e. one confirming that abortion policy was a domestic competence. There was some other BS about neutrality too afaik.

Meaningless in the context of the actual treaty perhaps, but they were, bizarrely, a large part of the reason the referendum failed the first time. Listening to people's concerns, addressing them and then asking for an updated opinion seems pretty bloody fair to me.

BonnieSituation

nc6000 wrote: »

Why are they so obsessed with fishing and fishing rights? My understanding is that the whole fishing industry is only a fraction of a percent of their GDP.

The same way they are obsessed with the minutiae of "trade". It's just bizarre.

MrMusician18

pixelburp wrote: »

There are fewer more tedious and disingenuous political urban myths than the "Ireland voted on the Lisbon Treaty 'til we said 'yes'". In fact I think it's such a blatant myth and falsehood, IMO it should be red flagged as conspiracy theory. It's well documented the second vote came after Ireland secured a bunch of concessions, and voted on that revised form (plus, didn't the Dutch & French also reject one of the Lisbons?).

But reality doesn't seem to deter those with an inherently anti-EU confirmation bias threading their thinking. Or possess any paranoia towards conspiracy, and that they are the keepers of "the truth", against all those "sheeple" that voted for Lisbon II. It's a broken record, disproven by facts, but hey ho.

Should every referendum then be subject to this same bias? Presumably then the Abortion referendum can be considered hostile to democracy as we voted TWICE(!) on the same issue. The divorce amendment too perhaps.

To be fair, the concessions won by Ireland were fairly meaningless, and related to things that weren't in the treaty anyway. i.e. one confirming that abortion policy was a domestic competence. There was some other BS about neutrality too afaik.

The only meaningful concession that was won was after Nice rejection, that every country got a commissioner. It was an easy sell since most countries were a little miffed by that lost opportunity for patronage, even if it did make the commission more workable.