|
Can we get good takes on something instead of the worst festering poo poo you can find You guys presumably aren't Nazis but you've spent every post since the original article signal-boosting them
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2019 17:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 15:15 |
|
|
Papers just went with "dude stabbed mayor to death and also claimed to have been imprisoned and tortured by the mayor's political party", in my country at least. Which was lovely of them, since pushing the guy's claim to be taken at face value was what the nazis were trying to do. Thing is, nazis always lie, by omission or commission. Apparently the guy had indeed been in prison. For attempted bank robbery.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2019 19:23
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-GaXa8tSBE
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2019 21:10
|
|
|
+++HUMILIATION FOR LOSER MAY+++
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2019 21:25
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
Ornedan posted:Papers just went with "dude stabbed mayor to death and also claimed to have been imprisoned and tortured by the mayor's political party", in my country at least. Which was lovely of them, since pushing the guy's claim to be taken at face value was what the nazis were trying to do. Thing is, nazis always lie, by omission or commission. A string of successful bank robberies. During his stay in prison, he was also diagnosed with schizophrenia and treated, but after he got released, nobody could force him to take his medicines anymore. His motivations are a complete mystery at this point and not speculating on them seems to be the safest option right now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2019 13:30
|
|
|
Brexit minus seventy days. Current destination: still no-deal brexit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 02:28
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Brexit minus seventy days. Current destination: still no-deal brexit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 08:40
|
|
|
They started discussing MREs vs. canned beans in the CSPAM brexit thread, so things must be going really well really curious to see how no deal turns out, from a morbid curiosity disaster movie perspective. I guess the British government can just decide to pass on checks and not collect tariffs and let everyone through, but the EU can't do the same? people importing stuff from Britain will have to pay the tariffs to their respective governments, so there is no way to fast track this, unless you want to pay it out of your own pocket as a form of charity to the British people?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 08:59
|
|
|
My first batch of innovative jams is ready, when brexit comes, I'll be prepared
steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 10:08 on Jan 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 10:06
|
|
|
Raspberry Jam It In Me posted:I guess the British government can just decide to pass on checks and not collect tariffs and let everyone through, but the EU can't do the same? Can't wait to eat the infected trash from the floor of EU abattoirs because we suspended import checks
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 10:09
|
|
|
Hey Brits, now's your excuse to finally eat the rich who got you into this mess in the first place
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 11:52
|
|
|
Sulla Faex posted:Hey Brits, now's your excuse to finally eat the rich who got you into this mess in the first place without spices from the continent it's gonna taste awful
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 12:02
|
|
|
A return to traditional English cooking would at least appease the conservatives
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 12:07
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Brexit minus seventy days. Current destination: still no-deal brexit. I could copy-paste Johnson's speech from today here but I wont. Instead I find endless schadenfreude. With seventy days to go, Britain still thinks that once they get their domestic politics in order, EU will immediately commit a collective suicide to appease to UK's wildest dreams. Edit: Johnson has said today that EU would be flexible about the Ireland backstop. Spoiler: lol
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 12:30
|
|
|
El Perkele posted:I could copy-paste Johnson's speech from today here but I wont. Instead I find endless schadenfreude. With seventy days to go, Britain still thinks that once they get their domestic politics in order, EU will immediately commit a collective suicide to appease to UK's wildest dreams. Boris Johnson is not the UK as a whole HTH. It's not like he even believes it himself
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 13:29
|
|
|
Even the fash papers think Boris is full of poo poo, they just like him because he attacks May for them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 13:33
|
|
|
Private Speech posted:Boris Johnson is not the UK as a whole HTH.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 13:38
|
|
|
What is the relationship of free-movement to trade-union currently? For the EU, ideally, I thought the UK had to choose either free movement or tariffs and border controls. In contrast, according to the Guardian for example, you can in fact have a trade-union without free-movement, which apparently was May's plan. I always thought this proposition is inherently dangerous for the EU, because it's partly what certain countries want as well. What's the actual relationship here? A trade-union implies unified external tariffs, but free movement of wares within, which is what the UK wants. Does the EU allow this proposition without free movement? It would at least mean that the financial sector survives in London aka the British economy? Secondly, in the UK thread it seems there is a lot of opposition to a trade union (in the UK). Is this specifically because outside tariffs need to be coordinated? I thought that if the UK gets no immigration + free trade, then they basically reach their Brexit goals and the EU loses. Is it more related to not being able to dump tariffs unilaterally? This all confuses me. If the UK gets rid of free movement, yet gets no-tariff trade, then I'd say they are doing pretty good and the EU diplomats hosed us. Yet, the rethoric is the other way around.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 14:22
|
|
|
caps on caps on caps posted:you can in fact have a trade-union without free-movement Not with the EU. Well, not the kind of trade-union the UK wants or needs more specifically. Because again, the EU doesn't want to. For exactly the reasons you listed. Which brings us back to, caps on caps on caps posted:If the UK gets rid of free movement, yet gets no-tariff trade, then I'd say they are doing pretty good and the EU diplomats hosed us. Yet, the rethoric is the other way around. They didn't get this. So the rhetoric is exactly what you'd expect. MiddleOne fucked around with this message at 14:37 on Jan 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 14:35
|
|
|
Pretty sure keeping free movement is a demand from the EU for any kind of deal that even sorta works for the UK, even if May claims she can convince them otherwise. You might have more luck posting your question in the UKMT though - strangely enough, British posters pay a lot of attention to Brexit. e: Though of course there are some tyrannical Eurocrats in this thread who can give you the unfiltered EU perspective.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 14:35
|
|
|
Private Speech posted:Boris Johnson is not the UK as a whole HTH. ikr but some low-hanging fruits are just too tempting
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 15:00
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Pretty sure keeping free movement is a demand from the EU for any kind of deal that even sorta works for the UK, even if May claims she can convince them otherwise. You might have more luck posting your question in the UKMT though - strangely enough, British posters pay a lot of attention to Brexit. The UK side of things it's that May has a red line on free movement, which means we do not get single market access since it violates the four freedoms. So she would then be debating levels of access to the market and what tariff amounts are fair. A lot of her hard-Brexit colleagues point to Canada's access and go "that please" ignoring how long it took to iron out those details.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 15:11
|
|
|
The way I learned is that if you want free trade for services, you also need free movement for people (who may want to move around in the common market to perform their services). Iirc the UK want free movement for goods and services but not people. This is problematic because the UK has a comparatively large financial service sector. This would be an arrangement that would favor the UK above all other countries so it really can't be done.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 15:12
|
|
|
What was negotiated was specifically regulatory alignment for goods without free movement for services and people, though it does come with Norway-style 'abide by all rules and contribute financially without a say in anything' with an extra side of 'as long as Northern Ireland is part of the UK you can't quit this agreement'.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 15:21
|
|
|
Boris promised to lie in front of the bulldozers if they tried to build a new runway at Heathrow. When it was voted on in parliament last year he was conveniently out of the country and couldn't vote. Today: https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1086264773149380608
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 15:39
|
|
|
Private Speech posted:What was negotiated was specifically regulatory alignment for goods without free movement for services and people, though it does come with Norway-style 'abide by all rules and contribute financially without a say in anything' with an extra side of 'as long as Northern Ireland is part of the UK you can't quit this agreement'. If you do the quiz of the guardian, and you put that you don't want free movement but also don't want issues with trade, then you automatically get May's deal as the only viable outcome. So in conclusion, May's deal says there'll be free trade of goods, but not services? I didn't read the actual deal paper which is why I am not actually clear on what it entails.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 16:25
|
|
|
the current, now dead withdrawal agreement, meant to last until the final exit in 2020, gave the EU right to put tariffs on fish from the UK, since the EU will only give tariff free access in return for access to UK waters, so there isn't free trade in all goods. Additionally, trade between UK and third countries are governed by EU directives and tariffs, so UK have no power to set them. The agreement gave UK services firms similar access as japanese and american firms, which is a severe downgrade, although I don't know much about the details, but everyone seems to say it will put a lot of hindrances up for british firms.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 17:13
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:Boris promised to lie in front of the bulldozers if they tried to build a new runway at Heathrow. When it was voted on in parliament last year he was conveniently out of the country and couldn't vote. Wow. I don't believe it. A sketch writer made a genuine funny. That has to be a first.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 18:54
|
|
|
catfry posted:the current, now dead withdrawal agreement, meant to last until the final exit in 2020, gave the EU right to put tariffs on fish from the UK, since the EU will only give tariff free access in return for access to UK waters, so there isn't free trade in all goods. Correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK the May deal forces Britain to comply with all of the EU law(not just the laws concerning the EEA) and keeps it under ECJ jurisdiction during the transition period. Free movement also remains completely untouched. Effectively, Britain remains in the EU but loses all of its representation during transition. It's an extremely poo poo deal for them and accomplished absolutely nothing, but it allows the government to keep that stupid dumb game going where they pretend that they can convince the EU to give them single market memberships without free movement. (At least for another year or so, which as as far as anyone in British government is able to think ahead.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 19:07
|
|
|
Well, it's not like Theresa May had any real chances from day one. There was de-facto no plan, or ever really possibility, for how to get the Brexit voters voted for. Like the EU is not a la carte, rather it's a very strict membership clubs where there are really only a few tiers (warning huge simplification and terrible metaphor incoming). 1. The Big Boys Table This is the all you can eat buffet of the EU. You get to sit in the councils, in the parliament and you get all the benefits of being part of the EU. Catch is that this is a buffet, and even if you don't want all of it you're still paying for all of it. But hey, at least you have some influence over what the buffet contains! 2. The Pseudo-Big Boys Table This is for all of you that want to be part of the EU but want to pretend that you're really not. You get to eat from almost the entire buffet, but you now have to sit at the very end of the table and don't get to participate in any of the real decisions that affect you. Also you're still paying, sucker. 3. The 'We Have Our Own Table' Club You have your own buffet but still want parts of ours? Oh that just swell, but you better also be willing to accept that at best you'll get scraps. This is a members only club and unless you at least sit at the pseudo-big boys table you'll be negotiating for every little part of the buffet, and you better believe you're paying premium over the club members. 4. The 'gently caress Tables' Club USA delenda est. There is no part of this where UK leave-voters view of what Brexit should have been will fit. EDIT: For those losing track of this terrible metaphor. The UK before Brexit was #1, the UK after Theresa May's now failed deal would have been #2 and in the event of a no deal the UK will be #4. Future looks great guys. MiddleOne fucked around with this message at 19:23 on Jan 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 19:19
|
|
|
UK voters wanted it to be one way. But it's the other way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 19:23
|
|
|
Raspberry Jam It In Me posted:Correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK the May deal forces Britain to comply with all of the EU law(not just the laws concerning the EEA) and keeps it under ECJ jurisdiction during the transition period. Free movement also remains completely untouched. Effectively, Britain remains in the EU but loses all of its representation during transition. It's an extremely poo poo deal for them and accomplished absolutely nothing, but it allows the government to keep that stupid dumb game going where they pretend that they can convince the EU to give them single market memberships without free movement. (At least for another year or so, which as as far as anyone in British government is able to think ahead.) Free movement specifically does not remain untouched, it just continues on for a few years longer (2021), that being the main thing May negotiated for. But otherwise pretty much. Regardless the deal is most likely dead now so who cares. edit: You can't even say it's a wrong thing to negotiate for from a democratic perspective; here's the result of a large (sample size 15,070) survey of what drove people to vote for Brexit: 
Private Speech fucked around with this message at 21:47 on Jan 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 21:37
|
|
|
All hail no deal.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2019 21:38
|
|
|
Private Speech posted:Free movement specifically does not remain untouched, it just continues on for a few years longer (2021), that being the main thing May negotiated for. But otherwise pretty much. Yeah this. British irredentists wrong about everything, also racist.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2019 02:06
|
|
|
Private Speech posted:edit: You can't even say it's a wrong thing to negotiate for from a democratic perspective; here's the result of a large (sample size 15,070) survey of what drove people to vote for Brexit: Only for certain definitions of "democratic". A modern democratic process presumes sound and working opinion making mechanisms. If these break down due to malicious actors, press monopolies, incompetence, etc. then the democratic process itself breaks down and is no longer legitimate. I mean, I get what you are saying but it's kinda misleading. An unreflective tyranny of the majority is not a modern understanding of the word "democratic".
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2019 10:50
|
|
|
Raspberry Jam It In Me posted:Only for certain definitions of "democratic". A modern democratic process presumes sound and working opinion making mechanisms. If these break down due to malicious actors, press monopolies, incompetence, etc. then the democratic process itself breaks down and is no longer legitimate. In any case, the fact that Leave only won with less than a 4% margin would indicate to me that a compromise would be the more democratically legitimate option. The referendum didn't show the UK being anti-EU, it showed the voting age population to be decidedly ambivalent, with a slight anti-EU lean. Like, only a fifth of voting age citizens actually thought it was worth voting Leave to reduce immigration, and the economy is the single biggest reason to vote in the referendum - clearly the economy should not be sacrificed completely to satisfy the immigrant side of things.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2019 11:36
|
|
|
Trying to interpret the will of a referendum is like trying to interpret scripture written by a monkey. You asked a binary question and you got a binary answer. Referendums having lower voting participation is also not indicative of anything, it's the empirical norm. So look, referenda suck. Look suspiciously on any politician who suggest doing them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2019 11:44
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:Trying to interpret the will of a referendum is like trying to interpret scripture written by a monkey. You asked a binary question and you got a binary answer. Referendums having lower voting participation is also not indicative of anything, it's the empirical norm. imo referenda have a time and place, ironically particularly when it comes to things like entering the EU - but importantly, there must be clearly defined alternatives in place in my country, we've had six referendums in our history: two on entering the eu, one on prohibition of liquor, one on lifting that prohibition, one on independence and one on whether we wanted to be a kingdom or a republic out of these, the only really silly one was the indyref, but since independence was happening either way at that point it was mostly a demonstration of just how popular independence was at the time the rest of them had in common two fairly clear options with relatively straightforward immediate consequences. in the case of prohibition there was even a second referendum when it turned out to work poorly! brexit, though, was idiotic since people could promise the moon on a stick since the actual policy side of things was so thin
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2019 12:05
|
|
|
I disagree, join EU referendums were just as good examples of bad referendums as the Brexit referendum. To take an example, I'm old enough to remember Sweden's Eurozone referendum and jesus christ was it just luck people voted no, The referendum was not even tangentially about the massive changes and risks joining the Eurozone would entail. Typically, political questions simplistic enough to be suited for referenda are not the ones put to it. Or the complete charades that preceded the Lisbon Treaty. MiddleOne fucked around with this message at 12:23 on Jan 19, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2019 12:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 15:15 |
|
|
MiddleOne posted:Trying to interpret the will of a referendum is like trying to interpret scripture written by a monkey. You asked a binary question and you got a binary answer. MiddleOne posted:Referendums having lower voting participation is also not indicative of anything, it's the empirical norm. V. Illych L. posted:imo referenda have a time and place, ironically particularly when it comes to things like entering the EU - but importantly, there must be clearly defined alternatives in place MiddleOne posted:I disagree, join EU referendums were just as good examples of bad referendums as the Brexit referendum. To take an example, I'm old enough to remember Sweden's Eurozone referendum and jesus christ was it just luck people voted no, The referendum was not even tangentially about the massive changes and risks joining the Eurozone would entail.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2019 12:24
|
|