Europe about to lose population?

[MrJonno]

The bigger and more powerful an organisation you vote for the more likely it can achieve anything, small national governments like that of the UK don't actually have much influence of their own country compared to global forces.

As a whole people who want to leave the EU don't like brown people and /or think England (not the UK) is actually an important global nation that is master of its own destiny

[mistermack]

The bigger and more powerful an organisation you vote for the more likely it can achieve anything, small national governments like that of the UK don't actually have much influence of their own country compared to global forces.

As a whole people who want to leave the EU don't like brown people and /or think England (not the UK) is actually an important global nation that is master of its own destiny

No country is master of their own destiny.
But the world would look a lot different now, if it hadn't been for the UK.
It might be great to be part of a powerful organisation, so long as you can trust and rely on the executive of that organisation. Otherwise, it's better to be outside.
And people find it hard to put their trust in people who they didn't vote for, and don't speak their language. That's why it will be a very long time, before the EU resembles anything like a nation.

[MrJonno]

The UK of the 1940's no longer exists, remember when Britain stood alone against Nazi Germany it controlled more of the world than Hitler did.

Eurosceptics basically can't accept the English empire doesn't exist any more

[Rum]

I'm sure that isn't true. The Empire is dead and buried and the vast majority of Brits know and accept that. I think the anti- Euro argument boils down to a couple of issues for most people

1. Are we as individuals and families better off financially in or out of Europe? (and there's no really reliable way of calculating that)
2. Do we want to be a part of a Europe heading for 'ever closer union' and all that goes with that or a 'proud nation state' and all that goes with that?

Personally I'm all for Europe becoming a United States of Europe. It is a long way off though.

[MrJonno]

I'm sure that isn't true. The Empire is dead and buried and the vast majority of Brits know and accept that. I think the anti- Euro argument boils down to a couple of issues for most people

1. Are we as individuals and families better off financially in or out of Europe? (and there's no really reliable way of calculating that)
2. Do we want to be a part of a Europe heading for 'ever closer union' and all that goes with that or a 'proud nation state' and all that goes with that?

Personally I'm all for Europe becoming a United States of Europe. It is a long way off though.

Intelligent people may well think it comes down to that, but the problem with intelligent people is they don't quite appreciate how utterly moronic much of the public is.

Make it easy for you, next time you are checking a bus or rail timetable understand that much of the Eurosceptic public would not be capable of finding out when the next train or bus is

[mistermack]

Personally I'm all for Europe becoming a United States of Europe. It is a long way off though.

I was but I've gone right off the idea.
Europe is no USA. It's a million miles away from the unity that the USA has. If you're not united, how can you have united states?
It's not so long ago that Hitler was blasting around the place, and Stalin was controlling a lot of it.
And the Serbians were massacring their own neighbours and vice versa.

But what's really putting me off right now is the underhand way that everything is getting done in Europe.
When something happens in the UK, generally, it's been discussed before an election, people have voted, and even if you disagree, at least you know that the people have voted for it, in some sort of fashion.
But in Europe lately, stuff just appears. And it's stuff that should be left to national governments, until there is proper unity, and a proper political system, where people know what they are voting for.

[Scot Dutchy]

Personally I'm all for Europe becoming a United States of Europe. It is a long way off though.

I was but I've gone right off the idea.
Europe is no USA. It's a million miles away from the unity that the USA has. If you're not united, how can you have united states?
It's not so long ago that Hitler was blasting around the place, and Stalin was controlling a lot of it.
And the Serbians were massacring their own neighbours and vice versa.

But what's really putting me off right now is the underhand way that everything is getting done in Europe.
When something happens in the UK, generally, it's been discussed before an election, people have voted, and even if you disagree, at least you know that the people have voted for it, in some sort of fashion.
But in Europe lately, stuff just appears. And it's stuff that should be left to national governments, until there is proper unity, and a proper political system, where people know what they are voting for.

Do you have an example of this and what should be left to national governments?

[mistermack]

Do you have an example of this and what should be left to national governments?

Yes, I've mentioned it already. The most recent one is the acceptance of migrants.
Whether you are for or against isn't the point.
Less influential countries like Hungary have been ordered to take "their share" of the flood of migrants that are pouring into Europe, because of Merkel's stupidity.

There is no such thing as "their share". This is a basic national right, that Hungary has lost to Merkel.
I find it absolutely stunning that Merkel can make Hungary and other countries take migrants that they don't want.
But Europe is full of shit like this, things that are less glaringly obvious, but just as invasive of national sovereignty.

Having said that, if Europe WAS like the US, a fairly unified country, then it wouldn't matter.
Merkel probably wouldn't get elected, and would certainly be booted out at the next election.
Or she would get blocked by the senate from the worst excesses.

[Scot Dutchy]

Do you have an example of this and what should be left to national governments?

Yes, I've mentioned it already. The most recent one is the acceptance of migrants.
Whether you are for or against isn't the point.
Less influential countries like Hungary have been ordered to take "their share" of the flood of migrants that are pouring into Europe, because of Merkel's stupidity.

There is no such thing as "their share". This is a basic national right, that Hungary has lost to Merkel.
I find it absolutely stunning that Merkel can make Hungary and other countries take migrants that they don't want.
But Europe is full of shit like this, things that are less glaringly obvious, but just as invasive of national sovereignty.

Having said that, if Europe WAS like the US, a fairly unified country, then it wouldn't matter.
Merkel probably wouldn't get elected, and would certainly be booted out at the next election.
Or she would get blocked by the senate from the worst excesses.

You are another one I am afraid that has not got a clue how the EU operates. Merkel does not run the EU which is what the right wing Euoroscepetics propaganda claims. I am sorry you have fallen for it. She is just one leader among 29 so stop saying she controls anything. She is not the president of the EU!
This man is:



Just like the wild horror stories concerning the immigration. A large majority of these so called immigrants will be returned home because they are not genuine refugees.

TG(!) the EU is not like the USA. America does not have a democratic elected government. At present it does not even have that.

[mistermack]

Just like the wild horror stories concerning the immigration. A large majority of these so called immigrants will be returned home because they are not genuine refugees.

You're avin a larf. If that was the case, they would all be returned home. Have you SEEN the figures for numbers returned home?

The only ones returned home are the ones who don't know the right lies to tell. And there are very few of them, these days. They all know the required script.

[Svartalf]

If a majority of those thousands of leeches are returned, I'll be happily surprised... or not, because only far right, nationalist gummmints will have the balls to do it, but having such gummints is not otherwise a good thing.

[NineBerry]

Less influential countries like Hungary have been ordered to take "their share" of the flood of migrants that are pouring into Europe, because of Merkel's stupidity.

There is no such thing as "their share". This is a basic national right, that Hungary has lost to Merkel.
I find it absolutely stunning that Merkel can make Hungary and other countries take migrants that they don't want.

In fact, it was the other way around. Merkel had decided that Germany will accept refugees from Hungary and not send them back to Hungary. According to the Dublin treaties, a European country does not have to accept refugees that have been in another European country before. All those refugees either enter through Hungary, Greece or Italy. According to Dublin, Germany could send all the refugees back to these countries and force these countries to accept them. Now the UK is all in favour of the Dublin treaties because they mean that the UK will hardly ever have to accept refugees because there is nearly no way for refugees to enter the UK without having been to continental Europe before.

So, the current legal situation is actually that all the Northern and Central European countries force the Southern and South Eastern countries to deal with refugees. However, those countries cannot deal with so many refugees. Therefore, and that is a good idea, Merkel wants to replace Dublin with a new system whereby refugees will be spread among all European countries. That would be the only fair solution.

Now you might say why should countries accept they have a responsibility to take on refugees. Well, there is this thing called "Convention relating to the Status of Refugees" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conventio ... f_Refugees that all European nation states have signed.

[mistermack]

Less influential countries like Hungary have been ordered to take "their share" of the flood of migrants that are pouring into Europe, because of Merkel's stupidity.

There is no such thing as "their share". This is a basic national right, that Hungary has lost to Merkel.
I find it absolutely stunning that Merkel can make Hungary and other countries take migrants that they don't want.

In fact, it was the other way around. Merkel had decided that Germany will accept refugees from Hungary and not send them back to Hungary. According to the Dublin treaties, a European country does not have to accept refugees that have been in another European country before. All those refugees either enter through Hungary, Greece or Italy. According to Dublin, Germany could send all the refugees back to these countries and force these countries to accept them. Now the UK is all in favour of the Dublin treaties because they mean that the UK will hardly ever have to accept refugees because there is nearly no way for refugees to enter the UK without having been to continental Europe before.

So, the current legal situation is actually that all the Northern and Central European countries force the Southern and South Eastern countries to deal with refugees. However, those countries cannot deal with so many refugees. Therefore, and that is a good idea, Merkel wants to replace Dublin with a new system whereby refugees will be spread among all European countries. That would be the only fair solution.

Now you might say why should countries accept they have a responsibility to take on refugees. Well, there is this thing called "Convention relating to the Status of Refugees" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conventio ... f_Refugees that all European nation states have signed.

You couldn't get it more wrong, if you tried.
The only reason anyone goes to Hungary, is that Merkel announced that Germany would take a million.
Hungary would be blocking all of these people at their borders, if it wasn't for a deal that Germany will take them.
There's nothing fair whatsoever about being ordered by another country to take people you don't want.
In any case, Germany and Sweden are now panicking at the chaos that they have caused. But the measures that they are taking are like whistling to hold back a gale.

I am heartily enjoying seeing Merkel sweat now, with the consequences of her ludicrous invitation to come to Germany. But trying to shift the results of her own stupidity onto other countries is what's wrong with the EU.
Just like in WW2, if the Germans sow the wind, they have to reap the whirlwind.

[Clinton Huxley]

The European Union may end up being ejected from the British Empire. Best of luck to 'em.

[Scot Dutchy]

I am heartily enjoying seeing Merkel sweat now, with the consequences of her ludicrous invitation to come to Germany. But trying to shift the results of her own stupidity onto other countries is what's wrong with the EU.
Just like in WW2, if the Germans sow the wind, they have to reap the whirlwind.

Once again you are showing complete ignorance of how the EU works. If Cameron had anywhere the statue of Merkel Britain would not be in the mess it is in.

Merkel does not run the EU! Now try to remember that ok or dont you understand that?