Current Affairs EU In or Out

In or Out

  • In

    Votes: 688 67.9%
  • Out

    Votes: 325 32.1%

  • Total voters
    1,013
Status
Not open for further replies.
I doubt there are many economic unions around the world with quite the long and ugly history of wars and conflict amongst and between its members as the European one. From the horse's mouth:

"the promotion of peace and the well-being of the Union´s citizens. an area of freedom, security and justice without internal frontiers. sustainable development based on balanced economic growth and social justice."

That's from the Lisbon Treaty. I'm not really sure there's a great deal to argue about with their aims, is there?

NAFTA, three countries that all invaded each other at some point.....however, this 'promotion of peace and the well being...etc etc' stuff originated when ?.......I don't remember voting for anything to do with something 'without internal frontiers'......

It seems that the reasons for being keep changing and evolving to suit the needs of the EU and not the nations..

So back to his question, why don't NAFTA have a shiny new flag and music.....
 
All sorts of wrong here.

"Miffed" ... the result doesn't annoy me or particularly please me. I'm not British and have no emotional investment in the issue. I'm far more interested in the reasons for the result and the contorted arguments which have been doing the rounds. Specifically, it intrigues me how domestic politics are more or less affected by it. Hence my question about overt signs of Union and the effects Bexit may have on the very poor.

I wondered why you wouldn't mention those as they are my areas of such concern as I have.

As to the terms of exit, who knows? I suspect the media and those interested in the issue will interpret these as good / bad depending on their original vote position:

Leaver: Look, it's raining diamonds.

Remainer: They'd have been bigger had we stayed.

Leaver: Look, there's a big world out there

Remainer: We're doomed, doomed.......
 
Where we are at now is a bit of an impasse. It's clear to all but the most die hard of leavers that access to the single market is a must. This is why in a way I understand what Theresa May has done. Let the leavers (Davis, Fox, Johnson) have the big jobs and prove we can retain single market access without allowing freedom of movement or paying into the EU coffers, let them have the opportunity to sort out these amazing post Brexit trade deals with the rest of the world. I'm not going to bring into the debate about the GDP per capita benefits of EU migration, talk about the NHS 350 mil a week lies, mention the effects on the less fortunate and disadvantaged of consigning ourselves to further tory rule or get drawn into some EU super state conspiracy.


Surely it is a good idea to try and figure out what leave actually means before leaving? (admittedly we don't have a great deal of time though). If leaving will actually make us better off as a collective, I will be happy and I'm sure most leavers also want all of us as a society to be better off too, so maybe we should take as much time as we can to look into what the decision means first.
Access to the single market is important but we can live without it. We shouldn't sacrifice control over our borders or the ability to make our own trade deals etc to gain access. Frankly I think they need access to our market just as much as we need access to theirs so we shouldn't have to sacrifice anything. If they aren't happy with that then so be it.
 
I doubt there are many economic unions around the world with quite the long and ugly history of wars and conflict amongst and between its members as the European one. From the horse's mouth:

"the promotion of peace and the well-being of the Union´s citizens. an area of freedom, security and justice without internal frontiers. sustainable development based on balanced economic growth and social justice."

That's from the Lisbon Treaty. I'm not really sure there's a great deal to argue about with their aims, is there?
Ironically it's the EU that is fueling far right nationalism so it is even failing with that.
 
NAFTA, three countries that all invaded each other at some point.....however, this 'promotion of peace and the well being...etc etc' stuff originated when ?.......I don't remember voting for anything to do with something 'without internal frontiers'......

It seems that the reasons for being keep changing and evolving to suit the needs of the EU and not the nations..

So back to his question, why don't NAFTA have a shiny new flag and music.....

It was in the Lisbon Treaty Pete, which your MEP will have voted on.
 
Yeah, the step by step forging of a superstate behind our backs........

I 'get' the arguments of Remain people by and large - even if I disagree with them. I really don't understand why they should make such a fuss about the superstate idea.
 
@bobbydigital - apologies, I left out an answer to one of your questions - about the anthem ... "Ode to Joy" is the anthem of the European Union and the Council of Europe; both of which refer to it as the European Anthem due to the Council's belief that it represents Europe as a whole, rather than a single country. It's played on official occasions by both organisations.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top