1966efc
Player Valuation: £20m
We need to sell ourselves to the Americans?
Unsure whether the mines of Burton on Trent can produce enough Marmite ore to satisfy the lust of those neo imperialists.
We need to sell ourselves to the Americans?
Freedom of movement and trade for nice attractive, white, European people like us, but perish the thought of having equal freedom of movement or immigration for people of other skin colours and backgrounds from other parts of the world, or of encouraging trade with the rest of the world in a non exploitative way. We wouldn't want that spoiling or soiling our European, exploitative (to the rest of the world) superstate, would we...
(not accusing anyone here of being racist or anything, just making the point that treated positively Brexit could be a massive force for the good in us interacting outside our Safe European Home, rather than being Little Europeaners...)
Tony Blair the culprit who took his eye of the subject and has the cheek to complain about the % of the referendrum vote I looked how he became leader in the vote to become leader of the Labour party guess what the % was far less than 52% of the vote.
You honestly think after the vote, that people are going to be happy to have an increase in migration from non EU countries, and become more global? That's a lovely but ridiculous sentiment.
Look at the Tory party conference, the centre right have realised that there is votes in this anti imitation, anti foreigner rhetoric. The vote to leave the EU was just the start and it's emboldened them.
Still seems mad that people would sacrifice membership of the single market for the 'control' of eu immigration. Eu immigrants take up less than 5% of total population. Wish someone would explain how this so 'dangerous'.
I'm convinced that a lot of people conflated EU immigration to non EU immigration (which has been 3x EU immagarion for last 20 years). But I suppose that was the point of Fararges leave campaign. There is no way that these would be happy to have more people coming in.
I know there were a lot of leavers that had good reasons for their vote, regarding sovereignty and opportunity (some of whom on this thread, who have made really valid points). But for large numbers of the electorate it was about one thing - immigration. All the vote for brexit has done is give that far right a voice. Personally, don't think any arguments on sovereignty are worth this price.
And you think we're going to increase non EU immigration?
Understand all your points and agree with some of them but there were plenty of people on the left who supported Brexit. The journalist John Pilger, Dennis Skinner, George Galloway, ultra left wing parties like the SWP. Even the remain-supporting Yanis Varoufakis was in principal anti EU saying he would not advise anyone to join it but only against us leaving because it could break up the EU and lead to the rise of the right (which is what you are pointing out I guess)
I don't think people would tolerate an increase in immigration but if we are going to tolerate some immigration (which we will) I would rather the opportunity be equally available to all countries (particularly those I consider we have a historic duty to by past colonisation and bomb dropping).
There also really is an issue with overcrowding in parts of this country and though if we were bigger I would love to welcome everyone, the way the population has risen (is it close to 10% rise in the last decade or two?) has put incredible pressure on housing, education and the health service in areas affected and for this reason I unfortunately believe we may have to limit future immigration rises (think thats the most we will realistically be able to do) and open them more to people in need rather than just more Eastern Europeans (much as I like them as hard working pleasant people) who are only here because they get £7ph here versus £2ph in Poland but are scarcely in danger in their countries.
Yes it might be idealistic expecting that will happen (whereas what is probably more likely is the same corporate globalisation with us outside the EU as in it) but rather like deciding who to support in the labour party (a non-Corbyn labour who would get into power but not really change anything versus Corbyn who won't get in but at least I can be proud voting for) I want to at least stand up for what I believe in.
I dont think voting Brexit was about immigration for most people, but was , at a deeper level, about them feeling disenfrachised and left behind and maybe projecting that on immigrants as well as voting Brexit as a big F you against the establishment.
This feeling disenfranchised is happening all over the world and leading to people supporting both people on the right (Trump, far-right parties in Europe) and on the left (Bernie Saunders, Syriza and other parties on the left in Europe, and could include Corbyn if he could manage to get himself across to people above the right-wing media)
I voted Brexit because for me (by allowing us to make our own decisions) it gives us the best chance of standing outside the greed of the global economic system, though I doubt that will happen, at least until that system collapses (as it surely will at some time).
And no, I am no left wing revolutionary (having visited the then Soviet Union and seen it plainly didn't work) but I would love a bit of what some of the Latin American countries have tried - particularly Cuba with their health service and education systems far surpassing ours.
![]()
Marvellous posting, sir. Perhaps the most sensible one I've read.![]()
both he and Mandleson are moaning as they will lose their vast EU pension pot!Tony Blair was elected leader with 57% of the vote Joey.
Incidentally the winning margin was 8 times as much it was for the advisory referendum.
Yes don't eat marmiteMeanwhile, the kow towing creatures of the E U, Morrisons, have increased Marmite to £2.64. Sainsbury's, £2.50, Waitrose & Tesco, £2.35 and the noble British patriots at Asda, £2.00.
I think we can all learn a lesson from this.
This might be nice for you @Joey66 http://blogs.ec.europa.eu/ECintheUK/euromyths-a-z-index
Found here - http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2016/06/daily-chart-15?fsrc=scn/tw_ec/debunking_years_of_tabloid_claims_about_europe (you can consider me hugely surprised that the Mail, Mirror and Telegraph are the biggest peddlers of lies - post truth world we live in innit)
THE Brexit campaign has been plagued by little white lies, half-truths and disinformation. Neither side has showered itself in glory in its attempts to persuade the British public of the benefits or drawbacks of EU membership. But Britain has a long and well-observed tradition of fabricating facts about Europe—so much so that the European Commission (EC) set up a website to debunk these lies in the early 1990s. Try our interactive quiz below and see if you can spot the myths.
Since then the EC has responded to over 400 myths published by the British media. These range from the absurd (fishing boats will be forced to carry condoms) to the ridiculous (zippers on trousers will be banned). Some are seemingly the result of wilful misunderstandings. A story published by the Sun, a tabloid, in 1999 claimed that the queen would suddenly have to make her own tea because of new EU rules. Not only is this inaccurate, as a patient EC official pointed out, but the laws that this referred to were enacted by Britain itself in 1993. Another article in the Daily Star in 2004 reckoned that the EU was going to limit the speed of children’s playground roundabouts. This voluntary guideline, it turned out, was not proposed by the EU at all, but rather by a different organisation with the word “Europe” in its name. Other myths do not originate from anything close to reality, such as the allegation that the EC would ban darts from pubs or outlaw unwrapped sweets.
![]()
Unsurprisingly, the Daily Mail spreads more EU-linked lies than anyone else. But it’s not just right-wing tabloids that are guilty. The Daily Telegraph also performs well on this measure, and even the BBC has had its wrist slapped on occasion. The issue that riles up all media outlets, it seems, is the suggestion that Brussels will meddle with good ol’ British food. From fry-ups to French mustard, the British dinner plate is sacred. Eurocrats trying to change that will incur the wrath of Britain’s press—and its readers.
Sadly, for all the commission’s hard work, it is unlikely to be heard. The average rebuttal is read about 1,000 times. The Daily Mail’s website, by contrast, garners 225m visitors each month.
Yet more googling I see bruce at least I did not post I wanted my country to go bust like you do remember that post if you do not get your own way you will obviously be leaving the UK as it as you stated you wanted it to crash or go bust just to stay in the EU!?????????????????????????????????????This might be nice for you @Joey66 http://blogs.ec.europa.eu/ECintheUK/euromyths-a-z-index
Found here - http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2016/06/daily-chart-15?fsrc=scn/tw_ec/debunking_years_of_tabloid_claims_about_europe (you can consider me hugely surprised that the Mail, Mirror and Telegraph are the biggest peddlers of lies - post truth world we live in innit)
THE Brexit campaign has been plagued by little white lies, half-truths and disinformation. Neither side has showered itself in glory in its attempts to persuade the British public of the benefits or drawbacks of EU membership. But Britain has a long and well-observed tradition of fabricating facts about Europe—so much so that the European Commission (EC) set up a website to debunk these lies in the early 1990s. Try our interactive quiz below and see if you can spot the myths.
Since then the EC has responded to over 400 myths published by the British media. These range from the absurd (fishing boats will be forced to carry condoms) to the ridiculous (zippers on trousers will be banned). Some are seemingly the result of wilful misunderstandings. A story published by the Sun, a tabloid, in 1999 claimed that the queen would suddenly have to make her own tea because of new EU rules. Not only is this inaccurate, as a patient EC official pointed out, but the laws that this referred to were enacted by Britain itself in 1993. Another article in the Daily Star in 2004 reckoned that the EU was going to limit the speed of children’s playground roundabouts. This voluntary guideline, it turned out, was not proposed by the EU at all, but rather by a different organisation with the word “Europe” in its name. Other myths do not originate from anything close to reality, such as the allegation that the EC would ban darts from pubs or outlaw unwrapped sweets.
![]()
Unsurprisingly, the Daily Mail spreads more EU-linked lies than anyone else. But it’s not just right-wing tabloids that are guilty. The Daily Telegraph also performs well on this measure, and even the BBC has had its wrist slapped on occasion. The issue that riles up all media outlets, it seems, is the suggestion that Brussels will meddle with good ol’ British food. From fry-ups to French mustard, the British dinner plate is sacred. Eurocrats trying to change that will incur the wrath of Britain’s press—and its readers.
Sadly, for all the commission’s hard work, it is unlikely to be heard. The average rebuttal is read about 1,000 times. The Daily Mail’s website, by contrast, garners 225m visitors each month.
Understand all your points and agree with some of them but there were plenty of people on the left who supported Brexit. The journalist John Pilger, Dennis Skinner, George Galloway, ultra left wing parties like the SWP. Even the remain-supporting Yanis Varoufakis was in principal anti EU saying he would not advise anyone to join it but only against us leaving because it could break up the EU and lead to the rise of the right (which is what you are pointing out I guess)
I don't think people would tolerate an increase in immigration but if we are going to tolerate some immigration (which we will) I would rather the opportunity be equally available to all countries (particularly those I consider we have a historic duty to by past colonisation and bomb dropping).
There also really is an issue with overcrowding in parts of this country and though if we were bigger I would love to welcome everyone, the way the population has risen (is it close to 10% rise in the last decade or two?) has put incredible pressure on housing, education and the health service in areas affected and for this reason I unfortunately believe we may have to limit future immigration rises (think thats the most we will realistically be able to do) and open them more to people in need rather than just more Eastern Europeans (much as I like them as hard working pleasant people) who are only here because they get £7ph here versus £2ph in Poland but are scarcely in danger in their countries.
Yes it might be idealistic expecting that will happen (whereas what is probably more likely is the same corporate globalisation with us outside the EU as in it) but rather like deciding who to support in the labour party (a non-Corbyn labour who would get into power but not really change anything versus Corbyn who won't get in but at least I can be proud voting for) I want to at least stand up for what I believe in.
I dont think voting Brexit was about immigration for most people, but was , at a deeper level, about them feeling disenfrachised and left behind and maybe projecting that on immigrants as well as voting Brexit as a big F you against the establishment.
This feeling disenfranchised is happening all over the world and leading to people supporting both people on the right (Trump, far-right parties in Europe) and on the left (Bernie Saunders, Syriza and other parties on the left in Europe, and could include Corbyn if he could manage to get himself across to people above the right-wing media)
I voted Brexit because for me (by allowing us to make our own decisions) it gives us the best chance of standing outside the greed of the global economic system, though I doubt that will happen, at least until that system collapses (as it surely will at some time).
And no, I am no left wing revolutionary (having visited the then Soviet Union and seen it plainly didn't work) but I would love a bit of what some of the Latin American countries have tried - particularly Cuba with their health service and education systems far surpassing ours.
Thanks. I really don't think I am definitely right and I realise it is an issue that raises strong feelings (perhaps stronger than any actual difference that will be made by us being in our out). I like remainers as people (sometimes better than fellow Brexiteers like myself) and I understand why many labour people did not want Corbyn as they feel they can do more by being in power.
It is just that the issue is not just one sided. My impression from visiting many European countries and living in one of them is that some of their liberalism is only on the surface - put a few people of other skin colour next to them and we see how deep their tolerance is.
Whereas in Britain we are (barring a few isolated incidents) truly living and growing up together, having friends from all cultures and countries.
That's why I dont like it when EU officials implied we were racist post Brexit when our country is far better integrated than many of theirs (though I've always been impressed by the tolerance of young German people)
There is a limit to peoples tolerance of immigration though and when they can't get housing or their kids into schools that are only half a mile away they are likely to express that dissatisfaction in the voting booths.
There also really is an issue with overcrowding in parts of this country and though if we were bigger I would love to welcome everyone, the way the population has risen (is it close to 10% rise in the last decade or two?) has put incredible pressure on housing, education and the health service in areas affected and for this reason I unfortunately believe we may have to limit future immigration rises (think thats the most we will realistically be able to do) and open them more to people in need rather than just more Eastern Europeans (much as I like them as hard working pleasant people) who are only here because they get £7ph here versus £2ph in Poland but are scarcely in danger in their countries.
p
.
I've seen this said by a lot of leave voters about overcrowding- it's interesting though that the area with the most overcrowding - London - voted overwhelmingly to remain. Areas with little imigrarion and overcrowding, like Cornwall, voted to leave. It's almost like the people with the least experience of immigration are the ones most scared...
This is what Merkel said about the Superstate back in 2012.......
German Chancellor Angela Merkel outlined her vision of Europe in a speech to the European Parliament November 7. But it was when she stepped away from her prepared notes to respond to a statement by parliamentary leaders that she revealed most about the future she sees for the European Union.
The EU will transform into single nation—a superstate—“otherwise it will not work in the long term,” she said. Here is Merkel’s full statement:
"I’m sure the Commission will become a government one day. I’m sure that the Council will become a second chamber one day. And I’m sure the European Parliament will take European responsibilities otherwise it won’t work in the long term. But today we must save the euro and create the basis properly. And we must give people a little bit of time so that they can come with us."
Step by step.....
Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.