Cyprus-Forum.com

[cyprusgrump]

When was the last time you visited England? Which part of the " English culture" impressed you most ? Perhaps the queues awaiting for the Royal baby to arrive? Or could it be, in the words of the Clown, letter boxes appearing every 10 steps? Maybe the daily stabbings or the ever present Traffic wardens? Perhaps the plethora of cameras waiting to catch motorists with their front tyre touching tge white line? Mate, there is NO longer " English culture" there is third world culture.
16.1 million voted remain, do they not count? The narrow minded litlle Englanders who are unable to see further than their noses voted leave in order to ....preserve the English culture !!!! There is not one valid economic reason why we should come out of the EU. Just look at Stetling!!! Surely it's fall tells you something .

As a Cypriot, how do you feel about some un-elected EU bureaucrat spending your tax dollars in the occupied areas...?

...or another un-elected EU bureaucrat spending millions of €uros on high-speed rail links in Turkey...?

[Lordo]

When was the last time you visited England? Which part of the " English culture" impressed you most ? Perhaps the queues awaiting for the Royal baby to arrive? Or could it be, in the words of the Clown, letter boxes appearing every 10 steps? Maybe the daily stabbings or the ever present Traffic wardens? Perhaps the plethora of cameras waiting to catch motorists with their front tyre touching tge white line? Mate, there is NO longer " English culture" there is third world culture.
16.1 million voted remain, do they not count? The narrow minded litlle Englanders who are unable to see further than their noses voted leave in order to ....preserve the English culture !!!! There is not one valid economic reason why we should come out of the EU. Just look at Stetling!!! Surely it's fall tells you something .

As a Cypriot, how do you feel about some un-elected EU bureaucrat spending your tax dollars in the occupied areas...?

...or another un-elected EU bureaucrat spending millions of €uros on high-speed rail links in Turkey...?

i don't know if you realise but there are eu citizens in the north. you were thinking of how to run a local shop, there is not corrolation between running a shop and runnint a country and more importatnly running eu.

in reality what is couple of hunderd millions in the eu budget? like a few shillings no more when you compare.

[erolz66]

This is a two-way game and the UK imports much more from the EU than it exports.

In goods. Not in services. In services it is the other way round.

If the EU chooses to impose high tariffs on UK goods then the UK can reciprocate and inflict much more damage on the EU.

Any trade war between the EU and UK will be limited by WTO rules - for goods. For services there is no limit on the restrictions the EU could impose.

Nice try...

So your argument is all the money we send to the EU is for stuff we would buy anyway...?

No. The reality is that the vast majority of the money we contribute to the EU pays for things that we will need to do and pay for ourselves once we are out of it. That is just a fact. A 7 year old could understand this. A smaller part of our contribution is re-distributive. However my point here is more about you and how you chose to go about 'campaigning' for Brexit. You chose to distort reality with intent as far as I am concerned when you make out that the entire amount we send to the EU is what we will 'save' by being out of it. That is my point. You do not appear to care about reality and truth. You prefer the distortion when it suits you pre set agenda whilst at the same time accusing those who you do not agree with of doing the EXACT thing you personally chose to do yourself.

Why don't we just buy it ourselves then and cut out the middle man? That is what we are going to do when we leave...

Exactly that is what we are going to have to do so why is it that you feel the need to keep pushing the 'lie'' that all we currently pay in to the EU will be 'saving' and then multiply up that false number by 30 times to boot and come up with a meaningless figure ? I was and still am 'persuadable' to support Brexit if you can give me a logical reasoned argument as to the benefits. If all you can do is repeat the same lies over and over then the conclusion I have to come to is that is all you have got. That there is no logical reasoned argument so that is WHY you chose to resort to lies and distortions.

I mean seriously, do you think the average working man in the UK with a mortgage and bills to pay is happy that a large amount of the tax he is forced to pay is spunked away by the EU?

Actually the proportion of a UK citizens tax obligations that goes to the EU rather than to national government is not 'large'. It is in fact around 1% of all the tax you pay to the UK government that goes in turn to pay the EU. So again all you seem to have, to me, is exaggeration and distortion. Beyond that is the other classic 'technique' that is used to support Brexit that also does little to convince me, namely that of blaming the EU for things that are generic in or out of the EU as if they are unique to the EU and thus an argument as to why it is or is not good to be in the EU. All governments spunk money away to some degree or another. I mean seriously, do you think the average working man in the UK with a mortgage and bills to pay is happy that a large amount of the tax he is forced to pay was spunked away by Johnson when mayor of London on vanity projects like his 'garden bridge' and other fiascos ? If UK national government had never spunked away my tax money on things I think are stupid or pointless, then the argument that leaving the EU would stop this would hold some credibility with me. As it si all I see is , again, an excuse as to why you want the UK to leave the EU not a rational argument that could convince someone like me.

If you were to say to me all government is shit, inefficient, wasteful, democratically deficient to various degrees, therefore less government is 'good' and more is 'bad' and thus leaving the EU is a viable way to reduce the total amount of government, I would disagree with you but I would respect the logic of that argument. Yet you do not do this. What you do is try and make out that the EU is shit, inefficient, wasteful, democratically deficient and UK government is not these things. That I also disagree with but this time without any respect for the logic of the argument because there is no logic to such an argument. It is not an argument at all, it is rhetoric and bluster designed to make people act emotionally and not rationally. If you or any of the leading 'leavers' have anything but this, I have yet to personally see it, drowned out as it is by the relentless rhetoric.

[Kikapu]

AFAIUI, May wasn't "forced" by parliament to ask for an Article 50 time extension. She could have ignored it. She didn't because she didn't want to.

You are mistaken. Parliament passed a bill in to law , going through all the readings, 1st, 2nd house of lords (all in 24 hours) that made it UK law that TM, as PM, had to ask the EU for an extension.

IMHO, it has always been the case that you will get no meaningful concession from the EU until it went to the wire.

You do not think TM took it 'to the wire' and still failed to get 'concessions' ? We are past the 'wire' already as far as I can see. The wire was 29th March 2019. We took it to that wire and then asked for more time when concessions where not forth coming.[
Hi Erol,

I have no idea how these quotes are credited to me. Please check, delete and re-post.

MR,
You must have deleted one of the quotes/names on the top line by mistake and when you submitted your post, it changed all the quotes and names automatically. Once your “edit” time has passed, you yourself cannot change it, but the moderator can.

Spot on Kicks, what does one do when there are too many quotes then? I personally think it's nonsense to have such a restriction and wish the administrator would go back to no limit o quotes.

To get around that problem is, when you delete the name, also delete the written quote to that name, so this way, all the names and quotes would match when you make a post. Next best thing is as you have suggested, is not to have limits on quotes.

[cyprusgrump]

Erolz,

You are very fast to throw around accusations of my being a liar to the point where you have to apologise for doing so falsely.

But then you come out with this: -

What you do is try and make out that the EU is shit, inefficient, wasteful, democratically deficient and UK government is not these things.

Something that I have never done.

The point I have made is that we can vote out inefficient government in the UK - we can't do that in the EU - especially when the likes of Von der Leyen are appointed in shady backroom deals.

Shouting "LIAR" over and over is not an effective debating technique.

[erolz66]

It is illegal for the British Parliament to defy the popular vote of the people by ruling hard BREXIT out.

Rhetoric. There is nothing illegal about parliament asserting itself as the ultimate sovereign entity in the UK. It is in fact the basis on which the UK parliament has worked for centuries. Parliament is by definition the expression of the will of the people. It was democracy and a disastrous decision that turned TM majority in to a minority in 2017. What you are saying is that it should be illegal for Parliament to be able to stop the actions of minority government, unable to command the support and confidence even of all it's own MP's, let alone a majority of all MPs. Well thankfully 500+ years of democratic tradition in the UK disagrees with you and rightly so.

Whilst we are on this subject of MP's betraying the wishes of those that voted them in to power, what % of Dominc Raab's constituents voted to remain in the referendum do you think ? You could also check out Liam Fox (North Somerset), Chris Grayling (Epsom and Ewell), David Davies (Monmoth) and others but of course you will not.

[cyprusgrump]

Whilst we are on this subject of MP's betraying the wishes of those that voted them in to power, what % of Dominc Raab's constituents voted to remain in the referendum do you think ? You could also check out Liam Fox (North Somerset), Chris Grayling (Epsom and Ewell), David Davies (Monmoth) and others but of course you will not.

Or you could look as a wider, less selective picture eh...?

Of course you will not...

[erolz66]

Something that I have never done.

You think ?

The point I have made is that we can vote out inefficient government in the UK

So what is your complaint about Parliament not doing what you want then ? What is the problem ? If they do not do what you want , just vote them out ? Reality is not quite so simple though is it ?

- we can't do that in the EU - especially when the likes of Von der Leyen are appointed in shady backroom deals.

The way the heads of the commission are appointed is how our democratically elected leaders chose to set up that system or agreed to such. So if we did not like that then according to you we just vote out that government and vote in one that does not agree to such. Not so simple in reality is it ?

The UK national political system is based on three pillars.

1. House of Commons - made up of democratically elected MPs that represent specific constituencies (and no I can not vote out Johnson if I want, unless I move to Uxbridge)
2. Civil Service - made up of self appointed people. The civil service chooses, behind closed doors, who holds the heads of the various departments. It is the classic 'job for life'. Even parliament can not 'sack' a civil service head.
3. House of Lords - made up of un elected appointees some with positions that are not just for life but carry on down generations.

The EU political system is based on three pillars

1. EU Council - made up of the democratically elected leaders of the member states.
2. EU Commission - made up of appointed people for a 5 year term, that has to ratified by the EU parliament and which the EU parlimament has the legal right to 'sack on mass should there be a majority that want to do so.
3. EU Parliament - made up of democratically elected MEPs that represent specific consistences.

That is the reality. Both systems have serious problems and failings. Both have elements of democratic validity as well as elements of democratic deficiencies. When you claim we must leave the EU because of it's democratic deficiencies without any attempt to consider is it more or less democratically deficient than UK national government and without any history of caring about democratic deficiency in the UK national system outside of 'campaigning' for Brexit, then what I hear is an excuse not a reason.

Shouting "LIAR" over and over is not an effective debating technique.

How about calling out things that I think are lies, explaining exactly why I think they are lies and providing credible evidence and being more than willing to admit it when I make an error as part of that process ?

[cyprusgrump]

Something that I have never done.

You think ?

The point I have made is that we can vote out inefficient government in the UK

So what is your complaint about Parliament not doing what you want then ? What is the problem ? If they do not do what you want , just vote them out ? Reality is not quite so simple though is it ?

- we can't do that in the EU - especially when the likes of Von der Leyen are appointed in shady backroom deals.

The way the heads of the commission are appointed is how our democratically elected leaders chose to set up that system or agreed to such. So if we did not like that then according to you we just vote out that government and vote in one that does not agree to such. Not so simple in reality is it ?

The UK national political system is based on three pillars.

1. House of Commons - made up of democratically elected MPs that represent specific constituencies (and no I can not vote out Johnson if I want, unless I move to Uxbridge)
2. Civil Service - made up of self appointed people. The civil service chooses, behind closed doors, who holds the heads of the various departments. It is the classic 'job for life'. Even parliament can not 'sack' a civil service head.
3. House of Lords - made up of un elected appointees some with positions that are not just for life but carry on down generations.

The EU political system is based on three pillars

1. EU Council - made up of the democratically elected leaders of the member states.
2. EU Commission - made up of appointed people for a 5 year term, that has to ratified by the EU parliament and which the EU parlimament has the legal right to 'sack on mass should there be a majority that want to do so.
3. EU Parliament - made up of democratically elected MEPs that represent specific consistences.

That is the reality. Both systems have serious problems and failings. Both have elements of democratic validity as well as elements of democratic deficiencies. When you claim we must leave the EU because of it's democratic deficiencies without any attempt to consider is it more or less democratically deficient than UK national government and without any history of caring about democratic deficiency in the UK national system outside of 'campaigning' for Brexit, then what I hear is an excuse not a reason.

Shouting "LIAR" over and over is not an effective debating technique.

How about calling out things that I think are lies, explaining exactly why I think they are lies and providing credible evidence and being more than willing to admit it when I make an error as part of that process ?

You've very eloquently made my point for me...

From a taxpayers point of view, how many layers of government is he financing...?

1. House of Commons - made up of democratically elected MPs that represent specific constituencies (and no I can not vote out Johnson if I want, unless I move to Uxbridge)
2. Civil Service - made up of self appointed people. The civil service chooses, behind closed doors, who holds the heads of the various departments. It is the classic 'job for life'. Even parliament can not 'sack' a civil service head.
3. House of Lords - made up of un elected appointees some with positions that are not just for life but carry on down generations.
4. EU Council - made up of the democratically elected leaders of the member states.
5. EU Commission - made up of appointed people for a 5 year term, that has to ratified by the EU parliament and which the EU parliament has the legal right to 'sack on mass should there be a majority that want to do so.
6. EU Parliament - made up of democratically elected MEPs that represent specific consistences.

And how many votes does he get in all of that to influence who gets the £300K a year top job at the EU...?

Thankfully with Brexit a single vote in the Leave box is going to remove three expensive layers of bureaucracy...

[Lordo]

lets just take the first item first. 16 million odd voted toremain.there is only one remain, there are no different versions of remain.
on the other hand 17 million voted to leave but what did they vote vor.
leave on:
1. no-deal
2. wto rules
3. norway plus
4. canada plus
5 leave but stay close - otheriwse in the custome union.

now this is intereting when we had an election in 2017, it superseeds the 2016 vote becasue tories promissed brexit is brexit which could be intepreted as leave with a no deal but even then they never specified that no deal was possible. instead they promissed that when we areutside we will still be able to have free access to the eu. in fact they even suggested that our deal will be tter outside than in. and here is the problem.only 13 million voted for the tories in 2017. for you now to calim all 17 million voted for no deal in 2016 is bullshit and you know it.

this government has no mandate to breixt as they have no majority and just becasue by joining with the fascists of northern ireland gives them technically a majority has no moral authority. and in rality the very small majority they have means that the tory party is being grabbed by the balls from just a few mps from remain or brexit wing. hence no mandate. but of course this did not stop may blackmailing the british mps to vote for hear deal.

it did not work and it will not work. the only solution is to have ageneral election agree a deal and put it back to the people to see if they agree with the deal