UK votes to leave the European Union

[Imp]

I do agree that under the EU they couldn't steal as much, but to be really honest why would anyone be puppet of germany or belgium or whatever? As much as EU is bureaucratic and so on, I really don't get anyone who actually does vote against EU or is the so called eurosceptic, common currency, free travel without passports, visas, IDs and shit etc, free trading and cheap domestic flights, common abroad visa vaivers for EU citizens and since 2017 abolished roaming and telecommunication fees, it's almost like USA on European continent, only complete moron don't want to have this, literally for free. That's why I think that everyone against EU no matter how much they argue, are rigid and selfish individuals stuck in their miserable life, if they don't know how to count euros or don't want to travel, they don't need to destroy that for those who do. Only thing that EU is missing to be a superpower is common armed forces and stricker border protection, really nothing else, oh and less industry outsourcing to china.

That summarizes the argument I've seen for Remain so far -- plus the bad economy stuff -- especially from young people. You're taking away my free/cheap stuff and making travel harder?

The difference is that the United States is mostly united by a common language and a common cultural identity. A substantial number of the original settlers were British subjects so they had a shared heritage from the beginning. Then they fought a war for independence that brought together like-minded individuals. One civil war later, these people went out and settled the west. Two hundred years later and they still have major disagreements.

You can't just jam together so many people with different cultural identities who speak more than a half-dozen languages and expect instant results. Even Canada can barely jam together English speakers with French speakers and it's been hundreds of years.

 

[Eug]

British county votes Brexit — then realizes EU may stop sending them money

Cornwall, one of England's poorest regions, is panicking after it realized the European Union may cut off its financial support.

LONDON—On Thursday, 56 per cent of all voters in the southwestern county of Cornwall voted in favour of leaving the European Union. It was a decision supported by a majority of the county’s members of Parliament.

But only one day later, Cornwall residents were asking, “What have we done?”

The county is heavily dependent on the more than 60 million British pounds ($106 million) in EU subsidies per year that are transferred to the region and that have helped finance infrastructure proj8ects and education schemes. Now, county officials are panicking — fearing the worst for the county’s future and wondering why one of the most EU-dependent counties in Britain voted against the EU — and its money.

---

“Leave” campaigners had previously reassured the county that it would not lose any subsidies if it left the EU. However, Cornwall officials are now worried that such reassurances might have been little more than ill-thought-out promises.

“Prior to the referendum we were reassured by the ‘leave’ campaign that a decision to leave the EU would not affect the EU funding which has already been allocated to Cornwall,” the council wrote in a statement on Friday. “We are seeking urgent confirmation from Ministers that this is the case,” the statement continued.

Cornwall officials’ fears are not unjustified: Only hours after helping to convince the British to vote for Brexit, the leader of the U.K. Independence Party, Nigel Farage, appeared to show uncertainty whether all promises would be kept.

Some Brexit supporters had previously told voters that the $470 million the British allegedly transfers to the EU each week would be allocated to the national health-care system in case of a Brexit.

Besides immigration, the desolate state of Britain’s health-care system (NHS) significantly contributed to anti-EU anger, as Euro-skeptics blamed the European Union for costing the country too much and wasting resources that could be spent domestically.

But on Friday, Farage suddenly said it was a “mistake” to have promised allocating $470 million to the NHS and distanced himself from that campaign slogan, saying he had never agreed to it.

 

[Imp]

EU Parliament is selected through direct election, so are the leadership roles. You think there is an issue with that?

From what I understand, the EU Parliament is elected by proportional representation, the EU Commission is appointed by national leaders and MEPs (EU Parliament).

Proportional representation, I believe, means you vote for a party, then the party picks the MEPs off a list. While democratic, it may lead to, who the hell is my MEP?

Then the EU Parliament, apparently, consists of 751 MEPs. Laws, I think, pass by simple majority or more. That means you effectively need MEPs in France, Germany, Italy, and/or other countries to vote with you to pass things -- Germany has 96 MEPs, France 74, UK 73. That may lead to, why is someone in Italy or Croatia telling me what I can or cannot do?

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/map.html

 

[amyklai]

That may lead to, why is someone in Italy or Croatia telling me what I can or cannot do?

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/map.html

Well, in principle that's not very different from saying "I live in Edinburgh / Cardiff / Belfast / Manchester, why is someone in London telling me what I can or cannot do?", is it?

And here's one simple reason why somebody from some other place might influence some rules that apply to you: you want to have an area that agrees on a certain set of rules so certain things (trade, travel etc.) can be made easier over the whole area. To set those rules you set up some sort of government that decides them.

No, of course you could say "hey, we can just set up a free trade zone", but then look at something like TTIP with its secret negotiations and the secret courts they want to set up and how those rules will be binding for all the members and ask yourself if that is really more democratic than having something like the European Parliament.


The basic truth of the matter the modern world with the need for trade and the forces of globalization means that countries have to accept lots of treaties and lots of rules to take part in the business. They're no longer as free as they were in former times, when there was less economic and otherwise interaction taking place. There are lots of people who feel uncomfortable with this complex and confusing world, who would like to go back to a simpler world where you're not bothered by all the problems the world seems to be throwing your way like chinese manufacturers that are threatening the security of your job and migrants and other factors that might change your world in ways you're not prepared for or don't want to deal with.

And then there are politicians like Farage, Johnson, Trump, Le Pen, Podemos, Syriza etc. which present simple solutions, easy scapegoats and promise to bring back the good old times / make your country great again / stand up to global capitalism / whatever.

If you want to see what this type of politician is capable of doing, just take a look at South America. They've been electing poulists for decades, and they've veen fscked over by them again and again. Chavez is a good example.

The times they are a-changing. And no, neither Boris Johnson nor Nigel Farage will be able to turn back the clock, they can only royally fuck up by trying to go back to soultions that might have worked in a less globalised world 60 years ago in todays world.

 

[Imp]

Well, in principle that's not very different from saying "I live in Edinburgh / Cardiff / Belfast / Manchester, why is someone in London telling me what I can or cannot do?", is it?

That actually does happen. People in the west of Canada and Quebec ask why Ontario (most populous province) or the Anglophones appear to dictate what they do. In the U.S., there are often complaints about Washington D.C.

The difference is probably that you're all part of the same country. No matter how much you think they're assholes, they're your assholes. In a way, you're indoctrinated to put up with it through national media and the education system.

In the EU, numerous distinct cultures and languages. Up until 1945, Europe spent the last two thousand years killing each other. Up until 1989, everyone west of Germany was getting ready to kill everyone to the east. Just because globalism demands it, these tensions don't suddenly disappear because you belong to a new club.

 

[sdifox]

From what I understand, the EU Parliament is elected by proportional representation, the EU Commission is appointed by national leaders and MEPs (EU Parliament).

Proportional representation, I believe, means you vote for a party, then the party picks the MEPs off a list. While democratic, it may lead to, who the hell is my MEP?

Then the EU Parliament, apparently, consists of 751 MEPs. Laws, I think, pass by simple majority or more. That means you effectively need MEPs in France, Germany, Italy, and/or other countries to vote with you to pass things -- Germany has 96 MEPs, France 74, UK 73. That may lead to, why is someone in Italy or Croatia telling me what I can or cannot do?

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/map.html

Each country decide how their MEPs are elected. And the number of MEP is proportional to population. Basically Brexiters believe they are more equal than others.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_to_the_European_Parliament

 

[Sheep221]

So, as long as it is "free", you are fine with other people making laws/regulations that end up hurting your country more than helping?
Then, since you are getting all the benefits, you call everyone else a moron because they are getting the shaft? I am sure your tune would change if the shoe was on the other foot.

The *idea* was sound, the implementation was (and is) bad.

The UK can now negotiate contracts that are much fairer to them than in the past, I don't fault them for wanting to be able to do that. The UK people can now decide how they want to go, not some other people who could care less about the UK.
Yes, it will take time, but, short term pain for long term gains. (That isn't to say they can't screw it up as well...)

There is no evidence that EU decisions hurt UK in any economic or cultural/national way. None of this was reason for brexit to become reality either.

Today's western world especially with rising Asian dominance
(sorry guys it's true) needs to be more integrated and close cooperating than ever before. What the long term goal of the EU is, is to become federation like US or Mexico, or Canada or...whatever, something, where member states will be contributing to single common military and unified marketplace(this already exists in EU). And also the free trade agreement with US is something that is important for future cooperation.

That summarizes the argument I've seen for Remain so far -- plus the bad economy stuff -- especially from young people. You're taking away my free/cheap stuff and making travel harder?

The difference is that the United States is mostly united by a common language and a common cultural identity. A substantial number of the original settlers were British subjects so they had a shared heritage from the beginning. Then they fought a war for independence that brought together like-minded individuals. One civil war later, these people went out and settled the west. Two hundred years later and they still have major disagreements.

You can't just jam together so many people with different cultural identities who speak more than a half-dozen languages and expect instant results. Even Canada can barely jam together English speakers with French speakers and it's been hundreds of years.

US has a different establishment than EU does, yes, but they are federation for long enough to actually stick together(except Texas where Brexit triggered those anti-US groups to be lobbying for texas to leave the US and become sovereign country)

 

[Elixer]

There is no evidence that EU decisions hurt UK in any economic or cultural/national way. None of this was reason for brexit to become reality either.

You really believe that economics played no role in the brexit?
Suffice to say lots of people differ from your interpretation of what you consider to be 'no evidence'.

In any case, it is now done and over with.
I said it once, and I will say it again, I wish the UK the best.
Yeah, it will take time.

 

[nk215]

The UK imports more from the EU than it exports to the EU. The EU is a bigger and more powerful economic entity than the UK at the moment, so it can look for other countries to supply part of what it used to import from the UK, lowering the UK exports even further (for example by replacing British beef by Argentinian beef). The UK has to renegotiate lots of trading deals first again, and meanwhile its citizens will still want French wine, Belgian chocolate, Dutch flowers, etc. So they'll have to keep the imports at pretty much the same level, which will cost a lot.

Your view is very one sided. EU agreements do not have 100% direct control on what gets exported and imported. The agreement just makes it easier for corporations to do the import/export between members. In your example, why would someone starts to import beef from Argentina instead of UK when both countries are not in EU? Unless there's a clear cut in lower cost, companies just won't do it for the hate of one country over another.

The statement saying that UK citizens continue to want French wine etc is about as valid as EU citizens continue to want UK cars/oil/medicine/gold (the 4 biggest UK export). It will cost more for UK to buy wine as much as UE to buy UK cars.

UK corporate tax rate is 20%. France, Germany, Belgium, Italy corporate tax rate are all >30%. Company just won't suddenly pull out of UK.

UK is one of a better off members in the EU. Without those members, there may not even be a EU. Follow the news and you'll see that there a quite a few "better members" who may want to leave. Which country wants to join? Turkey.

 

[desura]

So, predictions?

A few possibilities:

- Northern Ireland unifies with the rest of Ireland (which they should do imo)

- Scotland goes quasi independent.

- possible that they reverse it. Only a slim majority voted leave, really considering the change it should a supermajority to leave.

- possible that Scotland can veto the Brexit.

- they end up with a deal which is functionally very similar to the deal they had before.

- it ends up foreshadowing a Frexit, where opinion of the EU is lower than Britain.

- stocks drop 30% for three years while it all gets ironed out.

 

[sdifox]

You really believe that economics played no role in the brexit?
Suffice to say lots of people differ from your interpretation of what you consider to be 'no evidence'.

In any case, it is now done and over with.
I said it once, and I will say it again, I wish the UK the best.
Yeah, it will take time.

Brexiters, by voting for exit, did exactly what they claimed to be against. Their bad decisions impacted the people of the rest of the planet.

 

[Imp]

So, predictions?

A few possibilities:

- stocks drop 30% for three years while it all gets ironed out.

Global economy has been in the crapper for a while now. The stock markets (U.S.) ran out of steam back in late 2014. It's had a great run since 2009. If the American markets drop hard, Brexit may be the nudge that sends it over the cliff, but I wouldn't say it's 100% to blame.

European markets have been tanking for over a year -- ~15-20% down from 2015 highs before Brexit for DAX, FTSE, CAC. Their economy is not good, and it hasn't been for years.

Asia markets... NIKKEI down ~20% and Shanghai down 40% since 2015.

 

[13Gigatons]

UK is better off on their own. There may be pain in the short term but the long term outlook will be better.

 

[IronWing]

So, predictions?

A few possibilities:

- Northern Ireland unifies with the rest of Ireland (which they should do imo)

Won't happen. Even raising the prospect of re-unification in a serious way will set off a wave of sectarian violence.

 

[Imp]

Won't happen. Even raising the prospect of re-unification in a serious way will set off a wave of sectarian violence.

That's a weird one. You'd think Irish people would want to be with Irish people, but from the little I know and have heard, that may not be the case.

Just from the Brexit voter map, there are regions that wanted out of the EU too. And the vote was fairly evenly split compared to Scotland.

 

[13Gigatons]

That's a weird one. You'd think Irish people would want to be with Irish people, but from the little I know and have heard, that may not be the case.
.

Northern Ireland has a large English population. They were put there purposely and have been there for almost a hundred years. It would be nice if the Irish could finally get their whole country back.

 

[IronWing]

That's a weird one. You'd think Irish people would want to be with Irish people, but from the little I know and have heard, that may not be the case.

Just from the Brexit voter map, there are regions that wanted out of the EU too. And the vote was fairly evenly split compared to Scotland.

Northern Ireland is comprised of an Irish Catholic minority and a Protestant majority of mostly Scottish heritage. The territory was carved out of Ireland at independence precisely because the Protestants wanted no part of Irish Catholic majority rule. The history of relations between the two peoples is long and bitter. The current peace was very hard won and is fragile. Pushing for re-unification would be to drop a boulder in the pond.

 

[Greenman]

British county votes Brexit — then realizes EU may stop sending them money

Cornwall, one of England's poorest regions, is panicking after it realized the European Union may cut off its financial support.

LONDON—On Thursday, 56 per cent of all voters in the southwestern county of Cornwall voted in favour of leaving the European Union. It was a decision supported by a majority of the county’s members of Parliament.

But only one day later, Cornwall residents were asking, “What have we done?”

The county is heavily dependent on the more than 60 million British pounds ($106 million) in EU subsidies per year that are transferred to the region and that have helped finance infrastructure proj8ects and education schemes. Now, county officials are panicking — fearing the worst for the county’s future and wondering why one of the most EU-dependent counties in Britain voted against the EU — and its money.

---

“Leave” campaigners had previously reassured the county that it would not lose any subsidies if it left the EU. However, Cornwall officials are now worried that such reassurances might have been little more than ill-thought-out promises.

“Prior to the referendum we were reassured by the ‘leave’ campaign that a decision to leave the EU would not affect the EU funding which has already been allocated to Cornwall,” the council wrote in a statement on Friday. “We are seeking urgent confirmation from Ministers that this is the case,” the statement continued.

Cornwall officials’ fears are not unjustified: Only hours after helping to convince the British to vote for Brexit, the leader of the U.K. Independence Party, Nigel Farage, appeared to show uncertainty whether all promises would be kept.

Some Brexit supporters had previously told voters that the $470 million the British allegedly transfers to the EU each week would be allocated to the national health-care system in case of a Brexit.

Besides immigration, the desolate state of Britain’s health-care system (NHS) significantly contributed to anti-EU anger, as Euro-skeptics blamed the European Union for costing the country too much and wasting resources that could be spent domestically.

But on Friday, Farage suddenly said it was a “mistake” to have promised allocating $470 million to the NHS and distanced himself from that campaign slogan, saying he had never agreed to it.

Does this mean the UK was getting more money from the EU than it was paying into it?

 

[flexy]

Does this mean the UK was getting more money from the EU than it was paying into it?

It's "slightly" more complex:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...w-much-does-Britain-pay-to-the-EU-budget.html

TLDR:

None of the big contributors to the EU, Germany, Farnce, Italy, UK "gets more back" than they contribute, although EU proponents argue that ultimately the gains from being in the common market make good for the contributions. The majority of the "smaller" remaining EU nations actually contribute less but get more back.

 

[desura]

Northern Ireland has a large English population. They were put there purposely and have been there for almost a hundred years. It would be nice if the Irish could finally get their whole country back.

I saw what happened in Ukraine after Crimea was split off. Crimea is what kept Ukraine pro-Russia, and so a unified Ireland would likely be friendlier towards e UK.

 

[flexy]

and Boris and his friends were hoping it would give them a boost to power after the current government would first refuse to leave the EU and then would fall because of it. Instead Cameron used it to nuke their future carreers, and they realise they screwed over not just the UK but themselves as well.

I am pretty sure you read that (viral) Guardian comment too then. (Let me know if not, so I can post it).

I am not 100% sure about UK politics, but can you explain why it is speculated as if Cameron's move to give this responsibility to Boris or whoever would mean that (ACCORDING TO THIS THEORY) the Brexit would never happen?

Because...the guys didn't expect it really to happen...and no-one would have an interest in triggering Article 50?? Why not?

The gist I am getting right now...no-one really HAD.A.PLAN. ..now "shit happened"....and they feel it's way over their heads? (With the enormous implications of the Brexit, including of course the potential split from Scotland, Wales etc..no-one wants to touch this with a long pole....this is how Cameron "nuked them"? Am I interpreting this right?)

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

I am pretty sure you read that (viral) Guardian comment too then. (Let me know if not, so I can post it).

I am not 100% sure about UK politics, but can you explain why it is speculated as if Cameron's move to give this responsibility to Boris or whoever would mean that (ACCORDING TO THIS THEORY) the Brexit would never happen?

Because...the guys didn't expect it really to happen...and no-one would have an interest in triggering Article 50?? Why not?

The gist I am getting right now...no-one really HAD.A.PLAN. ..now "shit happened"....and they feel it's way over their heads? (With the enormous implications of the Brexit, including of course the potential split from Scotland, Wales etc..no-one wants to touch this with a long pole....this is how Cameron "nuked them"? Am I interpreting this right?)

I posted that link.

Boris wants to become the next leader of the Conservatives, and undermining Cameron's position while making himself popular among the anti-EU crowd would make it much easier for him to achieve it. However, whoever has to deal with leaving the EU or it being blocked in the parliament will not make him-/herself popular, so the idea was that Cameron would be the one stuck with it. Cameron leaving means that his successor gets that job, and that means that either Boris goes for the leadership position and has to explain why there is no $470m extra after leaving or has to explain why the UK isn't leaving, or he doesn't go for the leadership position and looks like a weakling (and thus kills his future political carreer).

If Scotland blocks 'Brexit' it will count as a loss for Boris, even if the public opinion changes in the UK (as they'll see him as one of those that talked them into voting for it in the first place). If Scotland doesn't block it but leaves the UK whoever is leading at that time will be tainted by it. Especially if Northern Ireland also considers leaving. (@nk215: A lot of companies, especially US ones, have their headquarters in Ireland rather than in England, so NI leaving would hit the UK hard)

Why do you think the Brexit leaders (besides possibly Farage, but he's a moronic fascist) don't want to immediately call on Article 50? They don't want to leave soon, if at all. Large areas of England are very poor compared to the SE, not just Cornwall but also the NW (Manchester, Liverpool, etc). Those areas used to have industries that either relocated to cheaper countries or vanished altogether, and very little came in its place. Birmingham is the second largest city in the UK, and when the industry collapsed there it was transformed into a service based town using billions of pounds/euros/dollars from the EU. The moment the UK has finalised leaving the EU such projects will no longer take place, and the UK can't afford to do it either at the moment. Which means more poverty and more unemployment (which means more unemployment benefits that have to be paid, which means more money is needed).
Most of the Brexit voters only voted it because they don't like foreigners.

 

[PingviN]

I do agree that under the EU they couldn't steal as much, but to be really honest why would anyone be puppet of germany or belgium or whatever? As much as EU is bureaucratic and so on, I really don't get anyone who actually does vote against EU or is the so called eurosceptic, common currency, free travel without passports, visas, IDs and shit etc, free trading and cheap domestic flights, common abroad visa vaivers for EU citizens and since 2017 abolished roaming and telecommunication fees, it's almost like USA on European continent, only complete moron don't want to have this, literally for free. That's why I think that everyone against EU no matter how much they argue, are rigid and selfish individuals stuck in their miserable life, if they don't know how to count euros or don't want to travel, they don't need to destroy that for those who do. Only thing that EU is missing to be a superpower is common armed forces and stricker border protection, really nothing else, oh and less industry outsourcing to china.

A nation losing it's sovereignty is a steep price to pay for something that should not require supranationalisation. We've had a passport union in the Nordics for over 50 years, with citizens being allowed to move and work where they please.

No one argues that being able to travel and trade with minimal effort is important. That is not the issue and has never been the issue. The issue is an ever growing EU, controlled by non-elected bureaucrats taking more and more control over national interests.

We're not the USA, we do not want to be the USA. Support for a federation is low. This is not what the EU was or what it was supposed to be.

 

[ALIVE]

First of all there are
the european parliament which is elected from the people and not given directly positions as one of the fellow forum members wrote
and there is comision which is 1 position for every country member and the shits are giver directly from the governments.

while they propaganda a lot the european parliament and the people voting and deciding for their future they hide the truth that the real power and control of the union is in the comision not in the parliament.

the problem in EU is that all countries voted for free movement of the EUROPEAN CITIZENS or at least that what we were told , in fact what was it
european citizens have no rights or movement inside the EU sadly but true

i was in sweden and i tried to enter in the famous system, all i got was bullshit,
they said to me i need to have a tax number to register to the unemployment agency so they will find me a job, so when i ask them what i need to do to get that number, they replied was to get that number you need to have a JOB!?!?!?!??!?! then i said to them YOU ARE FUCKING KIDDING ME

i went also in norway same reactions, in germany the same, now that i live in spain with my girlfriend same reaction

also the free movement is for 4 months after that you need to get a green card as everyone else, so i talk to sweden and the person there told me just leave the country for 1 day return with the tickets of travel and the hotel you stayed abroad and no problem new 4 months, in spain i try to get a green card so i can stay with my girlfriend the answer was NO
FUCK YOU YOU WILL GET NO GREEN CARD
when i replied but i want to be with my girlfriend they replied
STAY ILLEGAL is not as if the police will come in the house arrest you and sent you home
at least the sweden told me the loophole while the spanish authorities prompt me to act illegal

when i was in germany for long time i want to sent money to buy my credit card, so i asked a german i knew to go in his bank i was going to give him the money and he was going to sent the money in my bank so i can pay the card. we went in the bank and the answer was NO
it is illegal for the german person to send money to my account
lol that was the official answer word for word

so while the europeans are facing all this love inside the EU all the illegal muslims rapist, and potential terrorist, are put in welfare, they are given a house to stay and money to live.

Of course because the money will not magically appear from thin air in all countries they cut money to the citizents to give the welfare to the immigrants

and what happens in sweden? the imigrants welfare is given by the pension funds money which they are eaten up in an extremely fast pace and did i mention they cut the pensions in sweden??? to save money for the immigrants???

so EU has 1 problem illegal immigrants, that take lots of support in expence of the citizents, which would not have been any problem if they were hindu, chinese, japanese
but being muslim is what is causes the problems
the muslim will no assimilate in the europen culture they will try to take it down and make eu a muslim country, the rapes and especially the gang rapes are sky rocketed in EU, what was the response of the EU, the media to report no rape case, the police not even try to arrest the people responsible

in new year ave the new arrived poor syrian raped 1000 women in 1 city, the police did nothing and Merkel tried and still tries to hide the issue.

in Uk there are areas with lots of muslims that they formed their religion police and patrol the streets, while still now they say to no muslims polite not to drink alcohol that will not be the case soon

muslim have their own court systems , rum by muslims under sharia law and deliver justice between them at that courts, the laws of the country DO NOT APPLY TO THEM, a muslim in germany married a 14 year old girl which is ILLEGAL but the court said it is custom to his culture and let him free

THATS WHY UK left the union because they think they can address the immigration problem better

anyway even if that was not the case historical speaking the british are alway anti Europeans, and because of that the relationships between EU and UK where and always be problematic

You can not have someone in a union that really does not want to be in a union

UK wanted to have the best part of the Union without any obligation which can not happen in real world

as for Norway the scandinavian countries have formed the scandinavian union long before the EU, with free movement of people, goods

when the union was transformed into the EU of today they was a question what about Norway!??!??! and because of the Scandinavian union, the Norway end up to get all the good of the union with no obligations

and this is the 3rd time Uk betrays the union
Great Britain was a full member of a much earlier version of the union, then they left completely. The union stay firm and start growing and down the line Great Britain ask to enter again in the union. And then was revenge time for german and france. There is a region of france called britany , so france said FRANCE WILL NOT ACCEPT ANY COUNTRY IN THE UNION THAT HAS TERRITORIAL CLAIMS TO OUR LANDS, meaning great britain name is a dirct claim to their national land. So the proub british had to change their country name to ente rin the union and thus United Kingdom was born.

Do you find it funny that now in europe that UK is out everyoen is calling it again Great Britain. lol

 

[sdifox]

First of all there are
the european parliament which is elected from the people and not given directly positions as one of the fellow forum members wrote
and there is comision which is 1 position for every country member and the shits are giver directly from the governments.

while they propaganda a lot the european parliament and the people voting and deciding for their future they hide the truth that the real power and control of the union is in the comision not in the parliament.

the problem in EU is that all countries voted for free movement of the EUROPEAN CITIZENS or at least that what we were told , in fact what was it
european citizens have no rights or movement inside the EU sadly but true

i was in sweden and i tried to enter in the famous system, all i got was bullshit,
they said to me i need to have a tax number to register to the unemployment agency so they will find me a job, so when i ask them what i need to do to get that number, they replied was to get that number you need to have a JOB!?!?!?!??!?! then i said to them YOU ARE FUCKING KIDDING ME

i went also in norway same reactions, in germany the same, now that i live in spain with my girlfriend same reaction

also the free movement is for 4 months after that you need to get a green card as everyone else, so i talk to sweden and the person there told me just leave the country for 1 day return with the tickets of travel and the hotel you stayed abroad and no problem new 4 months, in spain i try to get a green card so i can stay with my girlfriend the answer was NO
FUCK YOU YOU WILL GET NO GREEN CARD
when i replied but i want to be with my girlfriend they replied
STAY ILLEGAL is not as if the police will come in the house arrest you and sent you home
at least the sweden told me the loophole while the spanish authorities prompt me to act illegal

when i was in germany for long time i want to sent money to buy my credit card, so i asked a german i knew to go in his bank i was going to give him the money and he was going to sent the money in my bank so i can pay the card. we went in the bank and the answer was NO
it is illegal for the german person to send money to my account
lol that was the official answer word for word

so while the europeans are facing all this love inside the EU all the illegal muslims rapist, and potential terrorist, are put in welfare, they are given a house to stay and money to live.

Of course because the money will not magically appear from thin air in all countries they cut money to the citizents to give the welfare to the immigrants

and what happens in sweden? the imigrants welfare is given by the pension funds money which they are eaten up in an extremely fast pace and did i mention they cut the pensions in sweden??? to save money for the immigrants???

so EU has 1 problem illegal immigrants, that take lots of support in expence of the citizents, which would not have been any problem if they were hindu, chinese, japanese
but being muslim is what is causes the problems
the muslim will no assimilate in the europen culture they will try to take it down and make eu a muslim country, the rapes and especially the gang rapes are sky rocketed in EU, what was the response of the EU, the media to report no rape case, the police not even try to arrest the people responsible

in new year ave the new arrived poor syrian raped 1000 women in 1 city, the police did nothing and Merkel tried and still tries to hide the issue.

in Uk there are areas with lots of muslims that they formed their religion police and patrol the streets, while still now they say to no muslims polite not to drink alcohol that will not be the case soon

muslim have their own court systems , rum by muslims under sharia law and deliver justice between them at that courts, the laws of the country DO NOT APPLY TO THEM, a muslim in germany married a 14 year old girl which is ILLEGAL but the court said it is custom to his culture and let him free

THATS WHY UK left the union because they think they can address the immigration problem better

anyway even if that was not the case historical speaking the british are alway anti Europeans, and because of that the relationships between EU and UK where and always be problematic

You can not have someone in a union that really does not want to be in a union

UK wanted to have the best part of the Union without any obligation which can not happen in real world

as for Norway the scandinavian countries have formed the scandinavian union long before the EU, with free movement of people, goods

when the union was transformed into the EU of today they was a question what about Norway!??!??! and because of the Scandinavian union, the Norway end up to get all the good of the union with no obligations

and this is the 3rd time Uk betrays the union
Great Britain was a full member of a much earlier version of the union, then they left completely. The union stay firm and start growing and down the line Great Britain ask to enter again in the union. And then was revenge time for german and france. There is a region of france called britany , so france said FRANCE WILL NOT ACCEPT ANY COUNTRY IN THE UNION THAT HAS TERRITORIAL CLAIMS TO OUR LANDS, meaning great britain name is a dirct claim to their national land. So the proub british had to change their country name to ente rin the union and thus United Kingdom was born.

Do you find it funny that now in europe that UK is out everyoen is calling it again Great Britain. lol

http://resources.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk/customs/questions/britain.html


GB <> UK...