BREXIT THE MOVIE
- Thread starter Tony1874
- Start date
- Jul 27, 2013
- 178
- 106
I love those spoof documentaries but not as funny as Spinal Tap.
- Jun 24, 2013
- 3,399
- 2,345
A credit to the concept of crowd-funding, but that's about all.
I do love a good stereotype ... pity there weren't any good ones in there: from Englishmen unable to communicate with foreign taxi drivers, through Frenchmen with berets and stripey jerseys (not forgetting the onions), to 'Asians' excelling at maths. Almost Pythonesque.
Let's retreat into our national bubble, and then we can all celebrate by buying BMWs and Mercedes.
I do love a good stereotype ... pity there weren't any good ones in there: from Englishmen unable to communicate with foreign taxi drivers, through Frenchmen with berets and stripey jerseys (not forgetting the onions), to 'Asians' excelling at maths. Almost Pythonesque.
Let's retreat into our national bubble, and then we can all celebrate by buying BMWs and Mercedes.
- May 21, 2014
- 836
- 486
Good! We will still trade with the countries in it anyway but more importantly we will be able to with the rest of the world and make our own decisions. The EU will probably disband completely if we leave and all countries in it will be left to themselves like it used to be. I'll be voting out for sure, I would love to see us have our sovereignty back and have full control over our own laws, borders etc. The EU has been an experiment worth trying but for me it hasn't worked and never will do.
- Aug 4, 2013
- 1,157
- 563
Hope your right, Pete.
- Aug 2, 2013
- 443
- 454
Frankly I'd rather stick pins down my toe-nails rather than listen and watch this pompous, racist, bigoted, egotist, elitist former stockbroker who gives the impression that he is a 'man of the people' when he is an arrogant, very rich and self-centered buffoon.
Yes, we could all feel warm and cuddly by joining Mad Boris's and Donald 'Farage' Duck's 'Little Englander' society in reaction to all those nasty Belgians, Frenchies, Krauts and the rest who have made us cow tow to all these bad European Laws.
Goodness me, how thing have changed since 1940!
But what is not reported in the Daily Snail or Sexpress are the EU Regulations - such as those regarding the management of Road Tunnels which followed the tragic Mont Blanc tunnel fire in 1999 - that have now significantly improved the safety and management of such assets across the UK and Europe.
I could cite many more examples (workers rights, environmental protection laws etc), all of which have made this country a better place.
And we can all hop on to a Ryanair and Easyjet flight for diddly-squat to wherever we want, but do we realise that this is largely down to the EU free skies policy and freedom of movement?
Ask yourself why Michael O'Leary - CEO of Ryanair and a non UK National - is so against Brexit?
I'm not saying that the EU is perfect - far from it: it is in need of serious reform. But better to be a major player inside of the organisation trying to influence things than being outside shouting, throwing things against a wall and being ignored.
So come 23rd June, all I would ask is not to think a little bit wider than the populist advice and headlines spouted by the likes of the gutter press and sensationalist politicians
Atticus. Thank you for what some would say was a balanced and considered post on the above issue. Regrettably, too many voters will" not think a little wider" as you advocate. They may be swayed with the views of the likes of Michael O'Leary and many others from outside our shores, who have a vested interest in the "in " vote. The same applies to many of our own MPs (of which there are far too many) most of whom have little experience of proper work and incredibly are allowed to dictate ridiculous policies to our Captains of Industry. As a Country, we survived successfully for a long period of time without the dictates from the unelected Brussels bureaucrats (or is it Strasbourg this week) and I see little point in having our own Parliament and House of Lords, who are quite capable of making the same sort of barmy decisions as those coming out of Brussels.How many years is it now, that the EU Accounts have remained unaudited ? Of course, there would seem to be a large concensus of our politicians who are advocating "In". No wonder, when in the event they are kicked out of Parliament, they have a ready made retirement home in Brussels, with extremely generous pay, pension entitlements and expenses.
The vote should be made in the light of all the available information. I'm afraid that the "in" crowd led by "call me Dave" do not want the electorate to know the true facts about, inter alia, our loss of sovereignty and control of our borders. There is a huge amount of scaremongering promoted by Cameron about what will happen if we vote "Out". I do not like being bullied or treated like a fool, even though I can behave like one at times. Why is there is a huge discrepancy between the official numbers of migrants and the number of applications for Social Security documentation?. No one knows for certain what effect these huge numbers will have on eg our Housing and Health Services. How many of the migrants allowed into Germany by Chancellor Merkel will be made German citizens and, in due course, find their way to Britain, with no check on their status?. It is a fair bet that a significant portion will have the potential to cause mayhem in Britain, as we have seen recently in Paris and Brussels. Not all will come on the basis of refusing our generous Social benefits and being willing to integrate fully into our culture..
It's time to regain control of our own destiny and get out of this failed experiment. If we vote "Out", will BMW and Mercedes etc refuse to trade with us if we are out of Europe ? The idea is absurd. We should re-establish many of the trading links we used to have with the rest of the World. Many of us have witnessed the misuse of EU monies on grand schemes in Europe, usually for the self promotion of local politicians and others. We should vote "Out" and use the considerable savings on worthwhile Projects at home and abroad where we can excercise proper control of the expenditure.
The vote should be made in the light of all the available information. I'm afraid that the "in" crowd led by "call me Dave" do not want the electorate to know the true facts about, inter alia, our loss of sovereignty and control of our borders. There is a huge amount of scaremongering promoted by Cameron about what will happen if we vote "Out". I do not like being bullied or treated like a fool, even though I can behave like one at times. Why is there is a huge discrepancy between the official numbers of migrants and the number of applications for Social Security documentation?. No one knows for certain what effect these huge numbers will have on eg our Housing and Health Services. How many of the migrants allowed into Germany by Chancellor Merkel will be made German citizens and, in due course, find their way to Britain, with no check on their status?. It is a fair bet that a significant portion will have the potential to cause mayhem in Britain, as we have seen recently in Paris and Brussels. Not all will come on the basis of refusing our generous Social benefits and being willing to integrate fully into our culture..
It's time to regain control of our own destiny and get out of this failed experiment. If we vote "Out", will BMW and Mercedes etc refuse to trade with us if we are out of Europe ? The idea is absurd. We should re-establish many of the trading links we used to have with the rest of the World. Many of us have witnessed the misuse of EU monies on grand schemes in Europe, usually for the self promotion of local politicians and others. We should vote "Out" and use the considerable savings on worthwhile Projects at home and abroad where we can excercise proper control of the expenditure.
- Jun 24, 2013
- 3,399
- 2,345
Those last 6 words are never going to happen whether in or out. There are enough examples of money being wasted on "projects" by our own national and local governments to fill a rather weighty book. Just look at the perennial reorganisation of the NHS by successive administrations.
The trouble with the Leave campaigners (well, one of the troubles) is that they can't seem to agree what it is that we would spend all our new-found wealth on. The farmers will still get all the subsidies. The NHS will get the money it needs, The deficit will get paid off. The Northern Powerhouse will become more than a glint in Osborne's eye. And so on. Nobody has made all the figures add up.
As for the sudden flood of "German" refugees, can we please stop adding to the scaremongering? There is enough of it already on both sides. I happen by profession to have a very clear understanding of this bit, and in simple terms, refugees in Germany have an initial 2-year "asylum-seeker" status, at the end of which the authorities check whether their country of origin is now safe or not. If not, they have a further three years probationary residence status, at the end of which the same checks are carried out. If by that point they have regular employment, a command of the language, and certified knowledge of German society and institutions (like our Citizenship Test), they can begin the process of applying for citizenship. This requires a period of residence (as opposed to being an asylum seeker) of a minimum of 8 years. Do the maths.
The same applies to the fears about millions of Turkish citizens suddenly deciding to come to the UK, as our oh-so-reliable media try to tell us. If (and it is still "if") the Schengen countries agree to offer visa-free entry to Turkish citizens in return for their assistance with the refugee crisis, this applies to the Schengen countries only, and we are not one of them.
As for Michael Gove's vision of massed Albanians at our borders, do I need to deign to comment on that piece of nonsense?
The simple fact that EU migrants in the UK make a significant net financial contribution to the national income of the UK via taxes, NI, and mere wealth creation gets ignored amidst tales of leaches on our social infrastructure which are often quite distasteful. Of course our schools and health service are creaking at the seams, but that is the result of constant funding cuts to schools - lots of govt emphasis on "preserving" budget levels, but preserving does not mean increasing, even in line with inflation, while running costs continue to go up, and nobody mentions that preserving only applies up to 16, while post-16 education has suffered huge cuts - and our annoying tendency to live longer and expect to receive treatment in line with advances in medical science (but not to think that the resources need expanding to cope with this). Of course there is a lack of affordable housing - but then I am old enough to remember Thatcher's sell-off of council houses and her refusal to allow councils to use the proceeds to build more (echoes of the suggestion that now housing associations should do something similar), and I live in an area where there is a high percentage of "second homes" and ridiculously high private rents considering that one of the key employment sectors is hospitality and tourism, which offer notoriously low-wage jobs, many of which are seasonal.
Please don't blame the EU for everything. By all means criticise its profligacy, its bureacracy and its snail-like approach to any ideas of reform, but don't throw out the baby with the bath water. If you do, consider the prospect of a future UK government led by the likes of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Iain Duncan-Smith, with the support of Nigel Farage. Now there's a scaremongering thought.
The trouble with the Leave campaigners (well, one of the troubles) is that they can't seem to agree what it is that we would spend all our new-found wealth on. The farmers will still get all the subsidies. The NHS will get the money it needs, The deficit will get paid off. The Northern Powerhouse will become more than a glint in Osborne's eye. And so on. Nobody has made all the figures add up.
As for the sudden flood of "German" refugees, can we please stop adding to the scaremongering? There is enough of it already on both sides. I happen by profession to have a very clear understanding of this bit, and in simple terms, refugees in Germany have an initial 2-year "asylum-seeker" status, at the end of which the authorities check whether their country of origin is now safe or not. If not, they have a further three years probationary residence status, at the end of which the same checks are carried out. If by that point they have regular employment, a command of the language, and certified knowledge of German society and institutions (like our Citizenship Test), they can begin the process of applying for citizenship. This requires a period of residence (as opposed to being an asylum seeker) of a minimum of 8 years. Do the maths.
The same applies to the fears about millions of Turkish citizens suddenly deciding to come to the UK, as our oh-so-reliable media try to tell us. If (and it is still "if") the Schengen countries agree to offer visa-free entry to Turkish citizens in return for their assistance with the refugee crisis, this applies to the Schengen countries only, and we are not one of them.
As for Michael Gove's vision of massed Albanians at our borders, do I need to deign to comment on that piece of nonsense?
The simple fact that EU migrants in the UK make a significant net financial contribution to the national income of the UK via taxes, NI, and mere wealth creation gets ignored amidst tales of leaches on our social infrastructure which are often quite distasteful. Of course our schools and health service are creaking at the seams, but that is the result of constant funding cuts to schools - lots of govt emphasis on "preserving" budget levels, but preserving does not mean increasing, even in line with inflation, while running costs continue to go up, and nobody mentions that preserving only applies up to 16, while post-16 education has suffered huge cuts - and our annoying tendency to live longer and expect to receive treatment in line with advances in medical science (but not to think that the resources need expanding to cope with this). Of course there is a lack of affordable housing - but then I am old enough to remember Thatcher's sell-off of council houses and her refusal to allow councils to use the proceeds to build more (echoes of the suggestion that now housing associations should do something similar), and I live in an area where there is a high percentage of "second homes" and ridiculously high private rents considering that one of the key employment sectors is hospitality and tourism, which offer notoriously low-wage jobs, many of which are seasonal.
Please don't blame the EU for everything. By all means criticise its profligacy, its bureacracy and its snail-like approach to any ideas of reform, but don't throw out the baby with the bath water. If you do, consider the prospect of a future UK government led by the likes of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Iain Duncan-Smith, with the support of Nigel Farage. Now there's a scaremongering thought.
Thank you Alan for your views. I bow to your expert knowledge of the regulations regarding timescales for the immigration of peoples into Germany. I have a lot of sympathy for those unfortunate people who have been forced to flee their homeland and believe we should help them in as humane a way as is possible. On the other side of the coin, however, it is a fact that some of those who have been admitted, who are intent on making trouble, will pay scant regard for the rules and regulations to which you refer. "Doing the maths" is irrelevant in the case of these people.
The scaremongering to which you refer and to which you which you say we should stop adding, is happening on both sides of the campaign and was, I believe, started by the "In" camp. I find it ironic that you end your note with a further reference to scaremongering. At least with those named individuals we can vote them out of office. It's called democracy, as opposed to those many unelected Brussels/Strasbourg officials who are dictating laws and regulations to us. Since majority voting was introduced in the EU in the 1980s, the UK has voted against proposed EU legislation 70 times and lost 70 times!. So much for our influence within Europe and I see no chance that the rest of the EU will absorb even the minor concessions negotiated by Cameron.
It is clear that, as I stated previously, there are many vested interest people and bodies who are trying to influence the vote. Do we trust our elected representatives to tell us the truth ? I have no such vested interest but, I would like to aim for a fair and just system for all and that would include the utopian idea of disbursing monies saved from our non membership of the EU to worthy causes determined by us. Impossible to achieve maybe, but still worth the trying.
The scaremongering to which you refer and to which you which you say we should stop adding, is happening on both sides of the campaign and was, I believe, started by the "In" camp. I find it ironic that you end your note with a further reference to scaremongering. At least with those named individuals we can vote them out of office. It's called democracy, as opposed to those many unelected Brussels/Strasbourg officials who are dictating laws and regulations to us. Since majority voting was introduced in the EU in the 1980s, the UK has voted against proposed EU legislation 70 times and lost 70 times!. So much for our influence within Europe and I see no chance that the rest of the EU will absorb even the minor concessions negotiated by Cameron.
It is clear that, as I stated previously, there are many vested interest people and bodies who are trying to influence the vote. Do we trust our elected representatives to tell us the truth ? I have no such vested interest but, I would like to aim for a fair and just system for all and that would include the utopian idea of disbursing monies saved from our non membership of the EU to worthy causes determined by us. Impossible to achieve maybe, but still worth the trying.
- Jun 24, 2013
- 3,399
- 2,345
- May 21, 2014
- 836
- 486
I have today received my 2016 EU Referendum Voting Guide from the electoral commission (which I assume everyone else has too!). Whilst it is not overly informative it does give a balanced view and a page each for both sides to have their say. Whilst no-one can realistically predict if we will be better off in or our out economically the Sovereignty issue will probably be the deciding factor for me. Whilst I am open minded, and could still be swayed the other way, the Guide has confirmed my gut feeling that we will be better off out*
*Unless I can be convinced otherwise, which I have not been so far!
FYI Alan - if Brexit does win it does not necessarily mean that the likes of Johnson, Gove, Farage et al will lead the country thereafter. Another party may win the next General Election, which is after the EU vote. Just saying.
*Unless I can be convinced otherwise, which I have not been so far!
FYI Alan - if Brexit does win it does not necessarily mean that the likes of Johnson, Gove, Farage et al will lead the country thereafter. Another party may win the next General Election, which is after the EU vote. Just saying.
- Jun 24, 2013
- 3,399
- 2,345
Like everything, it is unpredictable, I agree.
But I'd lay odds on Cameron not surviving long if he loses this vote, and anyway he has said he'll step down before the next election. With Osborne then tainted with the same 'loser' epithet, his chances of succeeding his next-door neighbour will be dealt a bit of a blow, leaving Johnson and Gove as the frontrunners. Johnson is playing the long game with his conversion to the 'leave' camp.
Mind you, I find the prospect of Osborne as PM equally depressing.
But I'd lay odds on Cameron not surviving long if he loses this vote, and anyway he has said he'll step down before the next election. With Osborne then tainted with the same 'loser' epithet, his chances of succeeding his next-door neighbour will be dealt a bit of a blow, leaving Johnson and Gove as the frontrunners. Johnson is playing the long game with his conversion to the 'leave' camp.
Mind you, I find the prospect of Osborne as PM equally depressing.
- Aug 4, 2013
- 1,157
- 563
I find Alan's " considered" viewpoint rather puzzling, clearly must have a involvement somwhere !. What I voted for in 1975 (?) was a "Common Market" with all the Countries of Europe trading within that agreement. I did not vote for the devious activities of a few members of Parliament to throw away my heritage in order to ensure a delightful future with a "cushy" life for them within that setup in the future.
The sooner we are out of this total "SCAM" the better it will be for all of our future generations of our "Little Englander's".
Truthtfully I have not spoken to one of my many contacts who will be voting to remain with Cameron and his bunch !!.
The sooner we are out of this total "SCAM" the better it will be for all of our future generations of our "Little Englander's".
Truthtfully I have not spoken to one of my many contacts who will be voting to remain with Cameron and his bunch !!.
- May 21, 2014
- 836
- 486
Why are you basing your argument on an Irishman, with a very vested interest in the UK, to not leave the EU? Why do you think he wants us to stay in it have you thought of that?! All the Irish friends I have say committing to Europe and the EU is the worst thing their country has ever done! Financially disastrous and almost a melt down as bad as Greece. Personally I'm quite happy to get a train or another airline on holiday and sacrifice Mr O'Leary's generous offers if this is one of the "benefits" of remaining in the EU. Woopy do
Last edited:
- Jun 24, 2013
- 3,399
- 2,345
I would also not regard Ryanair as a reason to stay in the EU, as I find that man pretty insufferable, although I will concede that his company's rise has brought about considerable benefits to those flying around Europe on other airlines. And that was a result of European deregulation. Otherwise you'd still be coughing up hundreds of pounds to BA to fly to Paris etc.
In a world where people think nothing of hopping on a plane for a few days away, being in the EU has brought untold little benefits to travellers. I for one have lived and worked in 4 other EU countries since the 70s without any bureaucratic nightmares to negotiate, and frequently nip to various EU locations for work purposes, and there are a few million UK citizens currently living elsewhere in the EU doing just the same. On top of that, young people are able to choose from the whole range of universities and other educational institutions throughout the EU - including taking advantage of free university education in eg the Netherlands and Sweden, thus escaping some of the mountain of debt which university education in the UK can leave you with.
I would like my grandchildren to have the same chances as me to live and work across the EU if they want, and the same chances as my daughter to sample education (and life) in another country. I shall be voting to preserve those opportunities for future generations, rather than worrying about what's in it for me personally, as I've been there, done that and got a drawer full of the t-shirts.
PS. The Irish mistake - and the Greek mistake - was to join the Euro, not to join the EU. That experiment was never going to work with the mix of countries and national economies that were brought into the unified currency regime. It might have stood a chance if they'd stuck to just the major economies, but expecting outposts like Greece, Portugal and Ireland to align their economies without aligning their fiscal policies with the likes of Germany and France was doomed to failure from the start. And even Germany is regretting it because they see that as the strongest economy they are caught between a rock and a hard place - spend a fortune of German taxpayers' money to bale out struggling Euro states, or suffer a massive drop in export earnings and a significant hit to their own economy if those countries exit the Euro and re-establish their own significantly devalued currency.
In a world where people think nothing of hopping on a plane for a few days away, being in the EU has brought untold little benefits to travellers. I for one have lived and worked in 4 other EU countries since the 70s without any bureaucratic nightmares to negotiate, and frequently nip to various EU locations for work purposes, and there are a few million UK citizens currently living elsewhere in the EU doing just the same. On top of that, young people are able to choose from the whole range of universities and other educational institutions throughout the EU - including taking advantage of free university education in eg the Netherlands and Sweden, thus escaping some of the mountain of debt which university education in the UK can leave you with.
I would like my grandchildren to have the same chances as me to live and work across the EU if they want, and the same chances as my daughter to sample education (and life) in another country. I shall be voting to preserve those opportunities for future generations, rather than worrying about what's in it for me personally, as I've been there, done that and got a drawer full of the t-shirts.
PS. The Irish mistake - and the Greek mistake - was to join the Euro, not to join the EU. That experiment was never going to work with the mix of countries and national economies that were brought into the unified currency regime. It might have stood a chance if they'd stuck to just the major economies, but expecting outposts like Greece, Portugal and Ireland to align their economies without aligning their fiscal policies with the likes of Germany and France was doomed to failure from the start. And even Germany is regretting it because they see that as the strongest economy they are caught between a rock and a hard place - spend a fortune of German taxpayers' money to bale out struggling Euro states, or suffer a massive drop in export earnings and a significant hit to their own economy if those countries exit the Euro and re-establish their own significantly devalued currency.
Last edited: