Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

Cyn,

You are as charming as per usual.

One of the signs of dementia is becoming less inhibited and the onset can be seen in some at an earlier age than in others.

This leads to a state of over-valuation of self and insensitivity to others and the surrounding.

Sometimes, such individuals, if they recognise the symptoms are able to modify their responses.

Others are trapped in their patterns of behaviour and remain oblivious.

Just an observation or thought.

But, I do recognise the development my own slight imperfections.

Hope you chicken liver pate is the right colour.

pinkish of course ..... i dare say with mould it might go blue and woolly, which could then be fed to the favoured few

getting back to the eu debate, i re-post 20749 which, despite fred getting very hot hot under the collar re some of the phrasing (i make no apology), i think brings the issue back into focus, and it would be good to hear the views of others ....

"getting back to renegotiating the treaty with EU ......

i find it very interesting that even germany is supporting the idea of a robust debate on this very serious issue.

whereas the likes of germany, france and others are unable for both psychological and political reasons, to be critical of the treaty as it stands, the uk, because of its long history of vocal dissent, can easily take up that cudgel ...... this then gives the other countries an excuse to bow to at least some of the uk demands, using the excuse of "reluctant, but in the interests of continued unity"

when it comes to a referendum - let's hope the question is put sensibly for once! - i suspect that if there are no concessions at all, then i shall vote "out", though the arguments at the time may lead me to vote differently

the "great unwashed" will almost certainly vote "out" but without having really thought it all through ..... as my late father-in-law said back in 1973, "they're only interested in what will happen to the price of butter"

"while others will think of the depth of their pockets."
===============.

If, which I doubt, Cameron is doing the "negotiating", then he will "blink".
-------------------------

But the hype at the moment about "negotiations" is again PR for his own party's consumption.

Review of treaties, pacts, regulations, rules etc. are due for review, reconsider in 2015 as one would expect.

My personal feelings are the UK needs the EU more than the EU needs the UK.
Going into negotiations tub thumping, usually ends up with the participants leaving with empty hands.

My guess that the UK will be still be in the EU which will be more fiscally and politically integrated.

But name specifically which rules, or regulations you would like to change, or consider “unfair” to the “UK”.

Also, which groups are likely to benefit from the changes, or moderation.

It is strange, that many, who wish to “break away” from the “EU”, wish to keep Britain “united” in spite of it consisting of four different nationalities.

(Using the same and opposite arguments.)
-----------


PS.

You could always take a bath!

on the face of it, you may be right about UK needing EU more than the reverse ..... however, i think it is a bit more subtle than that ..... i think that most of the major players (countries) recognise that there are swathes of regulations and rules and allowances that are in need of radical overhaul, and with the uk battling on that front, they can accept at least some changes while masquerading that it is all in the cause of retaining unity ..... of course, the MEPs won't want to do anything that will upset their fat personal budgets and allowances, any more than local gov't will accept that cuts could and should mean removal of many of its plush offices and layers of over-manned bureaucracy

obvious and easy targets will be fishing quotas, restrictive work hours and with luck, restriction of some of the freedom of movement to work nonsense (aka immigration as of right) and some of the excessive interference by European courts

without actually doing anything, the major countries can very easily agree to hold talks about talks about all/any of the above issues and others .... that will create an illusion of some acceptance to reform and all country leaders can go home with something that is easily sold to their voters

if Cameron can come home with some actual meat on the bones, albeit that it may be a bit peripheral or even ephemeral, then he can pursue with reasonable justification his campaign to keep UK within EU

EU really cannot afford UK to pull out, for all sorts of good and psychological reasons .... you only have to look at the economic pandemonium that ensued when it was suggested that greece, let alone portugal, spain and ireland as well, would need to be expelled


i know the above is pretty simplistic, but it's good as i can do quickly and without breaking my self-imposed rules on brevity

I agree with much of what your post 20791.

I think that the efficiency of EU has to be improved.

The cost and "gravy train aspects" and expenses should be addressed.

I cannot see why the various “legislative bodies” have to be in institutions “scattered” around Europe. I can understand the “political” reasons for this being done initially, but think some of it is probably a waste of money and in that the EU is reasonably establish much of the "institutions" (blocks of concrete and dinning rooms) could be pruned back on an efficiency and cost savings basis.

The political needs could be justified against cost to the public in general.
Administration at a local level (country) should be borne directly by the individual countries concerned.

Doing the above may cut cost and improve efficiency, but wouldn’t think too many MEPS or their “colleagues” would like it to happen.

“obvious and easy targets will be fishing quotas, restrictive work hours and with luck, restriction of some of the freedom of movement to work nonsense (aka immigration as of right) and some of the excessive interference by European courts”

I will think about these areas which you have mentioned, but in a way think of them as minor or teething problems to be modified and the content is more emotional than actual (badly worded, but want to get back to next week’s targets).

-------

I like simplifying things, but this B World ain't simple.

Especially, if you have the responsibility without the authority.

8-)

if you want something much more contentious, try tackling the french on their hopelessly inefficient farming methods and the huge subsidies they require/demand

fishing really is not simple at all, not least because countries buy licences from each other, and certainly the likes of the spanish are appallingly profligate and rip out all the fish they can and devil take the hindmost .... time to revive the icelandic cod wars, or the updated version of same!

The latter is the need for "central European court".

The referendum has little to do with trade. The Conservatives have always liked the trade aspects of the EU. The areas that cause problems are the creeping centralist regulations and legislation, and the trend towards federalism.

Labour promised a referendum on the changes to the EU treaty but the treaty changes were scrapped. When the changes were reanimated Labour refused the referendum on the basis that the Lisbon treaty was different. Of course it wasn't and they knew it. Cameron was then unable to have a referendum as the Lisbon treaty had given away our veto on changes and legislation.

A lot of people are in favour of membership of a trading bloc but NOT a United States of Europe. The trend towards federalism is largely a goal of the various socialist parties.

I am a big fan of the EU as a trading bloc. It was called "The Common Market" for a good reason. Without a change in our relationship with the EU, I will vote to leave.

how big a change and in what specific aspects would make you change your vote?
do you think uk will be allowed to cherry pick?

i fear the federalist bogeyman will be glossed over - i.e. it will be ignored in the pretence it does not exist, when of course we all know it does

Both,

As can be seen I am in general in favour of greater integration into EU and will try to process my thoughts why.

But as long as negotiations in the EU is done with the interest of the EU as a whole and for the long term betterment of the whole, I would go along with minor "discomforts".

Also, having somebody blustering their way to the table and demanding the best cuts to be theirs, backed up by the threat that they will go home if they don't have all that they want does not seem the best way to enthuse the others at the party.

From the little I know, and the Europeans I have met, there appears to be a greater feeling for and enthusiasm of being "Europeans" and for the "European Cause and Greater Integration". Much of the politics of the UK seems to be based on blowing up of misinformation, narrow self-interest (I think some to do with the Financial Markets) and the prejudices of little Englanders.

I can understand why the French might be beastly to us.

I wonder in future what the European Contracts for Armaments, Engineering R&D will look like if we are outside the market.

Family and neighbours come first when negotiation are carried out. Same currency, laws and rules lubricate deals when they are made.

The USA works in generally very efficiently generally.

I get the impression that there are several countries that are unhappy with all the central control. We may trigger a general discussion about the long term future of the EU. The use of the Euro was not thought out adequately. It has become obvious that the Euro needs there to be more central control over the members' budgets. Interest rates are centrally controlled but countries are free to spend how they wish. To join the Euro there were strict convergence criteria such as inflation, deficit and interest rates. Of course once a country joined, the criteria could not be policed. Countries like Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal and Ireland spent like there no tomorrow. Within a short time from joining, these countries would not meet the joining criteria.

There are now only two solution to the Euro problem. One is to scrap the Euro and the other is federalism or at least central control of members' treasuries.

i think, but cannot prove, that there is a great deal of unrest within the eurozone ..... the general populace of countries like nl, france, germany and belgium (and uk) are very uncomfortable with the influx of foreign (other eu nationals) workers when unemployment among their own citizens is rising rapidly

like most people over here, i think you will find they are also appalled by the appalling greed and unaccountability of the MEPs .... they can see the way they swan from brussels to strasbourg in their chauffeured limos, stay in the best hotels, and eat at the best restaurants - and do bugger all for their fat pay cheques except work out how to spend more money on some un-needed building or set of offices in some trendy quarter or "case study" of something totally irrelevant

I would accept the latter.

All organisation have internal and external problems.

One hopes one can change, modify, admit the mistakes regarding internal administration and adjust the external environment. Preying on your neighbour for a quick buck in the long term is less rewarding.

Europe is beginning to think that is what the UK is trying to do.

(The necessary changes can be made, already the majority of the Europeans are speaking English. 8-) )

Cyn,

Sounds like they have the same opinion of traders.

==========

Immigration has its problems. I know when I was a student about 55 years ago I believed in the free flow of people and removal of interstate boundaries, but never saw that migration would be on the present scale, or promote the problems which it is doing.

I talk about this with my daughter and every time we consider a good solutions we find all the weaknesses.

Possibly, if the EU succeeds economically, then the reasons for European migration at the present levels may lessen.

But your "parents" and many of my wife's family migrated here for political and economic reasons.

Difficult to tell another's family that they are not permitted to come in.

more tomorrow, but suffice it for now to say that times change

The UK certainly needs Germany - but Germany also need us, and I'm sure that both parties would reach an agreement whereby they continued to enjoy that trade regardless of whether we were in or out.

And I've got to admit that Club Med anchovies and olives are incomparable, so we'd need to ensure their supply is uninterrupted if we quit.

I do like France - it's just a shame it's full of the French.

Otherwise, I'm pretty sure that I wouldn't miss anything to do with Bulgaria or Romania, so I'll have a wash and then vote 'out'.

op osborne was on cnbc talking to sky news
he was grinning and smiling that he had taken money off pensioners
and making workers work longer .
and the report said that many would not reach pension age
osborne just smiled . horrible person is osborne

op BUY MRW UNDER VALUED BY 50P

fred - i can't remember, but wasn't your opening comment that you would vote NO? .... if so, that seems to have changed

anyway, back to my last observation yesterday ....
when both sets of grandparents came to this country at the very beginning of 20th century, i don't think there would have been any restriction at all, but then nor was there any state support or benefits.

by ww2, it was not easy to gain entry even for political asylum (the jews) and at the very least you needed sponsorship to show that you would not be leaning on the state for economic support

the west indian community was invited over from 1948 through early 50s (read about The Windrush) as the uk's labour force had been shredded once again by a devastating war. By that time, there was a fledgling NHS and i guess some other types of state support .... however, it should not be forgotten that jamaica and others were part of the commonwealth who, at that time, had automatic right of entry

this automatic right of entry was withdrawn within (say) the last 30 years (can't remember), and certainly there was a huge outcry when the hk chinese were refused except "by invitation"

however, the eu rules have opened an oil-tanker of problems with every tomasz (sorry of that name :-)), goran and ljuban now being allowed to come and work and/or to work the system to get housing, healthcare, unemployment benefit etc ..... this cannot be right when so many of our own youngsters (especially) cannot get jobs, let alone housing, no matter how hard they try

assuredly i am not suggesting a blanket ban on immigration, but i do believe that economic tests and other point system devices should be firmly implemented

sorry to be so long-winded