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.

TIM.

Compared with whom, and what is the your bases for defining me as such?

Also what is your definition of an idiot.

This seems a reasonable definition

An idiot, dolt, or dullard is a mentally deficient person, or someone who acts in a self-defeating or significantly counterproductive way.

"self defeating or significantly counter productive way" is interesting, I wonder, how many of those who know me, would apply that to me.

I suppose a few, but not many.

.

A. Darling states that as we are not in the Euro we aren't contributing to the Greek bailout, wonder how much that would have cost us under the Lib Dems, and with possible bailouts to come for other struggling countries, best we stay out, IMV
2517

But when it comes to our yearly EU contribution, I wonder how much it will increase by. So I agree we will not be contributing directly, but as ever if you belong, you pay in the long run. But I do fully agree it would be far worse if we had joined the Euro.
Like most who voted for joining the 'Common Market' as it was known, I was all for less red tape when it came to trade and the reducing of trade barriers. But as we all know the original concept to which we agreed has been altered by general nibbling away at the edges that it is no longer recognisable, the last such nibble (more like a big bite) was the Lisbon Treaty.
The first move from a Common Market was the start of when I lost all faith in anything a Politician tells me. We were well and truly conned, and that 'con' is continuing.
We should leave. Many will argue that if we did leave that would be the finish of the UK, but we could still trade. There are many countries that trade with Europe that are not tried to it. The main reason that politicians scare the electorate with horror stories of what would happen if we withdrew our membership, is because they want to leave an opening for membership of this 'Gravy Train' club should they wish to be MEP's.
The bottom line is we joined to benefit. I feel we had been in negative, benefit territory for years.

We are also paying because the Euro is sinking due to Greece and the Pound is being dragged down by it.

greek: In 1973 we were told we were voting for a free trade area - but Ted Heath et al later admitted that they knew exactly what they were taking us in to - a Federal Europe. They also admitted that they had deliberately misled the British public because thay knew the public wouldn't go for it.

I suspect that it is too late to leave, but as our resistance to the Euro shows, we can have our cake and eat it. We were right to stay out of that, otherwise we'd quite definitely be down the tubes with the rest of the PIGS.

Morning MightyMiro,

Totally agree with your first paragraph, and partly with your second, as I do not feel it is too late to leave.
Eventually if the EU does not crumble due to the Pigs situation, they will be bringing out even more Federational/Dictorial type rules as their eventual aim must be a Federal Europe, with a central total ruling body. We will then have a situation where separate counties governments will be similar to town councils with only a few powers that do not impinge on the big decisions that will be made in Brussels. This would result in Germany with support from their puppet France making other EU members nothing more than a principalities without a sovereign head of state.

Strange that the EU is the only Confederation or States that is going toward central ruling, as when you look at other similar situations they have either gone (the Balkans) or moving away from (USSR). If people are worried about a hung parliament due to the fact that it if far more difficult to reach decisions, how come many of the same people feel that a parliament of 27 countries, (and growing) with all their different beliefs, cultures and traditions can reach consensuses of opinion that benefit the members as a whole, instead of benefits of individual self progression.

.

The original aim of the EU was indeed to be a federal Europe. Years ago I was reading the newspapers in Italy and it was implied in every word written. There was much less reaction to it since Europeans do feel European unlike the Brits. However the difference in what the European newspapers thought the EU was about and what the UK newspapers thought was very striking. I realised years ago that the Brits had no idea was what going on.

After the whole failed referendum thing the EU has tempered its aims somewhat and I don't think that there would be any major inroads into UK sovereignty after Lisbon, which was difficult enough to push through (not only in the UK). The climate in the whole of Europe has changed. The only way they did it was by not calling the treaty a Constitutional Treaty and not merging all the treaties into one constitution, although the legislation is pretty much the same.

However, I have had to study EU law recently and make no mistake about it, EU laws take precedence over UK laws. The UK parliament can pass laws that conflict with EU law, but without in effect pulling out of the EU by repealing the European Communities Act 1972, they would be ignored by UK courts.

To be honest, I think it was only partly blatant lying by politicians at the time. I suspect that they may have been trying to have their cake and eat it too, or perhaps they didn't think about it enough. What happened was that the UK courts, being logical and law abiding bodies, held that there was no point in writing legislation holding that the UK was subject to EU law unless it meant precisely that. At the same time, the EU courts were dogmatic in reaching the same decision for all countries of the EU (European Court of Justice decisions are effective in the UK without further enactment).

If the UK tried to pass UK laws that conflicted with the EU without repealing the EC Act 1972, UK courts might, depending on the circumstances, recognise that the UK parliament had ceased to want to submit to the laws of the EU, but it would trigger a legal crisis until it was sorted out, since the courts would not know which EU law was effective and which not.

The legal debate as to whether the UK has or has not given up sovereignty has been going on for years and the best answer is that it has because it has chosen to. Theoretically there is no legal way of withdrawing from the EU. That is because the EC Act 1972 says that EU law overrides past and future UK legislation, and so theoretically, parliament could pass a law repealing the EC Act, but that would be ignored too.

The practical answer though is that if Parliament changed its mind, the Supreme Court would be very unlikely to stand against it.

Just receive this interesting E-mail from Gausie, whom I squelched over twelve months ago, as I thought his posting generally abusive about me, and equally abusive to others, when he disagreed with them. I saw no reason to be observant of what I saw, as deliberate attempts to be unpleasant.

A short time ago, I received the E-mail below from him, suggesting that I had made veiled threats to other BB posters.


I am not aware of making any such threatening remark, within the last twenty years or so, but I am interested to know, if anybody has felt personally threatened by any of my postings, on this thread, or any other Moneyam thread.


If so, and you draw my attention to such, I will reconsider the remarks.


However, I consider the content of the E-mail (see below), is deliberately unpleasant and abusive and is covertly threatening.


It seems to me that some posters are intolerant to views, or opinions, which do not concur with their own.


One can see why there is so much violence in the world.


(Of course, my opinion is not necessarily correct.)

========================================


This email has been sent via the MoneyAM Website (http://www.moneyam.com)


To reply to this email you will need to go to the MoneyAM Bulletin Boards
and click on the name of the user that sent you this email and then click
the 'message button'.


The following message was sent by Gausie:
http://www.moneyam.com/InvestorsRoom/profile.php?user=Gausie

-------------------------------------------------------------------------




You're a tosser.



I suggest you don't make veiled threats to other BB posters. What goes
around comes around.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

In order to change your contact options, please visit your profile at
http://www.moneyam.com/profile.php

Mnamreh,

You say. "With 7Bn humans on the planet and rising, how high does anyone want the barricades? It is not feasible to close the door".

Why is it. Just leave the EU (apart from trade) and just say No More. We should be the masters of our own country not servants of others.

Kayak,

I do agree. Although it will eventually come to a point where we say, Sod the Supreme Court, like several countries do. I am sure you agree the Court of Human rights is ignored by many countries, who get away with it. Not saying they all should, IE those who commit genocide, wholesale torture and the like, but many countries are far stricter on 'rights' than we are. The UK as always tends to bend over backward to obey each and every, law/rule that is imposed on us by courts that we have little or no say in the legislative powers or laws they decide should be enshrined as part of our culture.
After all, 'ALL courts including our own Supreme Court, are supposed to enforce the laws of the state that they apply to. If we as a nation refuse to Kowtow to the laws made by none mandated legislators, what can they do. We should have our own 'Bill of rights' and refuse to recognise the human rights act.
Remember the Court of Human Rights, often uses all it's power on the easy targets, for example members of the armed forces who have in the heat of battle, overstepped the mark, whilst allowing despots such as Mugabe to commit cold blooded genocide against his own people.
Once laws were made by the people, for the people, through their respective representatives. Now often they are, as you say made by faceless people we can not vote out. Yes we can vote in the European elections, but what weight does our piddling little country have against the power of the EU, especially as so called opt-outs are being nibbled away, to such an extent that soon it will be majority voting that holds total sway.

Fred,

Never felt threatened or insulted.

.

.

Mnamreh,

Same to you, the relaxing evening I mean.
Perhaps I am too much of a revolutionary for my own good.
Anyway at least after the election results are in, we can all look forward to the 'Good Times returning. After all, according to their leaders, all parties have the answers to our problems. And who are we to disbelieve them.

Actually I was considering to start my own party (The Apathy Party) but have not decided to as yet. I think I would like to canvass opinion here as to would it be worth having a go. So if you can be bothered please post here your views.
Not that sure what my policies would be, or if I would launch a manifesto or not.
Someone told me that there was a report published the other day, stating that apathy among the electorate was higher than ever, although I must admit that I couldn't be bothered to read it myself, so not certain if it's true or not.
But if all of us who are apathetic stick together we can have an influence.
In the last General Election 39% of the electorate didn'tt vote, so if that 39% were turned into seats my party could win an overall majority.
I think all the voters that can't be bothered to vote, should have their vote countered by default to the Apathy Party.
So if in the future, after this election of course or possibly the next you receive my flyer through your door, vote for me. If I receive no response to this post, don't worry about continually being pestered by flyers and doorstep visits, as I have no intention of taking this further without your support.

Damn. Whilst I was thinking about it, over the last 40 years or so, someone has beaten me too it.

The UK Apathy Party.....http://www.apathyparty.co.uk/

The USA Apathy Party.http://www.apathyparty08.com/

Relativitly:-)

Funny how our politicians banned the term 'non of the above' from being included in a political party name.

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2005/20050147.htm

What were they afraid of I wonder. I figure the 'non of the above' party would have won a massive landslide.

Was Nigel Farage hoping for the sympathy vote?

Just told it was another of Farage's stunts to draw attention.