We're out!

[Uncle Sick]

Sorry but what relevence does that have? Our forefathers fought and died so that we could be free, and we should be proud of that. Are you saying he can't have an opinion because he wasnt there? Thats fucking rediculous mate.

What relevance did his initial post have? Other than more, implied, anti-German xenophobia?

I don't see the French complain about the 100 years war. Who was it who laid waste to most of northern France? Oh, you guys.
Let the finger pointing commence then. Do we need centuries to pass before that "All Germans are Nazis shit" stops?

And of course you can be proud of what your forefathers achieved, I'm not questioning that. But his opinion was "You started it". That's the ridiculous comment. I reacted to it.

If you want to go tit for tat, it was Chamberlain who helped (helped - not caused) to start World War 2 with his appeasement policy.
Had Britain declared war right after Germany annexed the Czec Republic, history would have been different. The Third Reich would have been a small foot note in history books.

Germany/part of the German public turned radical (left -and- right) because of the overwhelming reparation payments caused by World War.

Oh, but you started it...

Germany also didn't start World War 1, imagine that... it was the Austrians who pulled out the saber and Germany honored it's alliance to Austria the same way Great Britain, France and
Russia honored theirs.

Today's Germany is a strong democracy, end of story. Who helped turning Germany into a strong democracy after the war? The United States.

And if France and Britain's leaders had agreed to Wilson's Fourteen Points, after World War 1, Hitler may have never risen to power due to lack of public support...

You can mention the war all you want. It's over. Political reality is that 'you guys' are in the life boat next to the European Super Tanker - be proud of it all you want.
Political reality is a bitch.

Job, quote your sources, will you?

 

[Raven]

It was a joke. From faulty towers. Do you not have a sense of humour or something?

Remove root vegetable from arse.

 

[throdgrain]

What relevance did his initial post have? Other than more, implied, anti-German xenophobia?

So you think answering in the same way makes it ok ?
I don't see the French complain about the 100 years war. Who was it who laid waste to most of northern France? Oh, you guys.
Let the finger pointing commence then. Do we need centuries to pass before that "All Germans are Nazis shit" stops?

I bet they do if you give them a chance


And of course you can be proud of what your forefathers achieved, I'm not questioning that. But his opinion was "You started it". That's the ridiculous comment. I reacted to it.

you over-reacted to it

If you want to go tit for tat, it was Chamberlain who helped (helped - not caused) to start World War 2 with his appeasement policy.
Had Britain declared war right after Germany annexed the Czec Republic, history would have been different. The Third Reich would have been a small foot note in history books.

You got proof of that? No of course not, it's just opinion, and even widely-held opinion, just something you though of thats all

Germany/part of the German public turned radical (left -and- right) because of the overwhelming reparation payments caused by World War.

That was demanded by the United States, if you want to get into the blame thing ...

Oh, but you started it...

IT WAS A JOKE
Germany also didn't start World War 1, imagine that... it was the Austrians who pulled out the saber and Germany honored it's alliance to Austria the same way Great Britain, France and
Russia honored theirs.

Today's Germany is a strong democracy, end of story. Who helped turning Germany into a strong democracy after the war? The United States.

What relevence does that have to, well, anything??

And if France and Britain's leaders had agreed to Wilson's Fourteen Points, after World War 1, Hitler may have never risen to power due to lack of public support...

lol, behave

You can mention the war all you want. It's over. Political reality is that 'you guys' are in the life boat next to the European Super Tanker - be proud of it all you want.
Political reality is a bitch.

British people don't want to be ruled by Europe. Never have, never will. Truth of the matter is though, the French and Germans would like to tell us what to do and how to live. I doubt we will ever put up with that.
Job, quote your sources, will you?

You started the war thing, it was a joke mate.

 

[rynnor]

Lets be serious though - France and Germany have been trying to sideline the UK from the EU for decades - the whole financial taxes idea was a wheeze they hooked onto 6 months ago as the perfect weapon to force the UK out and it worked. But its pretty damned obvious to those who are not completely partisan.

Merkel wants the power that comes with being the paymaster - its not how the EU club is supposed to work though but now the rest of Europe is in trouble she see's an opportunity to run the thing as de facto president in the directions she wants to go.

This isnt saying what she wants is neccesarily bad but the fact that one country is now effectively dictating policy for 26 countries is not democratic or healthy.

 

[Job]

i'm not anti German anymore than I'm anti anyone who has a history of grabbing through might, which quite clearly includes us, the goals of the Nazi's were universal at the time and we actually fought them because they did it first, it will never go away..ever, and posturing about chavs which is pretty well accepted on this forum is the very root of what ends up as a new world dream.
The world is run by money, governments are now like nervous lenders waiting to visit the branch manager and they are running out of options fast, this never ends well.

 

[rynnor]

If you want to go tit for tat, it was Chamberlain who helped (helped - not caused) to start World War 2 with his appeasement policy.

That's pretty weak tbh. Saying that not instantly declaring a costly war while we were still recovering from the last one and trying to obtain peace by diplomacy is wrong is purely a hindsight thing - I actually think he was right but sadly Hitler was seized by the idea of a greater germany.

Germany/part of the German public turned radical (left -and- right) because of the overwhelming reparation payments caused by World War.

The reparations were pretty nasty and the Brits felt France had gone too far thats why they refused to enforce them - realistically if the western allies had invaded germany at the end of WWI and broken the back of german nationalism there would have been no WW2...

Germany also didn't start World War 1, imagine that... it was the Austrians who pulled out the saber and Germany honored it's alliance to Austria the same way Great Britain, France and Russia honored theirs.

Are you serious? Austria was practically a vassal state of germany since the 17 week war - it was only german re-assurances that lead them to declare war.

And if France and Britain's leaders had agreed to Wilson's Fourteen Points, after World War 1, Hitler may have never risen to power due to lack of public support...

That was France really - they were vengeful over the germans taking their northern provinces previously - pure tit for tat.

Political reality is that 'you guys' are in the life boat next to the European Super Tanker - be proud of it all you want.
Political reality is a bitch.

Is the Super Tanker afloat or is it fatally holed amidships - only time will tell

 

[Scouse]

This isnt saying what she wants is neccesarily bad but the fact that one country is now effectively dictating policy for 26 countries is not democratic or healthy.

This.

But whilst we're being "serious" - lets admit up front that we don't live in a real democracy.

 

[Raven]

There is no such thing as a real democracy.

 

[rynnor]

This.

But whilst we're being "serious" - lets admit up front that we don't live in a real democracy.

No-one does nor ever has - even the ancient greeks didnt really as the poor/women were excluded.

 

[Scouse]

No-one does nor ever has - even the ancient greeks didnt really as the poor/women were excluded.

That's just sensible tho, really. Eh?

 

[Embattle]

The European project doesn't really do democracy, after all they tend to like to avoid referendums as much as possible for the simple reason that it tends to turn down the grand visions of eurocrats.

 

[Chilly]

Well us unwashed public arent qualified to vote on such IMPORTANT matters as our destiny.

 

[rynnor]

That's just sensible tho, really. Eh?

Well... maybe they had a point - on the poor at least - turn that to the modern day UK and you have a large non-productive chunk of the population voting themselves more money resulting in higher taxes on the productive section...

 

[Uncle Sick]

I'll man up and admit that I over reacted. Fact is, being German is a pain in the ass, as soon as it's revealed to most non-Germans.
I guess you get sensitive to it after awhile.

 

[rynnor]

No worries - the UK is not short of nationalistic idiots but luckily we no longer have the power to do much about it. Germany still has the kind of historic baggage that we have but finds itself in a position of power and influence. It remains to be seen what will happen.

 

[old.Tohtori]

I'll man up and admit that I over reacted. Fact is, being German is a pain in the ass, as soon as it's revealed to most non-Germans.
I guess you get sensitive to it after awhile.

Come to finland, we loves us some germans

 

[throdgrain]

Rynnor's reply got the italics right, I fucked mine up due to vodka

 

[DaGaffer]

There is no such thing as a real democracy.

Depends what you mean by "real". In the fullest sense, everyone would vote on everything, but back in the real world that's a practical impossibility. The Economist Intelligence Unit has had a crack at creating a democratic index and reckons there are maybe 9-10 countries in the world that are as democratic as you can practically get with current technology. As you would expect, its the Scandinavians (Norway is top), Australia, NZ, Canada and Switzerland. The UK is less democratic than these (about 19th in the world) and less democratic than Germany, but rather more democratic than France, which is regarded as a "flawed" democracy. This last bit is important because above all, the structure of the EU is a French (rather than German) design. I actually find all the German bashing going on on here quite surprising; everything about the EU is ultimately about putting French shackles on German power; its not about sticking one to the British, and never was. The French are pulling the strings here, and the UK is a sideshow.

 

[Embattle]

http://m.spiegel.de/international/europe/a-803097.html#spRedirectedFrom=www

 

[TdC]

The European project doesn't really do democracy, after all they tend to like to avoid referendums as much as possible for the simple reason that it tends to turn down the grand visions of eurocrats.

lol

I've been told that referendums tend to put power of choice in the hands of shit scared people who don't have long term vision, aren't willing to pay for anything, and are deeply mistrustful of anyone who doesn't look exactly the same as themselves. That aside, referendums are fine. You get what you pay for.

Seriously though, what DaGaffer said. You can tell living in a eurified country is good for him (jk)

 

[Job]

Democracy is dead and the politicians are powerless, all this talk of punishing the city of London well LOL at that one, I can just see the conversation.
Merkel: Listen here mr banker we don't like the Brits so could you not do any deals with them and do them with us instead...the usual 20% bail everybody out tax..is that ok?
Mr Banker: Don't ring this number again.

 

[Scouse]

Well... maybe they had a point - on the poor at least - turn that to the modern day UK and you have a large non-productive chunk of the population voting themselves more money resulting in higher taxes on the productive section...

Well, that's just rubbish. The poor pay the vast majority of tax as a percentage of their income whilst the rich pay both fuck and all. It doesn't really matter what the rich actually pay if the percentage is so skewed in their favour.

And - being human - what else are they going to vote for? They don't get to vote on anything important (as it's not a real democracy) and if someone says "tax people who have more than you" then they're going to vote "yes", unless they're mad, so you can hardly blame them...

Anyway - I was thinking more the women

Depends what you mean by "real".

I mean that the people are allowed to vote on things of consequence and that their vote would have meaning.

We get to vote on which shower of indistinguishable jokers get into the middle-management tier of government (i.e. UK.gov) - whilst the highest tier of government is unelected.

To be fair, a working democracy would need a well-educated and aware population, but that'd be inconvenient to our lords and masters so we don't educate them...

 

[Tom]

Well, that's just rubbish. The poor pay the vast majority of tax as a percentage of their income whilst the rich pay both fuck and all. It doesn't really matter what the rich actually pay if the percentage is so skewed in their favour.

That's a somewhat disingenuous sleight of hand. It's a well known fact that the richest people pay the lion's share of tax.

Poor people pay "the vast majority of [food prices] as a percentage of their income" is just as silly a sentence. Maybe we should legislate so that supermarkets and shops discount their prices for the poorest among us. After all, the rich can easily afford to pay £10 for a tin of beans.

 

[Embattle]

lol

I've been told that referendums tend to put power of choice in the hands of shit scared people who don't have long term vision, aren't willing to pay for anything, and are deeply mistrustful of anyone who doesn't look exactly the same as themselves. That aside, referendums are fine. You get what you pay for.

Seriously though, what DaGaffer said. You can tell living in a eurified country is good for him (jk)

People always take the argument that suits their agenda whether it be national or personal, the idea of one Europe is fine and probably something I would support but this bastardised version doesn't sit well with me.

 

[Embattle]

Well, that's just rubbish. The poor pay the vast majority of tax as a percentage of their income whilst the rich pay both fuck and all. It doesn't really matter what the rich actually pay if the percentage is so skewed in their favour.

And - being human - what else are they going to vote for? They don't get to vote on anything important (as it's not a real democracy) and if someone says "tax people who have more than you" then they're going to vote "yes", unless they're mad, so you can hardly blame them...

Anyway - I was thinking more the women




I mean that the people are allowed to vote on things of consequence and that their vote would have meaning.

We get to vote on which shower of indistinguishable jokers get into the middle-management tier of government (i.e. UK.gov) - whilst the highest tier of government is unelected.

To be fair, a working democracy would need a well-educated and aware population, but that'd be inconvenient to our lords and masters so we don't educate them...

That's a somewhat disingenuous sleight of hand. It's a well known fact that the richest people pay the lion's share of tax.

Poor people pay "the vast majority of [food prices] as a percentage of their income" is just as silly a sentence. Maybe we should legislate so that supermarkets and shops discount their prices for the poorest among us. After all, the rich can easily afford to pay £10 for a tin of beans.

Technically both can be right when using headline grabbing simplistic views, in reality we all know it is more complicated than that although arguments are based around the simplistic.

 

[DaGaffer]

Democracy is dead and the politicians are powerless, all this talk of punishing the city of London well LOL at that one, I can just see the conversation.
Merkel: Listen here mr banker we don't like the Brits so could you not do any deals with them and do them with us instead...the usual 20% bail everybody out tax..is that ok?
Mr Banker: Don't ring this number again.

There you go again. Merkel doesn't dislike the British and politically Cameron is more her cup of tea than Sarkozy, because the Germans are naturally more Atlanticist in their outlook than the French (and all three of them are right wingers). Germany would much rather Britain was in than out of the EU as the UK traditionally stops excessive French centralisation; but, how do the Germans get other EU members to sign up to strict budget rules and penalties if there's a massive get out of jail free (literally) card for the City of London?

I agree that signing up to a change to Lisbon wasn't in Britain's interests, but before we get all John Bull about it, ask yourselves why that is? If we were actually still a balanced economy (like, oh, France and Germany), that actually made stuff, we wouldn't be so over-reliant on the City that we felt we had to protect a bunch of self-serving cunts in the first place. Lets not forget we're going to end up out of the EU to protect the incomes of a shower of total bastards.

 

[Embattle]

There you go again. Merkel doesn't dislike the British and politically Cameron is more her cup of tea than Sarkozy, because the Germans are naturally more Atlanticist in their outlook than the French (and all three of them are right wingers). Germany would much rather Britain was in than out of the EU as the UK traditionally stops excessive French centralisation; but, how do the Germans get other EU members to sign up to strict budget rules and penalties if there's a massive get out of jail free (literally) card for the City of London?

I agree that signing up to a change to Lisbon wasn't in Britain's interests, but before we get all John Bull about it, ask yourselves why that is? If we were actually still a balanced economy (like, oh, France and Germany), that actually made stuff, we wouldn't be so over-reliant on the City that we felt we had to protect a bunch of self-serving cunts in the first place. Lets not forget we're going to end up out of the EU to protect the incomes of a shower of total bastards.

Part of the reason for balance in countries like France is a lack of truly following the single markets ideals and being more protectionist than most in the UK could ever stomach.

 

[Raven]

Yeah, can't disagree with that. However, it's a shower of bastards that generate a lot of tax income. Without them we would be (more) buggered.

I would rather we just left Europe all together. Not because I dislike Europeans, but because it just doesn't work, not without full central government and nobody wants that really.
I would be inclined to change my mind if I had a say in who ran it but as it is, as it is, I have never voted for anyone in Europe. I don't even know who they are. I don't like the idea of being told what to do by someone I didn't get a chance to vote for.

 

[Scouse]

That's a somewhat disingenuous sleight of hand. It's a well known fact that the richest people pay the lion's share of tax.

I don't think it's a sleight of hand at all. I think it's the pertinent fact.

I've not paid more than 19% on my total income in years. That's despite income tax + national insurance being more than that and me earning well above the higher tax rate.

Now, a nurse will pay fuckloads as a percentage of her income compared with me.

Yes, in total I'll pay more tax than a nurse, but as a percentage of my earnings I won't. What's fair about that?

Personally, I think they should flat-rate all income. That'd be fairer.

 

[Embattle]

BBC-

French President Nicolas Sarkozy admits that the EU is now a two-speed alliance but insists that Britain will not be marginalised. "There are now clearly two Europes," he tells French daily Le Monde. And, asked whether Britain could still remain inside the EU single market, Sarkozy adds: "We need Great Britain. We'd be greatly impoverished if we allowed its departure which, luckily, is not on the agenda."