Brexit Must Happen And Here's Why - Social Anxiety Forum
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-09-2019, 03:47 PM Thread Starter
SAS Member
 
XebelRebel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Gender: Female
Posts: 221

Brexit Must Happen And Here's Why


Although that's not a command; it is a suggestion.

The European Union's actual government which proposes all the new EU laws is the EU's version of Britain's House of Lords!

The European Union is not a democracy. The European Union is a technocracy (i.e. government by "experts" who are appointed on the basis of their alleged "expertise", rather than government by elected peoples' representatives).

I will keep this post as simple as feels appropriate, copying and pasting information from what is now a publicly trusted and respected source: Wikipedia.org

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wikipedia
The European Commission (EC) is the executive branch of the European Union, responsible for proposing legislation, implementing decisions, upholding the EU treaties and managing the day-to-day business of the EU.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission

The phrase "executive branch" (of government) means that the EC is like the British government's Prime Minister and cabinet ministers.

But the British Prime Minister and the cabinet ministers (whom he or she appoints) are all directly elected by their local voters at the constituency level. In Britain, Members of Parliament, or MPs, are expected to represent the interest of their local constituents instead of simply representing the interests of the nation -- and they do actually do that.

Members of Britain's executive branch of government can be directly voted out of office by the electorate at a general election (or at something called a by-election).

But back to talking about how the European Commission works:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wikipedia
The Commissioners are proposed by the Council of the European Union, on the basis of suggestions made by the national governments, and then appointed by the European Council after the approval of the European Parliament. It is common, although not a formal requirement, that the commissioners have previously held senior political positions, such as being a member of the European Parliament or a government minister
So the actual government of the EU that proposes new laws is not actually elected by the EU's general public -- and neither is it elected by the Members of the European Parliament!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wikipedia
This EU institution operates as a cabinet government, with 28 members of the Commission (informally known as "commissioners"). There is one member per member state, but members are bound by their oath of office to represent the general interest of the EU as a whole rather than their home state...

...One of the 28 is the Commission President (currently Ursula von der Leyen) proposed by the European Council and elected by the European Parliament. The Council of the European Union then nominates the other 27 members of the Commission in agreement with the nominated President, and the 28 members as a single body are then subject to a vote of approval by the European Parliament.
So the EU's elected peoples' representatives -- the MEPs (Members of the European Parliament) -- are currently allowed to have a vote on a single figurehead member of the actual EU government, but they are not presently given the opportunity to choose who that person is. They are simply asked to say "Yes" or "No" to someone nominated by the EU's national cabinet ministers (who are actually elected). Notice that this process is one step removed from genuine democratic accountability to the public with regard to the Commission President's selection.

As for the twenty-seven other Commissioners: sadly, the EU's national premiers (who are also actually elected Prime Ministers and Presidents) have refused to allow the MEPs to vote on the composition of the EC -- instead requesting that the European Parliament gives their "rubber stamp" of approval to twenty-seven Commissioners all at once. So what is the EP supposed to do in that situation?

The EP holds public hearings regarding its opinion on the suitability of proposed Commissioners, but so far it has almost never formally disapproved of new Commissioners. And even when it had disapproved of a few Commissioners, notice that the 700+ members of the EP had not all been allowed a free vote on such important decisions.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...sion-candidate

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Guardian
France’s candidate Sylvie Goulard rejected over job with thinktank and party’s alleged misuse of funds...

...The defeat is likely to trigger recriminations in the group over how they managed to lose Goulard in such a decisive way: 82 of the 112 MEPs eligible to vote on her appointment voted against her.
XebelRebel is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-09-2019, 03:48 PM Thread Starter
SAS Member
 
XebelRebel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Gender: Female
Posts: 221
Now let's talk about what the European Parliament does. Here is another excerpt from Wikipedia:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wikipedia
Although the European Parliament has legislative power, as does the Council, it does not formally possess legislative initiative (which is the prerogative of the European Commission), as most national parliaments of European Union member states do...

...the Commission presents a proposal to Parliament and the Council which can only become law if both agree on a text, which they do (or not) through successive readings up to a maximum of three. In its first reading, Parliament may send amendments to the Council which can either adopt the text with those amendments or send back a "common position". That position may either be approved by Parliament, or it may reject the text by an absolute majority, causing it to fail, or it may adopt further amendments, also by an absolute majority. If the Council does not approve these, then a "Conciliation Committee" is formed. The Committee is composed of the Council members plus an equal number of MEPs who seek to agree a compromise. Once a position is agreed, it has to be approved by Parliament, by a simple majority.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament

Please pay extra-special attention to the text which I have highlighted using purple lettering; it is very, very important as it quite clearly shows that the directly elected European Parliament -- along with the directly elected Council -- are actually analogous to Britain's unelected aristocratic chamber of appointed allegedly "learned" Lords and Ladies (the House of Lords), with respect to the legislative impotency of that "second chamber".

Since the Parliament Acts of 1911 and 1949, the House of Lords has retained very little power to prevent democratically elected British governments from enacting new laws. What the House of Lords can do is slow down the process of new legislation taking effect, by sending it back to the House of Commons with its suggestions for how it might be improved upon -- which is basically the same thing that the European Parliament does at the moment.

The European Union's actual government which proposes all the new EU laws is the EU's version of Britain's House of Lords!

Conversely, the EU's subordinate chamber -- which has the power to slow down the process of new EU laws taking effect -- is the European Parliament of genuinely elected politicians. The EP is like the Parliament of the Soviet Union right now: asked to "rubber stamp" the policies of the Commission's "politburo".

Now please take a moment to think and feel about how abominable that situation is!

This is not about the so-called Left and Ring wings of politics. This is not about immigration, xenophobia, or racism. This is about democracy and if the European public wants to be governed by pseudo-aristocrats who act as the puppets of actual aristocrats, criminally fraudulent banking shareholders, and their vassals: the wider grouping of transnational corporations and their shareholders (which is a grouping that tends to overlap with that of the aforementioned banking shareholders).

Are you British? Do you love democracy? If so, then please vote for Boris Johnson's Conservative party at the December 12th general election. Why? Because that British political party is the party which is committed to making Brexit happen, and which can also form a majority government to actually follow through on that promise.

Who cares about the policies of the British Conservative party! We need to get Britain OUT of that totalitarian system of pseudo-aristocrats and technocrats who don't trust the European public to make any of the important decisions about who governs their country. At least Britain's aristocrats don't have much in the way of lawmaking ability anymore, even though the British monarchy and the honours system is a lesser abomination in its own right.

I am going to also copy and paste the most important piece of this communication to the beginning of the post, as a bold dick move.

Again I will make it very clear that I am not commanding any of you to do anything with this specific forum post; I am only making a suggestion. I hope that you will listen to my suggestion and implore your friends, family, and any other living entities to also vote for Boris Johnson's Conservatives.

I don't even like Boris Johnson very much, but I know what I am talking about. Please trust me.
XebelRebel is offline  
post #3 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-09-2019, 04:10 PM Thread Starter
SAS Member
 
XebelRebel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Gender: Female
Posts: 221
Here is a video of the previous European Commission President, Jean Claude Juncker.




Ordinary people tend to get fired from their jobs if they publicly humiliate and assault their work colleagues like that. The video speaks for itself.
XebelRebel is offline  
 
post #4 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-09-2019, 04:14 PM
SAS Member
 
Micronian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Toronto, Canada
Gender: Male
Age: 40
Posts: 3,934
The EU is a totally onerous group, and they kill the economic sovereignty of the nations they control. They basically keep the wallets hostage of their member nations.


The problem is that it seems like people are using "brexit" not as economic emancipation, but as a vehicle for very right-wing xenophobia. At least that's the impression I get. It may or may not be true (it could easily be manipulated propaganda made in the interests of the EU), but without a good consensus nothing's going to get done. I think the public will be the only ones that suffer either way....and maybe that's why there isn't the support that there should be. The conservative party--or whoever it is that's driving the move for brexit--maybe isn't marketing it convincingly enough.

"I might be great tomorrow, but hopeless yesterday"
Micronian is online now  
post #5 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-09-2019, 05:40 PM
SAS Member
 
SludgeBucket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 72
The EU is Hitler's prophecy come true.. and the man Juncker, his grand father was the richest Nazi in WW2 and was friends eith Hitler and what's more astonishing is that Juncker is best friends with Soros who was a Nazi collaborator who stated that during his time being mentored by his Nazi father seeing him confiscate the Jews and take them away to death camps were "some of the happiest times of his life" which is where his personality was born.. Brexit's goal was to create a one European state and Britain is the last nation holding it together, under it's clasp of dominance and control and this is why May failed time and time again because Britain never left and thew EU has seized control of it from the very beginning.. but I do believe that a no-deal Brexit must take place, besides the current deal that has been made, where Britain can truly become an individual sovereign nation once again without being dependent on the EU.
SludgeBucket is offline  
post #6 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-09-2019, 08:01 PM
SAS Member
 
Beatnik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Finland
Gender: Male
Age: 28
Posts: 573
My Mood: Lurking
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pointer23* View Post
Brexit should happen to stop immigrants coming over or at least being questioned why they are doing nothing once here.
Let's examine how the Brexit would affect the immigration employment;

https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentand...market/may2018

Quote:
The employment rate (the proportion of people aged from 16 to 64 years who were in work) was 81.9% for EU nationals, higher than that for UK nationals (75.6%) and higher than that for non-EU nationals (63.0%).
So when Britain stops being part of the EU, the immigration from the EU countries will probably go down, meaning the WHOLE employment rate will go down?

That dog älähd's to witch kaligga galahd's
Beatnik is offline  
post #7 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-10-2019, 03:59 AM
Villain
 
Persephone The Dread's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: I've come to burn your kingdom down one ****post at a time
Language: Eng (UK,) 下手な日本語
Posts: 39,991
Well the House of Lords isn't a technocracy, it's an oligarchy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Micronian View Post
The EU is a totally onerous group, and they kill the economic sovereignty of the nations they control. They basically keep the wallets hostage of their member nations.


The problem is that it seems like people are using "brexit" not as economic emancipation, but as a vehicle for very right-wing xenophobia. At least that's the impression I get. It may or may not be true (it could easily be manipulated propaganda made in the interests of the EU), but without a good consensus nothing's going to get done. I think the public will be the only ones that suffer either way....and maybe that's why there isn't the support that there should be. The conservative party--or whoever it is that's driving the move for brexit--maybe isn't marketing it convincingly enough.
It's not really propaganda, anyone you speak to about Brexit here who is pro-brexit and isn't left wing (which is going to be most people,) just brings up immigration (like my dad,) they honestly don't consider anything but that and that is the most vocal group.

I am fairly sure those numbers aren't changing, so that group will just be pushed further right over time I guess.

Some people heard my words and thought it meant they knew me
Truth is, I don't exist, I'm just a soundtrack to your movie
Some background figure in a story that's already scripted
And what I feel's just felt for you to hear me ****ing spit it
I jump in many different heads through these words and poems
Always hoping maybe the next leap'll be my leap home

Persephone The Dread is offline  
post #8 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-10-2019, 05:01 AM
Yoink
 
sabbath9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 2,043
https://www.truthdig.com/articles/br...-or-barbarism/



Quote:
In that spirit, here are my observations about the Dec. 12 U.K. general election from the western shore of the Atlantic.
  1. Corbyn is offering, by far, the best option on Brexit.
Whatever you might have heard about how Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn has handled the Brexit crisis, here’s what’s important: as of right now, he has arrived at the best solution going forward.


No political issue in my lifetime has been more mind-numbingly tedious than the Brexit morass. Suffice to say, an ocean’s distance is helpful in maintaining one’s sanity, let alone clarity. So, apologies for sounding like a scold—but, c’mon you Brits, wake up and recognize that Corbyn is providing a simple, sane pathway to survive this cluster*****.


Here’s his plan, which, if you ask me, makes a lot of sense.


If elected prime minister, Corbyn will negotiate a new Brexit deal, aiming for an arrangement similar to Norway’s current relationship with the EU (which means the U.K. will remain part of the EU common market). Then, he would put that deal up for a popular vote with the only other option being to remain in the union. The whole thing will be resolved in half a year.


The only other option is a Tory-led government that eliminates any Remain option and that will present the familiar anti-worker, deregulatory, pro-finance Brexit that’s already proved very unpopular, and which, among other things, will almost certainly lead to the breakup of the U.K.


So, it’s very simple. If you support Remain, you have only one hope left: defeating the Tories. That means voting tactically for Labour and its allies, i.e., those parties that might be willing to form a Labour-led government so Corbyn can pursue Brexit sanity.


Also, if you support Brexit but actually want a positive arrangement with the EU—one that prioritizes the concerns of average people and the environment, as well as respects the Good Friday accord–you should also support Labour and its allies. This argument is not a pro-Remain sleight-of-hand. I am pro-Remain, but I sincerely believe that a Norway-like Brexit deal will have a very good shot of winning a second referendum. Norway, after all, is doing pretty damn well these days.


So, if you’re pro-Remain—you have to vote Labour and friends. If you want a decent Brexit—ditto. Those two positions have to represent two-thirds of the electorate. Why is this not a landslide?

And I always thought this would be
the land of milk and honey
Oh but I came to find out that it's
all hate and money
And there's a canopy of greed holding me down.
sabbath9 is offline  
post #9 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-10-2019, 07:32 AM
Viva La Raza!
 
nubly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Surviving the trumpocalypse
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,713
My Mood: Tired
Ain't going to happen. I get the feeling that Uk government is prevent its citizens from shooting themselves on the foot.
nubly is offline  
post #10 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-10-2019, 05:15 PM Thread Starter
SAS Member
 
XebelRebel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Gender: Female
Posts: 221
Replying to Persephone The Dread, I do not classify Britain's House of Lords as an oligarchy because it is not the executive branch of government -- ergo, it is not a collection of "archons" (translated as "rulers").

But the European Commissioners can be fairly described as being a group of obviously visible political "rulers" of the European Union. The Commissioners are appointed, not elected -- and they are appointed on the basis of their alleged "expertise": ergo, the EC is a technocracy. The EC is also an oligarchy, by popular definition and with regard to the etymology of that word.


The House of Lords is not a technocracy though, since it does not govern Britain. The House of Lords is neither an oligarchy nor a technocracy -- but the European Commission is both of those things, thus doubly awful.


It is sensible for British lovers of democracy to vote for Boris Johnson's Conservative party this December 12th as his party can secure a majority government. It seems that "getting Brexit done" (i.e. implemented -- preferably with a no-deal scenario) requires a majority government.


It is appropriate and advisable to hate the European Commission system. There is such thing as too much of a good thing, you see. In my book(s) the "EU" = "eurgh!"


There is more that can be said on that topic, but I choose not to say any more right now.
XebelRebel is offline  
post #11 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-10-2019, 06:07 PM
Villain
 
Persephone The Dread's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: I've come to burn your kingdom down one ****post at a time
Language: Eng (UK,) 下手な日本語
Posts: 39,991
^ I just mentioned that because you said the EU was equivalent to the House of Lords. A bunch are there because they inherited titles or are part of The Church of England not because of ability.

Also I voted labour.

Some people heard my words and thought it meant they knew me
Truth is, I don't exist, I'm just a soundtrack to your movie
Some background figure in a story that's already scripted
And what I feel's just felt for you to hear me ****ing spit it
I jump in many different heads through these words and poems
Always hoping maybe the next leap'll be my leap home

Persephone The Dread is offline  
post #12 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-10-2019, 07:46 PM
SAS Member
 
Beatnik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Finland
Gender: Male
Age: 28
Posts: 573
My Mood: Lurking
I only have one British car (for now), but it would suck if I would have to start paying import taxes etc. from all the car parts that I order from there, also I just realized that I order all my coats, jackets and shoes from there too! So... if you leave the EU, I will buy them from somewhere else! Take that... you!

That dog älähd's to witch kaligga galahd's
Beatnik is offline  
post #13 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-11-2019, 05:34 AM Thread Starter
SAS Member
 
XebelRebel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Gender: Female
Posts: 221
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beatnik View Post
I only have one British car (for now), but it would suck if I would have to start paying import taxes etc. from all the car parts that I order from there, also I just realized that I order all my coats, jackets and shoes from there too! So... if you leave the EU, I will buy them from somewhere else! Take that... you!

I prefer the Backstreet Boys, rather ominously -- but let's not go there.



I have just performed a search (using an alternative to Google; and remember that Skynet is Genisys) for "house of lords" -- which returned the following result:


Quote:
Originally Posted by Wikipedia
House of Lords (band) - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Lords_(band)
House of Lords' eponymous debut was released in 1988, featuring a heavier sound than Giuffria with a lower keyboard mix. The album received critical acclaim and the band toured with Cheap Trick, Ozzy Osbourne and the Scorpions in 1989. The album featured one minor hit, "I Wanna Be Loved" (Hot 100 No. 5.

Giuffria? The name sounds familiar, does it not? It reminds one of a "virgin".


OK. That's enough cryptic crossword **** for this post. I said something about keeping things simple, so I'll spell it out for you (literally speaking, rather than magically so).



I had Jeffrey Epstein killed in his prison cell. On some level I actually enjoyed it. I will explain more in another thread so that people who are not into that sort of thing can more easily avoid reading it.


This post and this thread do not represent me trying to force Brexit to happen by mind controlling people actively for that purpose.


Back to speaking of what you may consider to be "rational" "reasons" for Britain's exit from the European Union happening...


The bringing up of the "oligarchy" label was very helpful, as it has prompted me to point something out to all of you lovely people. The European Commission consists of 28 persons: all of whom are appointed -- not elected -- in the sense that the European general population does not vote for any of them directly.


The European Union has a population size of hundreds of millions of people! Thank you, Persephone the Dread, for helping me to recognise that the European Commission system ought to be described as an institutionalised, legalised oligarchy, first and foremost -- and only secondarily as a technocracy with regard to the intentions of its so-called "architects".


I don't like the House of Lords very much at all, but it is comically oversized when compared with official figures regarding the number of British people.


The European Union governmental system is appalling! Why on Earth are some of you so bothered about short-term economic gain when it comes to Brexit? Are you even democrats? How do you feel on the subject of short-term economic gains when it comes to the issue of saving the environment? Do you approach that topic differently, or do you simply not care about both democracy and environmentalism?
XebelRebel is offline  
post #14 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-11-2019, 06:22 AM
Greasy prospector
 
blue2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: The salty spitoon
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,947
My Mood: Lurking
It will stop foreigners coming over stealing our jobs & our women.






And all our yesterdays have lighted fools the way to dusty death
Out, out, brief candle! Life's but a walking shadow,
A poor player that strut's and fret's his hour upon the stage and is heard no more,
It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
- Macbeth
blue2 is offline  
post #15 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-11-2019, 10:51 AM
SAS Member
 
Micronian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Toronto, Canada
Gender: Male
Age: 40
Posts: 3,934
Quote:
Originally Posted by blue2 View Post
It will stop foreigners coming over stealing our jobs & our women.
everyone in every country says that. It's the oldest excuse in the book.

"I might be great tomorrow, but hopeless yesterday"
Micronian is online now  
post #16 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-11-2019, 11:10 AM
SAS Member
 
SludgeBucket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by Micronian View Post
everyone in every country says that. It's the oldest excuse in the book.
Yes because the Quran and everyone that follows the Quran is all about undertaking self-dominance of conquering the world with it's religion and it's man to breed.. India used to be three time larder than it was, and Turkey used to not be an Islamic nation as well as others, but over time Islam has dominated those countries with it's religion.. now in places like Europe, there are nearly as many Muslims in France as there are Europeans, and in ten-twenty years the amount of Muslims will outnumber people in Sweden etc.. all sovereign nations will be destroyed if this continues and we will all soon be preaching Allahu Akbar.
SludgeBucket is offline  
post #17 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-11-2019, 01:13 PM Thread Starter
SAS Member
 
XebelRebel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Gender: Female
Posts: 221
What the World needs is for the corrupt system of the crony capitalist so-called "internationalists" to be broken down, then replaced with many smaller independent nation states -- with the economic policies of those self-responsible countries patterned after and approximating the mode of governance known as autarky. And a "hard" (one might say masculine) Brexit can be the first step to achieving that goal: necessary for human civilisation to become genuinely "sustainable" -- which is a word that seemingly all environmentalists like to say, ad nauseam.


You may say something like "Oh, isn't it awful that Brexit happening will mean that some of the monopolist transnational corporations (which we ought to oppose anyway) will take some of their farms, factories, and workers to -- or from -- countries other than Britain!", but how is that a bad thing for the health and security of human civilisation?


Do you want transnational corporate monopolies -- with majority criminal-banker "ownership" -- to have free rein to do whatever they want, by bullying genuinely democratic nation states into submission with their anti-democratic, "supranational", oligarchic technocracies (like the European Union, the United Nations, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the Bank for International Settlements), and with their threats to "up sticks" and take away their businesses from anywhere that refuses to play their game? Well that is not what I want!


Boris Johnson was actually right to say "f*** business", around the Summer of 2018. Just as Victoria Nudelman was correct to bluntly declare "f*** the EU"!


We must stand up to those monopolist bullies and CALL THEIR BLUFF!


It will be a good thing if someone like Beatnik stops buying British cars, coats, jackets, and shoes after Brexit happens! Do the anti-Brexit people honestly believe that a country like Finland is incapable of manufacturing and providing most of its own goods and services, for its own population? And do those same people genuinely think and feel that Britain cannot reconfigure its economy to do the same thing, fairly quickly after exiting the European Union's legal, economic, and political institutions and treaties?


According to the history books at least, this thing called World War II happened -- which involved the cutting of overt economic ties between Britain and Nazi-occupied Western Europe, but the British economy actually boomed as a result of its government mandating a demand for military equipment (with a supply of money to pay for the required goods and services provided by commercial banks, more or less created "out of thin air" -- but not yet on computers).


Please read the following post which I recently typed up:


https://www.socialanxietysupport.com...post1093845869


I mentioned the Club of Rome, and here is a excerpt from its Wikipedia entry (which is actually a quotation from the book, The First Global Revolution, by Alexander King and Bertrand Schneider:


Quote:
Originally Posted by Wikipedia
"Every state has been so used to classifying its neighbours as friend or foe, that the sudden absence of traditional adversaries has left governments and public opinion with a great void to fill. New enemies have to be identified, new strategies imagined, and new weapons devised."[9] "In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together. But in designating these dangers as the enemy, we fall into the trap, which we have already warned readers about, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself."

National governments -- like Britain, but also other independent nation states that choose to take back their sovereignty for their Demos -- can create money (out of thin air, if need be), to fund their emancipation from the criminal banking cartel, and its network of transnational business vassals, which have been f***ing up the environment for everyone with their rapacious greed. Those same national governments can also do the same thing to fund the remaking of their economic systems so that they will be environmentally "sustainable".


Here is a BBC article, entitled "How would the Greens fund their £1tn pledge?":


https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-50315720


Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Edgington for BBC News
The IFS calculates the Greens' proposal would take borrowing to £140bn. This would be more than 6% of national income and the highest level since 2012-2013, when borrowing rocketed following the global financial crisis. The Green Party is in favour of remaining in the European Union, but running a budget deficit of 6% would be double the limit set out in the EU's growth and stability pact.

So you see, the European Union's financial regulations actually forbid its constituent national governments from breaking away from the fraudulent Ponzi scheme monetary system of the criminal banking cartel -- which makes sense, since the EU under European Commission governance is a corrupt oligarchy (run by stooges of the banks and transnational corporations, for the banks and transnational corporations)!


Now please do a little reading on the subject of the European Union's "expenditure benchmark" rule to understand one of the reasons why a debt-free currency issued by Britain's Treasury (to be given to public sector workers and contractors as their wages for setting up the "green" economy) won't work until AFTER Britain leaves the European Union -- preferably with a no-deal scenario, to make absolutely sure that Britain will be OUT of EU pacts such as that which I referred to above, for long enough to bring back something like the Bradbury Pound, or to go back onto something like the historical Gold Standard.


I know that this information is not easy to digest, but I am making an heroic effort to explain these complicated ideas to you fellows BECAUSE I LOVE YOU -- and BECAUSE I HATE THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION; BECAUSE I HATE THE CRIMINAL BANKING CARTEL; BECAUSE I LOVE TO HATE THINGS WHICH I DON'T WANT!


There is a woman who I admire -- namely Elizabeth Truss -- and she made a speech to the Conservative Party Conference in 2014 that was widely ridiculed. I will post a segment of it below:





Is there anything wrong with what she said? It sounds good to me! She is currently Boris Johnson's Secretary of State for International Trade, as well as President of the Board of Trade and Minister for Women and Equalities.


NO-DEAL BREXIT: WE CAN DO IT! (Even if Boris Johnson gets his "excellent deal" through Parliament soon.)
XebelRebel is offline  
post #18 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-11-2019, 02:55 PM
Greasy prospector
 
blue2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: The salty spitoon
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,947
My Mood: Lurking
Quote:
Originally Posted by Micronian View Post
everyone in every country says that. It's the oldest excuse in the book.
Well everyone can't be wrong, it's a PC war, a slow occupation, democratically eroding individual unique culture & heritage built up over centuries till one day you wake up & it's gone, but what goes around comes around, karma, it's not like GB didn't already influence culture almost everywhere in the world.






And all our yesterdays have lighted fools the way to dusty death
Out, out, brief candle! Life's but a walking shadow,
A poor player that strut's and fret's his hour upon the stage and is heard no more,
It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
- Macbeth
blue2 is offline  
post #19 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-11-2019, 03:39 PM
SAS Member
 
Beatnik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Finland
Gender: Male
Age: 28
Posts: 573
My Mood: Lurking
Quote:
Originally Posted by SludgeBucket View Post
there are nearly as many Muslims in France as there are Europeans, and in ten-twenty years the amount of Muslims will outnumber people in Sweden etc.. all sovereign nations will be destroyed if this continues and we will all soon be preaching Allahu Akbar.
7-9% of the French people are Muslims (and Europe isn't a religion and muslim isn't an ethnicity)
https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/...of-france.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_...den#Demography

Quote:
In the year 2050 the number of Muslims in Sweden would be 1,130,000 (or 11.1% of the population) under the zero migration scenario, 2,470,000 (or 20.5% of the population) under the medium migration scenario, and 4,450,000 (or 30.6% of the population) under the high migration scenario.

Either you have been lied to or you're just a lying troll, which one is it? Considering your views on politics and support for Trump I would guess it's the latter...


You are welcomed to DESTROY me with (alternative) facts! (please no insults, just facts over feelings)

That dog älähd's to witch kaligga galahd's
Beatnik is offline  
post #20 of 28 (permalink) Old 12-11-2019, 03:53 PM
SAS Member
 
SludgeBucket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beatnik View Post
7-9% of the French people are Muslims (and Europe isn't a religion and muslim isn't an ethnicity)
https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/...of-france.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_...den#Demography




Either you have been lied to or you're just a lying troll, which one is it? Considering your views on politics and support for Trump I would guess it's the latter...


You are welcomed to DESTROY me with (alternative) facts! (please no insults, just facts over feelings)
You're hilarious.
SludgeBucket is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome