Anyone realizing how ****ed EU is?

[Kris Silver]

That's the outcome and effect of its design BN. More and more centralisation, decision-making taken away from the nation states. Under the proposed Federalisation and further integration, the Danish man does not decide the future of Denmark, he cannot protect what is dear to him. Those decisions increasingly belong to the major economic players Brussels who hold all the financial cards over less wealthy members. The only way he can retain control of his own country is to get out of the EU.

If you exclude regulations largely trade (which is in the most part what we accept and signed into) the EU only accounts for around 13% of UK only law. Include regulations and it rises to 65%, but as I say that’s what we largely agreed to harmonise to save us all costs. In terms of UK only law – a mere 13% is influenced by the EU. Hardly the no control or EU controlling UK that some like to make out with little facts backing it up. And the UK already had a better deal, and had a reformed deal on offer as a special status member able to veto more, not follow closer integration, and have more controls of things like benefits. https://fullfact.org/europe/two-thirds-uk-law-made-eu/

Not sure why you use the example of a Danish man but couldn’t you turn that on its head and say the Danish have a member party input into the EU – of one member. That’s similar to that one member vote, of another richer bigger nation with millions more people. So you can just as easily argue the Danish man has more influence than some of his counterparts in many ways. In any case he still gets to vote for his local government like every independent democracy in the EU, and I don't credit the extreme view that 'oh you can vote for anyone they are all the same'. As I've demonstrated just with the UK stats, our local, democratically voted for governments do have significant/majority control of their local laws. Perhaps Bat can shed his insight here as a Dane.

[Weebler I]

You make some valid points mate. Let me adress of couple of Things though:

The danes are wealthy as such. However as a small nation with an open economy, we are dependant upon trade with our partners. It just so happens, that our major markets is in the EU. Before we joined our major trade partner was the UK and we followed them into the EEC. Since then the UK has had a diminishing, but still important, role.

So to me the EU stands at a major crossroads now. It faces the biggest crisis ever. Not because of Brexit, but brexit has clearly made the issues more urgent. I think that the EU HAS to change towards less integration and control of it's outer borders. Ie the brussels bureaucrats has to achieve an alignment with the general population of it's member states. I think that it serves my country best to participate in such a transition, rather than sitting on the outside looking in.

As I understand it, the plan is for further political integration and federalisation, it was brought up at a meeting last Friday. There are also plans for an EU Army. Brussels has one plan, while the people on the ground in these nations have a different idea.

It is amazing what has stemmed from what was originally supposed to be a trading bloc.

I sincerely hope that you brits don't get a tough wake up call when the brexit deals are made. Hopefully sooner rather than later as this uncertainty has a negative influence on Capital markets.

NATO is a valid argument, but I don't believe for a second that NATO could have achieved the European Peace success on its own ie without the EU.

As for Greece, well I don't think they should have ever been allowed in the euro. Same with others like perhaps Portugal and Spain. However that crisis has been handled to an A+ by EU led by Merkel.

Britain shouldn't get a bad deal from Brexit since the UK is by far Germany's most profitable export market. Granted, the EU is not just Germany but they are a key influencer. It also imports from the EU more than it exports. Time will tell.

We had the NATO vs EU debate on peace in Europe a few weeks ago in the UK. The main argument was that EU diplomacy failed in Yugoslavia, instead speeding the war up, and it was NATO who in the end sorted the situation out.

[BattlingNelson]

If you exclude regulations largely trade (which is in the most part what we accept and signed into) the EU only accounts for around 13% of UK only law. Include regulations and it rises to 65%, but as I say that’s what we largely agreed to harmonise to save us all costs. In terms of UK only law – a mere 13% is influenced by the EU. Hardly the no control or EU controlling UK that some like to make out with little facts backing it up. And the UK already had a better deal, and had a reformed deal on offer as a special status member able to veto more, not follow closer integration, and have more controls of things like benefits. https://fullfact.org/europe/two-thirds-uk-law-made-eu/

Not sure why you use the example of a Danish man but couldn’t you turn that on its head and say the Danish have a member party input into the EU – of one member. That’s similar to that one member vote, of another richer bigger nation with millions more people. So you can just as easily argue the Danish man has more influence than some of his counterparts in many ways. In any case he still gets to vote for his local government like every independent democracy in the EU, and I don't credit the extreme view that 'oh you can vote for anyone they are all the same'. As I've demonstrated just with the UK stats, our local, democratically voted for governments do have significant/majority control of their local laws. Perhaps Bat can shed his insight here as a Dane.

Well what I can say is, that most of the Laws dictated by the EU, would still likely be implemented if we where on the outside looking in. We are dependant on the EU as partners. Besides a lot of the Laws are actually common sense which probably gets lost in bashings of curved cucumber Laws. But Laws against pollution, Chemical products, sustainable fishing etc. is tough to argue against IMO.

[BattlingNelson]

As I understand it, the plan is for further political integration and federalisation, it was brought up at a meeting last Friday. There are also plans for an EU Army. Brussels has one plan, while the people on the ground in these nations have a different idea.

It is amazing what has stemmed from what was originally supposed to be a trading bloc.

Denmark will never join an EU army, and I don't think such an army will ever be installed.

It's my belief that lesser integration will be on the table in Brussels. I think that even the brussel bureaucrats has seen the writing on the wall. However time will tell. If not, then surely more exits/referendums will follow.

Britain shouldn't get a bad deal from Brexit since the UK is by far Germany's most profitable export market. Granted, the EU is not just Germany but they are a key influencer. It also imports from the EU more than it exports. Time will tell.

We will see yes. But surely the deal will not be worse for the EU than the deal Cameron negotiated earlier this year.

We had the NATO vs EU debate on peace in Europe a few weeks ago in the UK. The main argument was that EU diplomacy failed in Yugoslavia, instead speeding the war up, and it was NATO who in the end sorted the situation out.

Correct. However we don't know if there would have been major conflicts had the EU not been there.

[Weebler I]

If you exclude regulations largely trade (which is in the most part what we accept and signed into) the EU only accounts for around 13% of UK only law. Include regulations and it rises to 65%, but as I say that’s what we largely agreed to harmonise to save us all costs. In terms of UK only law – a mere 13% is influenced by the EU. Hardly the no control or EU controlling UK that some like to make out with little facts backing it up. And the UK already had a better deal, and had a reformed deal on offer as a special status member able to veto more, not follow closer integration, and have more controls of things like benefits. https://fullfact.org/europe/two-thirds-uk-law-made-eu/

Norway only subscribes to 17.5% of EU regulations (not that I'm arguing their situation is perfect).

You mentioned the UK veto, well take a look at how often it mattered and what it's really worth:

In decisive votes where regulations and decisions were being finally adopted between 2010 and this year, the UK voted No 23 times and abstained 18 times, the new research shows.

In each case the measure went through anyway

In the last term, 1,936 motions were put before the European Parliament. 576 of these motions were against British interests and were voted against by the majority of British MEPs. However 485 of these motions still passed. This is a failure rate of 84 per cent

Dave went out there to get us a good deal pre-Brexit, and even many Remainers agreed that what he returned with was derisory.

Not sure why you use the example of a Danish man but couldn’t you turn that on its head and say the Danish have a member party input into the EU – of one member. That’s similar to that one member vote, of another richer bigger nation with millions more people. So you can just as easily argue the Danish man has more influence than some of his counterparts in many ways. In any case he still gets to vote for his local government like every independent democracy in the EU, and I don't credit the extreme view that 'oh you can vote for anyone they are all the same'. As I've demonstrated just with the UK stats, our local, democratically voted for governments do have significant/majority control of their local laws. Perhaps Bat can shed his insight here as a Dane.

Well they didn't listen to the UK, so why would they listen to a smaller nation?

Tell me what is it precisely that motivates you with regard to the EU project. Not the general reasons that are trotted out, but the main reason so maybe I can understand where you're coming from.

[Weebler I]

Denmark will never join an EU army, and I don't think such an army will ever be installed.

It's my belief that lesser integration will be on the table in Brussels. I think that even the brussel bureaucrats has seen the writing on the wall. However time will tell. If not, then surely more exits/referendums will follow.

It may well be post-Brexit. I read talk of a two-speed EU from the Germans, whereby countries that want to integrate further can choose to do so, while others stay as they are. Imo it'll be that much further down the road now, as a result of the UK referendum, they'll have to deal with the aftermath of that first.

[BattlingNelson]

It may well be post-Brexit. I read talk of a two-speed EU from the Germans, whereby countries that want to integrate further can choose to do so, while others stay as they are. Imo it'll be that much further down the road now, as a result of the UK referendum, they'll have to deal with the aftermath of that first.

It will for sure be very interesting to see the UK deal with the EU. If they get a good deal as an EU associate then there will be pressure in other sceptic nations to get a similar deal. Those nations include Denmark, Holland and possibly others.

[!! Anorak]

A red k? That really hurt my feelings Anorak!

It was a bit mean now I think on it... I'll green you on the next go round.

[Kris Silver]

Dave went out there to get us a good deal pre-Brexit, and even many Remainers agreed that what he returned with was derisory.

Well they didn't listen to the UK, so why would they listen to a smaller nation?

Tell me what is it precisely that motivates you with regard to the EU project. Not the general reasons that are trotted out, but the main reason so maybe I can understand where you're coming from.

I can't argue with your veto stat's in fairness, I thought you might go that direction so I thought I'd tried to imply I more meant the new deal on the table. I understood Cameron had gotten some concessions on being able to veto a law impacting the UK (not the whole bloc). I welcome and enjoy debating this with someone clearly respectable, intelligent and clued up on a lot of the facts. It actually underlines just how many outers weren't reasonably debating. The whole thing angers me because I'm not that intelligent yet I take a vote seriously, responsibly, research, and don't promote idea's and vote a certain way unless I'm confident they are well formed. And quite simply, many of the stats and claims Brexiters made, were false. Some of those that voted out did so based on that and on agenda's not facts.

I've always thought of myself as British, and a proud European. Over the past two decades I've been able to judge at least in my life experience, relations, trades, movement, holidays, tourism, common laws, collaboration, science projects, shared security data, all of this has improved Britain and all Euro states. The pro's far out-way the cons.

I mean take away it being a bloc, free movement, and largely HQ'd in Brussels and I think most people would have less issue. But it is hard to judge if things have worsened or improved over a period and I think the nature of politics these days is to always focus on the negatives and find someone to blame. This whole debate has been a catalyst and opportunity for some to be fooled into a nationalistic agenda of 'our neighbors to blame, were great, and better off without'. It's fundamentally flawed and based on stigma and psychology more than any well reasoned rational assessment. Not saying the EU is perfect, far from it. But to not be at the table with key neighbors and partners leading 500m people, is not an behavior of a forward looking, leading, worldly country I don't think.

surely the deal will not be worse for the EU than the deal Cameron negotiated earlier this year.

This exactly sums it up as-well. The reformed deal offered controls on immigrants even if by lowering benefits quite a bit, and a special status to avoid further integration. It was the best of both worlds and we'll never get such a good deal again. So we've blindly punished ourselves by rebelling.

Those floating voters who were swayed to leave, why weren't they sure right up until the last few days? How can they have assessed things fully enough (required over weeks) to have judged accurately. There's been said to have been 1m Brexiters whom regret voting out and largely done it out of being swayed by facts or rebelling. There's also 500k whom regretted voting Remain so it would've still been a very very tight win for Brexit with this factored in. But that's an indicator right away, many more will regret it over the coming weeks and months I feel. Many will fool themselves things are better even in the face of evidence they are not.

Sadly in modern democracy some deep issues of high importance and complexity, our democratically voted leaders should have a significant sway on the direction. The vast majority of business, experts, politicians, elected leaders have to carry some responsibility and power here oddly enough to avoid this slim rebel vote from people whom don't have such insight, and are not educated as to the future repercussions. This sadly and understandably is very unpopular a statement for many people - because we like to believe we the people are defeating and improving the system. But sometimes were just damaging it for everyone. Such a slim vote doesn't affect us for a parliament, it's going to punish the country, break up the UK union, weaken the EU, and make it more likely other countries slip into similar thinking, leaving, all of this adding further economic uncertainty and costing us all £'s. Or €'s. Or $'s.

It's a lot of negative impacts for our economy and others. I don't think many people realise quite how much were in a global village and acting in this selfish manner harms more than helps.

[creekrat77]

I can't argue with your veto stat's in fairness, I thought you might go that direction so I thought I'd tried to imply I more meant the new deal on the table. I understood Cameron had gotten some concessions on being able to veto a law impacting the UK (not the whole bloc). I welcome and enjoy debating this with someone clearly respectable, intelligent and clued up on a lot of the facts. It actually underlines just how many outers weren't reasonably debating. The whole thing angers me because I'm not that intelligent yet I take a vote seriously, responsibly, research, and don't promote idea's and vote a certain way unless I'm confident they are well formed. And quite simply, many of the stats and claims Brexiters made, were false. Some of those that voted out did so based on that and on agenda's not facts.

I've always thought of myself as British, and a proud European. Over the past two decades I've been able to judge at least in my life experience, relations, trades, movement, holidays, tourism, common laws, collaboration, science projects, shared security data, all of this has improved Britain and all Euro states. The pro's far out-way the cons.

I mean take away it being a bloc, free movement, and largely HQ'd in Brussels and I think most people would have less issue. But it is hard to judge if things have worsened or improved over a period and I think the nature of politics these days is to always focus on the negatives and find someone to blame. This whole debate has been a catalyst and opportunity for some to be fooled into a nationalistic agenda of 'our neighbors to blame, were great, and better off without'. It's fundamentally flawed and based on stigma and psychology more than any well reasoned rational assessment. Not saying the EU is perfect, far from it. But to not be at the table with key neighbors and partners leading 500m people, is not an behavior of a forward looking, leading, worldly country I don't think.



This exactly sums it up as-well. The reformed deal offered controls on immigrants even if by lowering benefits quite a bit, and a special status to avoid further integration. It was the best of both worlds and we'll never get such a good deal again. So we've blindly punished ourselves by rebelling.

Those floating voters who were swayed to leave, why weren't they sure right up until the last few days? How can they have assessed things fully enough (required over weeks) to have judged accurately. There's been said to have been 1m Brexiters whom regret voting out and largely done it out of being swayed by facts or rebelling. There's also 500k whom regretted voting Remain so it would've still been a very very tight win for Brexit with this factored in. But that's an indicator right away, many more will regret it over the coming weeks and months I feel. Many will fool themselves things are better even in the face of evidence they are not.

Sadly in modern democracy some deep issues of high importance and complexity, our democratically voted leaders should have a significant sway on the direction. The vast majority of business, experts, politicians, elected leaders have to carry some responsibility and power here oddly enough to avoid this slim rebel vote from people whom don't have such insight, and are not educated as to the future repercussions. This sadly and understandably is very unpopular a statement for many people - because we like to believe we the people are defeating and improving the system. But sometimes were just damaging it for everyone. Such a slim vote doesn't affect us for a parliament, it's going to punish the country, break up the UK union, weaken the EU, and make it more likely other countries slip into similar thinking, leaving, all of this adding further economic uncertainty and costing us all £'s. Or €'s. Or $'s.

It's a lot of negative impacts for our economy and others. I don't think many people realise quite how much were in a global village and acting in this selfish manner harms more than helps.

Wouldn't you agree that the EU's survival through the test of time, whether it be bloody or by votes early on, is futile? I'm one of those that believe sovereign nations remaining independent from unelected bureaucrats superseding the country is just the natural flow of things. At least the flow that citizenry in a given nation would want. I think the voters in Britain knew that this vote was now or never. They understood the historical impact, metaphorically pushing themselves out of the nest. All good things come to an end and managing their own nation's collective future is a struggle they probably gladly welcome. I think the EU is an economic ceiling that hinders what progress could be made. It's a sink or swim scenario, but a shake up like this was just inevitable. Its been long enough, Britain has every right to steer their own destiny