Starmer's Approval Rating Plummets,
News1 min ago
Is Sarkozy right about the EU.........??
When he says "Something isn't right" - Citizens may be losing faith.??
near the top of this article:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/748266 0.stm
near the top of this article:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/748266 0.stm
Answers
1 to 15 of 15
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by R1Geezer. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
its very simple, the citizens of europe do not want to be in a superstate or a republic or a federation, call it whatever its all the same at the end of the day.
they want to keep their own identity, currency etc etc
they never had any faith, the only thing they are losing is their countries, its the politicians who are steamrollering this through at all costs, when will they get the message
THE PEOPLER DONT WANT A EUROPEAN SUPERSTATE
they want to keep their own identity, currency etc etc
they never had any faith, the only thing they are losing is their countries, its the politicians who are steamrollering this through at all costs, when will they get the message
THE PEOPLER DONT WANT A EUROPEAN SUPERSTATE
>Citizens may be losing faith.??
Many citizens lost their faith AGES ago.
What sort of stupid situation is it where a country in Eastern Europe can join the EU, and then hundreds of thousands of THIER workers pour into another EU country.
This is not good for the country losing the people, nor good for the country who are getting the people.
I am not against SOME movement of workers across country boundries, but when you are talking about hundreds of thousands in a short time frame that is stupid.
Many citizens lost their faith AGES ago.
What sort of stupid situation is it where a country in Eastern Europe can join the EU, and then hundreds of thousands of THIER workers pour into another EU country.
This is not good for the country losing the people, nor good for the country who are getting the people.
I am not against SOME movement of workers across country boundries, but when you are talking about hundreds of thousands in a short time frame that is stupid.
I also think it is stupid when a worker comes from a country with a lower standad of living (say Poland) and arrives in the UK to work.
He/She claims to have children back in Poland, AND WE PAY CHILD BENEFIT FOR THE CHILDREN IN POLAND.
Not only that but we pay it at the same rate a UK person gets it, making NO allowance for the fact the the cost of living is low in Poland.
So that encourages workers to come from Poland and other European countries, first to earn a higher salary, and secondly to get a child benefit FAR above what they could get in their country.
I do not pay my UK taxes to fund child benefit for Polish children.
He/She claims to have children back in Poland, AND WE PAY CHILD BENEFIT FOR THE CHILDREN IN POLAND.
Not only that but we pay it at the same rate a UK person gets it, making NO allowance for the fact the the cost of living is low in Poland.
So that encourages workers to come from Poland and other European countries, first to earn a higher salary, and secondly to get a child benefit FAR above what they could get in their country.
I do not pay my UK taxes to fund child benefit for Polish children.
There is also a huge row brewing in Italy. Thousands of Roma gypsies have gone to Italy from poor countries like Slovakia and Romania.
This has seen a huge rise is local street crime with the Italian government saying they are now going to fingerprint all Roma gypsy children to try to reduce street crime.
http://www.adnkronos.com/AKI/English/Security/ ?id=1.0.2298579103
Some Italian people have attacked Roma gypsy camps, setting fire to buildings etc.
http://www.adnkronos.com/AKI/English/CultureAn dMedia/?id=1.0.2230802468
This is exaclty what you expect to happen. The poorest people in the poorest countries will move to the "rich" countries in the hope they can get more money, but finish up being outcasts and causing unrest.
Jst one example of the stupidity of bringing down the country borders in the EU.
This has seen a huge rise is local street crime with the Italian government saying they are now going to fingerprint all Roma gypsy children to try to reduce street crime.
http://www.adnkronos.com/AKI/English/Security/ ?id=1.0.2298579103
Some Italian people have attacked Roma gypsy camps, setting fire to buildings etc.
http://www.adnkronos.com/AKI/English/CultureAn dMedia/?id=1.0.2230802468
This is exaclty what you expect to happen. The poorest people in the poorest countries will move to the "rich" countries in the hope they can get more money, but finish up being outcasts and causing unrest.
Jst one example of the stupidity of bringing down the country borders in the EU.
Yes further down he says people may be thinking that the national level is a better place to address issues and such thinking is "a step backwards"
So yes in that sense he is right.
There is a definate agenda to concentrate on any EU problems and totally ignore anything positive.
How many people even heard that over half a Billion pounds of European social fund money was coming to London?
http://www.mayorwatch.co.uk/Mayor-Announces-68 0m-Skills-Investment-article_id-1660.html
There is a PR war and the EU is losing it
So yes in that sense he is right.
There is a definate agenda to concentrate on any EU problems and totally ignore anything positive.
How many people even heard that over half a Billion pounds of European social fund money was coming to London?
http://www.mayorwatch.co.uk/Mayor-Announces-68 0m-Skills-Investment-article_id-1660.html
There is a PR war and the EU is losing it
Yes, jake, I had realised that.
I had also realised that the UK has just �given up� the rebate earned by Mrs Thatcher meaning that our contribution to the EU budget will rise to �10.2billion and that only �4.6billion will come back by way of Brussels spending. I also know that France is the largest overall recipient of EU funds, raking in �67billion over the next six years, compared with �35billion for the UK.
It�s rather like having �100 stolen from your pocket and being told to be grateful when the robber hands you back a fiver for your cab fare home.
The EU is losing nothing. It is the people of the UK that are the losers amid this utter madness.
I had also realised that the UK has just �given up� the rebate earned by Mrs Thatcher meaning that our contribution to the EU budget will rise to �10.2billion and that only �4.6billion will come back by way of Brussels spending. I also know that France is the largest overall recipient of EU funds, raking in �67billion over the next six years, compared with �35billion for the UK.
It�s rather like having �100 stolen from your pocket and being told to be grateful when the robber hands you back a fiver for your cab fare home.
The EU is losing nothing. It is the people of the UK that are the losers amid this utter madness.
It is not an example, jake. It is the situation surrounding the entire EU budget, unlike the selective extract that you have quoted.
For those wondering what good all this does us, a treasury spokeman said "..the EU budget supported the economic development of the newer member states, which is in our national economic interest."
Quite how this is so has yet to be explained to me and many others. It may go a long way to help M. Sarkozy overcome his bewilderment with the attitude of the plebs towards the "European Project"
As for being a "good European", I am not a European, either good bad or indifferent. Nobody asked me if I wanted to be one and until they have the courtsey to do so I'm a boring old Little Englander.
For those wondering what good all this does us, a treasury spokeman said "..the EU budget supported the economic development of the newer member states, which is in our national economic interest."
Quite how this is so has yet to be explained to me and many others. It may go a long way to help M. Sarkozy overcome his bewilderment with the attitude of the plebs towards the "European Project"
As for being a "good European", I am not a European, either good bad or indifferent. Nobody asked me if I wanted to be one and until they have the courtsey to do so I'm a boring old Little Englander.
As for being a "good European", I am not a European, either good bad or indifferent. Nobody asked me if I wanted to be one and until they have the courtsey to do so I'm a boring old Little Englander.
Who asked if you wanted to be English?
Who asked you if you wanted to be British?
Who asked if you recognise the Queen as the head of State?
Who asked if you wanted to be English?
Who asked you if you wanted to be British?
Who asked if you recognise the Queen as the head of State?
If you want a philosophical (if somewhat meaningless) argument, Vic I suppose the answer must be that by virtue of my birth to English parents (themselves English as far back as I can trace), all of us living in England for all of our lives, probably qualifies me as English as far as I am concerned. My recognition (or otherwise) of the Monarch is immaterial to my perceived nationality.
A person's nationality is generally accepted (with few exceptions) as what they perceive it to be, and I am quite happy with mine.
It is true that the UK is part of Europe (as it is part of the world). That is a geographical matter, not a political one.
Changing one's nationality is usually a bilateral arrangement and , as I said, nobody consulted me.
Will that do?
A person's nationality is generally accepted (with few exceptions) as what they perceive it to be, and I am quite happy with mine.
It is true that the UK is part of Europe (as it is part of the world). That is a geographical matter, not a political one.
Changing one's nationality is usually a bilateral arrangement and , as I said, nobody consulted me.
Will that do?
I forgot to mention that in my lifetime, the option to be �English� has all but been wiped out by successive governments. For political expediency all the English are now �British� except when separate arrangements for the other British (the Scots, Welsh and Irish) are debated. Then, of course, they must be English again.
I don�t want to see my nationality further diluted.
I don�t want to see my nationality further diluted.
Take a look at this map:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markea ston/2008/06/map_of_the_week_public_spendin.ht ml
Living in the South East I get much less back than I put in compared to the rest of the country!
Independance for the South East!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markea ston/2008/06/map_of_the_week_public_spendin.ht ml
Living in the South East I get much less back than I put in compared to the rest of the country!
Independance for the South East!
There's a lot of lies and rubbish written about this.
When you see "The EU" who do you think this is?
You realise of course that the UK is "The EU" third most powerful component?
Poland and the 2004 acession countries were welcomed because to do do increases both theirs and our prosperity. No one with half a brain can deny that Britain has benefitted economically from the cheap labour that Eastern Europe has provided.
On the point about the rebate: again not quite true. Britain argues for a rebate because it was the EU's third poorest country. It would be a very silly person to argue that we are somehow still entitled to it. Much poorer countries with much more vulnerable econmies fill the criteria that Britain did to get a refund and yet the EU wont give them one
Why? because Britain says NO and the reality of Brussels is that what Britain wants it gets.
Sarkozy has a point: despite membership being in a win-win scenario the nonsense on hear shows that you could probably get turkeys to vote for Christmas.
The problem is: Sarkozy is not the person to solve it.
When you see "The EU" who do you think this is?
You realise of course that the UK is "The EU" third most powerful component?
Poland and the 2004 acession countries were welcomed because to do do increases both theirs and our prosperity. No one with half a brain can deny that Britain has benefitted economically from the cheap labour that Eastern Europe has provided.
On the point about the rebate: again not quite true. Britain argues for a rebate because it was the EU's third poorest country. It would be a very silly person to argue that we are somehow still entitled to it. Much poorer countries with much more vulnerable econmies fill the criteria that Britain did to get a refund and yet the EU wont give them one
Why? because Britain says NO and the reality of Brussels is that what Britain wants it gets.
Sarkozy has a point: despite membership being in a win-win scenario the nonsense on hear shows that you could probably get turkeys to vote for Christmas.
The problem is: Sarkozy is not the person to solve it.
1 to 15 of 15
