Has Boris's relationship with Trump damaged the special relationship.

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Tigger2, Jan 20, 2021.

  1. Montegriffo

    Montegriffo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2017
    Messages:
    10,673
    Likes Received:
    8,941
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The UK Parliament had the right to overrule any EU laws or regulations.
    We never gave up Parliamentary Supremacy.
    We could block any EU law we didn't like through an Act of Parliament.
    That is sovereignty.
    All your Wiki quote is saying is that unopposed EU laws can come into law in the UK without a further Act of Parliament.
    The EU could not force unwanted laws on Parliament.
    Parliament remained supreme ie sovereignty.
     
  2. Tigger2

    Tigger2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2020
    Messages:
    3,663
    Likes Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    What unanswered question?
    The very one you just answered, or rather avoided answering by saying "Regulation" instead of "Law"
    As you appear to suffer severe pedantry, I'll rephrase the question in hope you might not dodge it.
    Name one EU regulation the UK has not agreed to that has any significant effect on the average man/woman in the UK.
    Ah, that pedantry again. Texas is called a "state" which is a different name to the name "country". Therefore all he other comparisons I made can be safely ignored. Sigh.

    Believe me I have debated this with Brexiters to the nth degree, literally thousands of posts. I have heard all your arguments, accusations and insults. All the stuff about being a foreigner in my own country, not caring about the poor blah blah.
    Anything other than address the facts. Having made the soap box claim that the EU made people poorer, you fail to acknowledge ant counter evidence, but switch immediately to usual Brexiter tactics of insult and evasion. Seen it all before mate.
    Yeah, yeah. I'm sure you care so much more than I about the poor. :rolleyes:
     
  3. Tigger2

    Tigger2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2020
    Messages:
    3,663
    Likes Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I minor correction here, some regulations within the EU can be passed by majority vote.
    Another interesting point.
    The Uk was offered a 5 year moratorium on freedom of movement to give time to better hone the system.
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2021
  4. Lil Mike

    Lil Mike Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Messages:
    51,287
    Likes Received:
    22,667
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "All your Wiki quote is saying is that unopposed EU laws can come into law in the UK without a further Act of Parliament."

    Well yeah.

    So Parliament has to make some sort of affirmative action to override any EU law or regulation? Have they ever done that?
     
  5. Lil Mike

    Lil Mike Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Messages:
    51,287
    Likes Received:
    22,667
    Trophy Points:
    113
    An interesting way to phrase your question.

    "Name one EU regulation the UK has not agreed to that has any significant effect on the average man/woman in the UK."

    Err, why should I answer this particular question since it has nothing to do with any of my posts?

    I pointed out that the EU could pass regulations for it's member states without their input. So the EU doesn't need the UK to "agreed to" anything. It happens automatically. And what's the point of this qualifier, "any significant effect on the average man/woman in the UK?"

    I think I see why you've "debated this with Brexiters to the nth degree, literally thousands of posts" with little effect, and I'm not a Brexiter. You're not debating honestly.

    Oh well, I'm sure your country will work this out.
     
  6. freedom8

    freedom8 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2018
    Messages:
    1,842
    Likes Received:
    1,110
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's funny, but a bit short. Many EU laws and directives had and still have indirect effects on UK citizens, like the standards ( quality and other characteristics) imposed for various goods.,
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2021
  7. freedom8

    freedom8 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2018
    Messages:
    1,842
    Likes Received:
    1,110
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It is simpler that that: each country has the right to veto any important decision made by the Commission; that is preventive action.
    Moreover, all laws passed by the EU Parliament have to be ratified by each member's Parliament to become effective. Those 2 rules explain why the EU is so slow and heavy to manage.
     
  8. Lil Mike

    Lil Mike Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Messages:
    51,287
    Likes Received:
    22,667
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And that applies to regulations as well?
     
  9. freedom8

    freedom8 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2018
    Messages:
    1,842
    Likes Received:
    1,110
    Trophy Points:
    113
    All regulations are scutinized by the individual Parliaments before being enacted. Objections are discussed within EU Parliament and EU Council.
    When objections persist, they are looked at by special commissions.

    If a large majority of Parliaments do not object that the proposed regulation does not infringe the subsidiarity principle, the EU can impose its regulation.

    It should be noted that the areas of action that were delegated to the EU by the members States and, hence, in which the EU can impose its rules and regulations, have been UNANIMOUSLY determined by all members states' Parliaments.

    And, in case of diagreement on the interpretation of all these agreements, you still have the European Court of Justice for arbitration.

    Very complex system indeed.
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2021
  10. freedom8

    freedom8 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2018
    Messages:
    1,842
    Likes Received:
    1,110
    Trophy Points:
    113
    When brexiteers said the EU had stolen UK's sovereignty, that was a vicious lie: the EU never "stole" any right that the UK Parliament had not willingly given to it.
    And all along the years when UK was member of the EU, it participated in the creation of all EU rules and regulations.
    Brexiteers are either ignorant or hypocrites; I would not exclude some of them cumulate both.
    Now, for their so-called recovered sovereignty, that is the most ludicrous aspect. In today's global village, can any country be totally sovereign?
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2021
  11. AlpinLuke

    AlpinLuke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2014
    Messages:
    6,559
    Likes Received:
    588
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Was there a special relationship?
    I've never noted it.

    UK was part of EU and US had a direct relationship with EU.
    After Brexit it's all to be built starting from zero [and from a Catholic Irish guy at the White House, with good peace of Boris ...].
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2021
  12. joesnagg

    joesnagg Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2020
    Messages:
    4,749
    Likes Received:
    6,799
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Not surprising, considering a majority of our politicians, from top to bottom are lawyers, including the top tiers of the unelected bureaucracy, which no doubt contributes to our ongoing political miseries.
     
  13. freedom8

    freedom8 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2018
    Messages:
    1,842
    Likes Received:
    1,110
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, there always has been, specially in the field of defense and intelligence, partially due to an (almost) common language.
    Former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair was dubbed Bush's poodle for his support to 43 during the second Irak war.
     
  14. Lil Mike

    Lil Mike Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Messages:
    51,287
    Likes Received:
    22,667
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not for nuthin' but your comment contradicts the link I had previously posted.


    Could you provide a link to document your argument?
     
  15. freedom8

    freedom8 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2018
    Messages:
    1,842
    Likes Received:
    1,110
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I have no link to give you, sorry. The one you give does indeed seem to contradict me. I'm no specialist either and the matter is complex and evolutive. One thing is certain though: the UK was never imposed laws or regulations it had not agreed to, either specifically, either through previous formal devolution of its right to the EU institutions. That principle is the very essence of the EU constitution.
     
  16. Tigger2

    Tigger2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2020
    Messages:
    3,663
    Likes Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes, but even more interesting that you will go to any lengths to avoid addressing it.
    The question is pertinent because the claim is the EU is becoming a Quasi state and the UK losing its sovereignty as a vassal state.
    If this is not your contention please clarify.
     
  17. Tigger2

    Tigger2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2020
    Messages:
    3,663
    Likes Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    When I first read this I thought you were being factious, but now I realise you are not. Do you really think America has been left behind socially and culturally. That is the view in much of Europe even before Trump. Since Trump I have heard people comparing the States to India, not economically, but in attitudes to the poor, religion, those who are different and the outside world generally.
     
  18. AmericanNationalist

    AmericanNationalist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2013
    Messages:
    41,165
    Likes Received:
    20,940
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I do, I absolutely do and this is in large part due to my research of European politics and European political theory. As an example, Canada has a unity government, Israel has the Knesset and in the UK you also have a multi-party option. Here in America, we're doomed to two camps and forced to express our varied social and political views of the world...through the donkey and elephant.

    I might not like the fact the US is basically the whores of Europe financially since, for some reason we still think a Marshall Plan is necessary for Europe.(I personally think it's political kickbacks for our political officials and a serious under covering of that would lead to massive exposure of political corruption inside of America.) but I'll say this in favor of our European counterparts: You guys actually have the ability to transform the landscape of Europe, should you so choose.

    The comparison of Brexit and Trump, is like comparing a baby to an adult. Brexit was a monumental decision that essentially said to Brussels: The UK is going to reclaim its national sovereignty. Now, there's some hiccups and some things economically that have to be worked out, and that part of it the government failed in its negotiations but I'm still proud of the Brits. You guys wanted an independent, sovereign UK and you got it.

    Trump was but one man, he didn't lead a "political movement", contrary to what democrats think there wasn't "Trump Republicans"(and as you can imagine given my comments just above, a 'Trump Republican' is no different than any other Republican or democrat.) So again, compared to the revolutionary declaration of Brits/English citizens in the UK, Trump was a baby. A minor play in world history.

    In short: We lack representation, political awareness or even a cohesion regarding our political theory. At first, when some UK commentators remarked as such a century ago, I thought it would be sour grapes. But upon close examination, they're right. We're still a baby politically, some 250 years later.
     
  19. AlpinLuke

    AlpinLuke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2014
    Messages:
    6,559
    Likes Received:
    588
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    EU "laws" are actually divided into two categories:

    * Regulations have issued by EU and they are immediately valid in the Union.
    * Directives have issued by EU, but they have to be adopted by the members [by means of a dedicated law].

    Then there are "decisions" which are valid for the receivers [if EU issues a decision about Italy, Italy has to apply it. A decision can be issued also about a private subject: for example a firm, a corporation ...].

    There are also recommendations which are only recommendations ...
     
    Lil Mike likes this.
  20. Tigger2

    Tigger2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2020
    Messages:
    3,663
    Likes Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    One of the obvious ways we feel you are being left behind is health care. Most European countries have some form of free at the point of contact health care and it has not destroyed our economies or reduced our standard of living. When we listen to America we here two failed arguments. One is that it will cost too much and break America (Which is clearly disproven by Europe) The other is that you just don't want it. I think this second opinion is down to your lack of choice and that both of your parties are conservative and controlled by money. No voter can vote for a European style health system because no party dare offer it.

    You have referred to this several times, before I answer, are you alluding to U.S defence spending and Nato?
    Indeed and not just Brexit. We recently had Jeremy Corbyn leading the labour party, now no one in their right mind would elect him to run the country, but the fact that Labour voters elected him to party leadership lead the conservatives to reconsider its political compass and move back toward our middle ground.

    I have mixed feelings about Brexit, it was sold to the public on a raft of lies, things such as 4 million Turks joining the Eu and coming to work in the UK. When Turkey was never going to be allowed into the EU, and promises to them that the door was slightly open were made to try and get them to reform and stop using torture etc.
    On the other hand over the last few years I have noticed the UK being given exceptions to a growing number of EU policies, such as retaining the pound, leaving the ERM. So I began to wonder if our roads keep diverging so much then sooner or later the gulf between us would become so large we would need to leave, so why not now.
    Economically its crazy and my arguments are nearly all with those claiming it will help the poor, but It might just be our destiny to stand alone.


    Trump represented a desire to escape from the non choices you current have, but he wasn't the man he promised to be. He was just a bigot who thought he knew better than anyone around him. He hit on things people wanted changed, but had no idea how to change them successfully. And worse he saw no reason to take the whole country with him and thus one after another he alienated people and got kicked out.

    Which leads me to this quote above; I absolutely agree, but isn't that because you are afraid of the choices? Mention any progressive ideas to an American and they shout Communist. You are terrified that if you veer even slightly from the capitalist path you will immediately be taken over by Fidel Castro. So you have two capitalist parties with hardly a *** paper between them.

    BTW. I can't believe you are still punishing Cuba, get over it for gods sake.
     
  21. AlpinLuke

    AlpinLuke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2014
    Messages:
    6,559
    Likes Received:
    588
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Regarding UK, I find it curious that there are Brexiters who are still so interested in the destiny of the European Union.
    We ignore the United Kingdom now, I cannot understand why they are still following what's happening in the Union.
    British mysteries ...

    Between UK and EU now there is an intermediate condition [in good substance about trade nothing has changed] and probably before of next summer we are not going to see something really new.

    About migration and financial activities something has changed immediately, but the impact of these new rules is quite limited on daily life [if you are not going to look for a job in UK or the other way round].
     
  22. Tigger2

    Tigger2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2020
    Messages:
    3,663
    Likes Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The reason they are interested in anything going wrong in the EU is because they are constantly being shown the problems they have caused for the UK and all they can do is bang their drums and say "Look at that, they're worse off"
    I have travelled quite a bit in Europe and can I say I really like you guys.
     
  23. AlpinLuke

    AlpinLuke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2014
    Messages:
    6,559
    Likes Received:
    588
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I have enjoyed my stay in New York as well. Probably because Manhattan [I was in the down town, near Wall Street] is full of Italians ...
     
  24. Tigger2

    Tigger2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2020
    Messages:
    3,663
    Likes Received:
    1,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Ahh. I'm in the UK.
     
  25. AmericanNationalist

    AmericanNationalist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2013
    Messages:
    41,165
    Likes Received:
    20,940
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I will answer in part here and in the next quote: All of the above regarding our defense spending, and nato and foreign aid. When the US Citizens were finally made aware of this grotesque spending, especially in the 2016 elections the defense made by our establishment politicians is that it's but 1% of the budget, and so we should be fine with that.

    Well, when that 1% is tens of trillions of dollars, several hundred billions of dollars that makes an impact when it comes to spending.(Also, I need to be clear with my numbers. It's 1% foreign aid, our defense spending has never hovered below 22%). Also, we spend ALOT on 'health care', but not in delivering it. More in the defensive medicine, the papers, the red tape. It's just a complete mess and a bigger government program will not lead to the success that you guys have.

    In part, you benefit from the smaller European countries. We're a country of 320 million people. I think the UK at last census was about 74 million. With smaller numbers, it's easier for more beds, more cots, etc and far less use of supply then that of the United States. Also, to a much less of an extreme degree than us, you're not selling everything all over the world but your trade ports are largely open to fellow Europeans(the biggest loss of leaving the EU was how easy it was. But if the two administrations ever get to an equilibrium, I wouldn't be surprised if that opens up again for you guys.).

    So an American reform, due to smaller sizes will never in fact quite be what the EU/UK have. But I do agree that reform is absolutely necessary and must occur in several areas. Also, a major reason we'll never get what you guys have, is that because the EU is interconnected(IE: A Polish citizen can use a France hospital). Democrats have largely, strongly opposed Across-State-Lines and as a result, even if they scream to the mountaintops they don't and refuse to add the most crucial element to a universal health care plan.

    But the main issue is the cost of pensions, period. So I'm not chasing UHC as some kind of mythical model that we must absolutely follow, especially since Democrats aren't interested in the certain steps to make it happen. I much prefer realistic solutions to the health care issue. I have a large wide-scaling proposition to fixing health care in America but to save you as much of a diatribe as I can I'll be succinct with what I wish would happen:

    A two-tier system, with public and private insurers/hospitals. I'd add a system tier breaking it into 3's of singles, families and seniors/pre-existing conditions. The biggest reason for the rise of premium costs is that everyone is added to the pool. Why we insist on such an economically destructive approach, is anyone's guess. Instead, break the pool into these 3 groups and of course, each group will have differing costs but each group will also be far better off than if they'd grouped it together.

    Maybe pre-existing conditions/seniors will end up holding a little bit of the cost bag, but in exchange for the coverage of pre-existing conditions which is the main Democrat hiccup, I say it's a well-balanced trade off.





     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2021

Share This Page