The Gaming Den Forum Index The Gaming Den
Welcome to the Gaming Den.
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Google
 Search WWW   Search tgdmb.com 
Brexistentialism
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 9, 10, 11 ... 13, 14, 15  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Gaming Den Forum Index -> MPSIMS
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Kaelik
ArchDemon of Rage


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 12087

PostPosted: Wed Jul 13, 2016 5:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Wait so I'm confused... Corbyn doesn't want to be party leader? And so MPs who hated him voted for him to force him to be in the running he doesn't want to be in? How is any of that related to a completely different vote taken after people went home to exclude current voting members who joined too recently and therefore must be secret Tories trying to elect Corbyn to sabotage the party (No seriously, I saw someone claiming this in another location...).
_________________
"DSMatticus" wrote:
Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
Click here to see the hidden message (It might contain spoilers)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
FrankTrollman
Serious Badass


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 27159

PostPosted: Wed Jul 13, 2016 7:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Corbyn is the party leader. He was elected in an arcane process and now he is the leader of the Parliamentary Labour Party. However, for various reasons that range from totally reasonable to fucking pathetic, the vast majority of the Parliamentary Labour Party doesn't like him and doesn't want to follow him. The members of parliament have staged a revolt where they are trying to get him to step down, but it turns out they don't actually have the power to force him to resign.

The origin of this clusterfuck is the basic left/right problem that 2 party systems have (while the UK has like 8 fucking parties, it's essentially a 2 party system where the name of the parties changes somewhat depending on what part of the country you are in). Party members are people who identify strongly with the party, while the total vote of each party is simply everyone who feels the party's representatives are closer to them than the other party's is. So the members of the Labour party are a lot more left wing than the average person who votes for a Labour candidate, just as the members of the Conservative party are a lot more right wing than the average person who votes for a Conservative candidate. Thus, the average member of the parliamentary delegation of each major party spends a lot of time trying to convince the average Joes that their party is a lot more moderate than it actually is, while winning leadership elections of the party members requires you to act as extreme as possible. Like the US primary system, where you need to throw red meat to the base to win the primary and you need to pivot to moderation to win the general.

And so Labour and the Tories both have leaders who are more extreme than their average member of parliament, who in turn are more extreme than their average parliamentary election voter. Where Corbyn differs markedly from Cameron or Milibrand is that he doesn't spend a lot of time trying to convince the electorate that this isn't the case. He comes off as one of the Trotskyist old men who hung out at my uncle's house, because he's basically one of those guys and is totally uninterested in pretending otherwise. Meanwhile, Theresa May is basically Hitler and she spent her first couple of speeches since sewing up the party leadership claiming that she was going to tax rich people and stick up for the little guy and do all kinds of other leftist and moderate crap that she will in fact not ever do.

Can the Labour party win while being unapologetically leftist at the top? I dunno. No one else does either, because the Labour party hasn't tried that in the living memory of my mom. Maybe they could, maybe they couldn't, but the people who currently have seats in parliament are mostly uninterested in finding out. The strategy they (and by "they" I mean about 80% of the people with seats in parliament) want to pursue is one where they tack to the right and try to snatch moderate votes that might otherwise go to the Tories. Can that win? Maybe. Certainly Blair won like three fucking elections doing that shit. But it hasn't won lately, and Milibrand lost the last election extremely badly despite the fact that the Tories had objectively the worst economic performance in the history of the United Kingdom - and he spent that election claiming he was going to be basically just like the Tories but not as extreme (austerity that was "less and slower" rather than challenging the underlying premise of setting fire to the economy and kicking peasants to chase arbitrary debt thresholds).

Now the reason that Corbyn is leader at all is because the members of the Parliamentary Labour Party are bad at tactics and plotting. After the drubbing of the last election, the communist wing of the Labour Party threatened to walk out if they didn't get a chance to vote for someone who wasn't one flavor (flavour?) or another of fake centrist. Nominations for the leadership post are made by members of parliament, and so a bunch of parliamentarians nominated Corbyn even though they did not support him because they were afraid that without some kind of genuine leftist on the ballot the party would collapse in acrimony. They convinced themselves that they'd selected an unelectable crank, and while for the general election they might still prove to have been right about that, for an election of party members they were very much wrong. If they wanted a business friendly centrist to win, the correct choice would have been to nominate three commies and only one Blairite, because fucking obviously. But that is not what they did, and in any case Corbyn got a majority of the vote and that is fucking that. But it's important to remember that Corbyn was not in fact someone that the MPs ever really thought they would have leading them, he was just supposed to be a token lefty on the stage to make the "serious" people look better. Like letting Trump into the Republican debates, but on the left.

I don't know what the way forward here is supposed to be. There is a fundamental impasse where the Labour party has not figured out a message that can win over its own membership, the electorate, and the elected representatives at the same time. Fuck, they don't seem to have figured out a message that will make any of those groups happy, let alone all three.

-Frank
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kaelik
ArchDemon of Rage


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 12087

PostPosted: Wed Jul 13, 2016 7:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

My specific question was about this:

Parthenon wrote:
the Labour rules for challenging the Labour leader is that all the challengers need support from 20% of the MPs. But there is no requirement for the current leader to drum up support. However, the Labour MPs who hate the idea of Corbyn wanted to ignore that and demand that 20% of the MPs vote for Corbyn.


Which sounds like it is about a current/future party election, not a past one.
_________________
"DSMatticus" wrote:
Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
Click here to see the hidden message (It might contain spoilers)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
FrankTrollman
Serious Badass


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 27159

PostPosted: Wed Jul 13, 2016 7:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Kaelik wrote:
My specific question was about this:

Parthenon wrote:
the Labour rules for challenging the Labour leader is that all the challengers need support from 20% of the MPs. But there is no requirement for the current leader to drum up support. However, the Labour MPs who hate the idea of Corbyn wanted to ignore that and demand that 20% of the MPs vote for Corbyn.


Which sounds like it is about a current/future party election, not a past one.


OK. So last time around, a number of fake centrist type Labour MPs nominated Corbyn despite not actually supporting him in order to appease the commies in the party who were making noises about being disenfranchised. This time, a bunch of the MPs are saying "Fuck this, let's just disenfranchise all the leftists. What're they gonna do, vote Lib Dem?"

The first plan for disenfranchisement was to demand that Corbyn get a number of MPs to re-nominate him for a challenge on his own position. Which they would presumably then not do, leaving the seat open for someone they found more acceptable. That plan went down in flames, and Corbyn is going to stand for election without MPs having to nominate him to challenge himself.

The next plan for disenfranchisement was to simply announce that a bunch of Labour party members don't get to vote because go fuck yourself. Labour has a bunch of levels of membership, including various levels where you pay like 3 or something for a temporary membership in the party. There is a meme going around that a lot of British people believe that Corbyn got elected because a lot of people who weren't terribly invested in the party or were otherwise "not serious" voted for the crankish lefty instead of someone more traditionally appealing. This is pretty obviously not true (consider: in the United States being a member of the Democratic or Republican Party is literally free, and that isn't really part of any Jedi Mind Trick to get parties to select unelectable extremists). But the fact that many people believe it, and more importantly many actual MPs believe it, means that they think that literally disenfranchising a bunch of lower membership tier party members in the next election will give them an edge over the commies.

This probably sounds incredibly heavy handed, horrendously stupid, and almost guaranteed to fail. And um... yes. Yes it is.

A thing to wrap your head around is that politics in the UK is insanely small scale and bullshit. The Mayor of London gets more votes than the Prime Minister. That's not even a joke. Sadiq Khan got 1,148,716 votes to become mayor of London, and Theresa May got 35,453 votes to become MP for Maidenhead. The current prime minister of the UK has never received more votes in an election than a second decimal point rounding error of the vote share of the Mayor of London. Fuck, the third place Green Party protest vote candidate for Mayor of London got 150,673, nearly five times the votes Theresa May got in her best performance. If the machinations of parliamentary intrigue sound super small time and like amateur hour bullshit, that is because they are in fact super small time amateur hour bullshit. A Parliamentary District is so small and bullshit that winning it is like successfully getting onto the school board of Santa Cruz, California (Sheila Coonerty's vote total of 29,345 votes would have been the winning total in a majority of parliament seats).

-Frank
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Koumei
Serious Badass


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 12797
Location: South Ausfailia

PostPosted: Thu Jul 14, 2016 4:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Kaelik wrote:
My specific question was about this:

Parthenon wrote:
the Labour rules for challenging the Labour leader is that all the challengers need support from 20% of the MPs. But there is no requirement for the current leader to drum up support. However, the Labour MPs who hate the idea of Corbyn wanted to ignore that and demand that 20% of the MPs vote for Corbyn.


Which sounds like it is about a current/future party election, not a past one.


Parthenon worded it clumsily. They wanted to ignore the "He doesn't have to drum up 20% support" rule and demand that, for the new leadership challenge, Corbyn can't run unless he has 20%, and thus is (presumably) automatically excluded.
_________________
Count Arioch the 28th wrote:
There is NOTHING better than lesbians. Lesbians make everything better.


Last edited by Koumei on Thu Jul 14, 2016 4:52 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sandmann
Apprentice


Joined: 10 Nov 2011
Posts: 76

PostPosted: Thu Jul 14, 2016 6:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Boris Johnson is now foreign secretary in the new May government... Why? Seriously, why?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sendaz
Journeyman


Joined: 27 Dec 2015
Posts: 124

PostPosted: Thu Jul 14, 2016 6:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

sandmann wrote:
Boris Johnson is now foreign secretary in the new May government... Why? Seriously, why?
Because they probably believe they needed a Leave campaigner to fill the role, plus it puts him on the hot spot to help fulfil everything he promised or at least a reasonable facsimile of it.
This despite the fact there were several Remain campaigners who could have set aside their own feelings and do the job better.

This will be a Make or Break for Boris. He can't continue to make the gaffes he has in the past and he has to evolve into something better (Politimon GO?) or the political & press machine will grind him up. Even now you see the opening salvos in the foreign press.

A rather surprising move all around, but it could be serving May's long term goals. Sooner or later Boris would have gotten over whatever Gove hit him with to make him step away originally in run up for PM and if he can't pull off some fabulous moves here any political future will be ashes.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kaelik
ArchDemon of Rage


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 12087

PostPosted: Thu Jul 14, 2016 7:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

sandmann wrote:
Boris Johnson is now foreign secretary in the new May government... Why? Seriously, why?


Because if you know your inevitable end is to be thrown into the pit of spikes, you want to throw as many other people into the pit first so you can land on their backs and not on the spikes.
_________________
"DSMatticus" wrote:
Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
Click here to see the hidden message (It might contain spoilers)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Korwin
Duke


Joined: 13 Feb 2009
Posts: 1900
Location: Linz / Austria

PostPosted: Thu Jul 14, 2016 11:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Kaelik wrote:
sandmann wrote:
Boris Johnson is now foreign secretary in the new May government... Why? Seriously, why?


Because if you know your inevitable end is to be thrown into the pit of spikes, you want to throw as many other people into the pit first so you can land on their backs and not on the spikes.
nicely worded!
_________________
Red_Rob wrote:

I mean, I'm pretty sure the Mayans had a prophecy about what would happen if Frank and PL ever agreed on something. PL will argue with Frank that the sky is blue or grass is green, so when they both separately piss on your idea that is definitely something to think about.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FrankTrollman
Serious Badass


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 27159

PostPosted: Thu Jul 14, 2016 9:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

BoJo's appointment to the foreign office of all fucking things can only be interpreted as an insult. An insult to pretty much every country. Plausible interpretations of this are:

  • Theresa May cares more about internal Tory party politics than she does about the UK's relationship with any and every other country. She is willing to play chicken with the United States' special relationship with Britain in order to protect her right flank in intra-party bullshit. Under this interpretation, Theresa May is dangerously incompetent.

  • Theresa May fully intends to negotiate hard with Brussels, and is sending the EU a deliberate insult at the beginning of negotiations in order to show them that she is tough and means business. Under this interpretation, Theresa May is dangerously incompetent.

  • Theresa May fully intends to fold to Europe and fucking hates Boris Johnson. She is attempting to leave him holding the bag to save her career. Under this interpretation, Theresa May is a treacherous backstabber and whether she is good or bad at it is presently unknown.


-Frank
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ancient History
Invincible Overlord


Joined: 18 Aug 2010
Posts: 11367

PostPosted: Thu Jul 14, 2016 10:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Split the difference: May is positioning Johnson into a position where he is guaranteed to fail, and is going to try and use that to her best advantage when it inevitably happens.
_________________
The Unpublishable - Updates Fridays between midnight and midnight | http://wikithulhu.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Parthenon
Knight-Baron


Joined: 24 Jan 2009
Posts: 908

PostPosted: Thu Jul 14, 2016 10:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Yeah, my bad, sorry about the confusing wording.

My thinking on Boris Johnson being foreign secretary is that either
  • A: The whole Conservative leadership was staged and this was agreed upon way beforehand: all the Julius Caesar quotes were to pretend that the reason Boris didn't run is because of Gove, and Leadsom quit very suddenly for little reason because they'd already had the charade stopping Leave campaigners from being PM. Boris Johnson knew that if he was Prime Minister he'd have to go hard on Leave and end up in a really shitty situation, so he took a promotion to foreign secretary rather than be prime minister and be blamed for the fact that EU negotiations will go really badly for the UK.

  • B: Teresa May knows that if the UK backtracks at all on free movement or anythign similar, then if someone who campaigned to remain or who abstained was foreign secretary then 52% of the country would have a semi-legitimate grievance that the government wasn't taking their vote seriously, so she is forced to have a leaver in that position, and because they won't get an agreement that works Boris will get shafted.



    All the stuff in the news about Gove backstabbing Johnson seems overly contrived and too often repeated to feel true. While A is very conspiracy theory it makes about as much sense as the current explanation.
  • Back to top
    View user's profile Send private message
    PhoneLobster
    King


    Joined: 07 Mar 2008
    Posts: 6199

    PostPosted: Fri Jul 15, 2016 12:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

    Having lived in a country of wildly incompetent conservative party ministerial appointments (across the board no less) for the last several years as a general rule it is almost ALWAYS a matter of internal party politics with NO consideration of whether the appointment is actually appropriate to the role in any shape or form.

    The party has exceptionally limited talent pools to start with before further arbitrary backroom factional pandering limitations, and since they are Tories they just don't give a fuck about actual competence in government and as a general rule rarely fear any kind of serious personal career consequences for failure to function in their appointed roles.
    _________________
    Phonelobster's Self Proclaimed Greatest Hits Collection : (no really, they are awesome)
    Click here to see the hidden message (It might contain spoilers)
    Back to top
    View user's profile Send private message
    FrankTrollman
    Serious Badass


    Joined: 07 Mar 2008
    Posts: 27159

    PostPosted: Fri Jul 15, 2016 5:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List



    -Frank
    Back to top
    View user's profile Send private message
    Koumei
    Serious Badass


    Joined: 07 Mar 2008
    Posts: 12797
    Location: South Ausfailia

    PostPosted: Fri Jul 15, 2016 6:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

    Not that it can happen without the EU actually liking it, but what is the EEA+ deal in the "Won't crash UK economy" and "Acceptable to Leave voters" crossover?

    Also I was worried I was the winner of "tasteless Brexit jokes" contest, but Yahtzee stepped up to the plate with his "The value of the pound has dropped faster than a conservative prime minister's trousers at a pig farm". and "nostalgia runs through this like whisky through a recently deposed prime minister". Never change.
    _________________
    Count Arioch the 28th wrote:
    There is NOTHING better than lesbians. Lesbians make everything better.
    Back to top
    View user's profile Send private message
    FrankTrollman
    Serious Badass


    Joined: 07 Mar 2008
    Posts: 27159

    PostPosted: Fri Jul 15, 2016 6:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

    Koumei wrote:
    Not that it can happen without the EU actually liking it, but what is the EEA+ deal in the "Won't crash UK economy" and "Acceptable to Leave voters" crossover?


    The EEA+ deal is a hypothetical situation where the UK keeps access to the common market but doesn't have to pay any money towards funding the EU institutions which support that common market and also British people get to travel in Europe and own property there but EU citizens have to stay the fuck out of England. That's the thing that the "sane" wing of the leavers claim they are going to get. They are not going to get that.

    Even today it hasn't really sunk in to the British people or the British press that the UK does not have the whip hand in negotiations with the EU.

    -Frank
    Back to top
    View user's profile Send private message
    Koumei
    Serious Badass


    Joined: 07 Mar 2008
    Posts: 12797
    Location: South Ausfailia

    PostPosted: Fri Jul 15, 2016 6:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

    I guessed that's what it was, I was just wondering what it stands for. Even a google search, after you go "No I don't mean Real Deal, I mean EEA+ deal", brings up mentions of it and what it means and how "Hahaha no" is the answer, but... not how it came to be called that or anything.
    _________________
    Count Arioch the 28th wrote:
    There is NOTHING better than lesbians. Lesbians make everything better.
    Back to top
    View user's profile Send private message
    tussock
    Prince


    Joined: 07 Nov 2009
    Posts: 2549
    Location: Here

    PostPosted: Fri Jul 15, 2016 10:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

    In NZ you get to be a minister of the state or not (under the right wing party) depending on how many donations to the party have your name tagged onto them. The Prime Minister brings in the most money, the Finance Minister brings in the next most, and on down the line.

    Failing terribly at your job to the point of costing a lot of votes just means they give your ministership to someone else and you get to be minister of whatever was left over at the time, maybe after waiting a couple months if you, like, mysteriously appropriated hundreds of millions of dollars of government money for your family or whatever.

    Being able to do the job isn't even a consideration. Most complaints about them can be quickly dealt with through character assassination, thanks to all the data government has on everyone. I understand we follow the British model quite closely, though the state here also appoints the directors of the most watched news channels, and openly threaten to defund anyone who speaks against them on government coin.
    _________________
    news://rec.games.frp.dnd
    Back to top
    View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
    sendaz
    Journeyman


    Joined: 27 Dec 2015
    Posts: 124

    PostPosted: Fri Jul 15, 2016 10:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

    Koumei wrote:
    I guessed that's what it was, I was just wondering what it stands for. Even a google search, after you go "No I don't mean Real Deal, I mean EEA+ deal", brings up mentions of it and what it means and how "Hahaha no" is the answer, but... not how it came to be called that or anything.
    The earliest I can find the term being suggested was back in 2013 here:

    http://openeuropeblog.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/eea-plus-model-for-future-of-uk-in.html

    The outline itself goes back to 1989, but wasn't given a name really back then plus it would have had a different name anyway had they gone forward with it then seeing as the EEA itself wasn't a thing until 1994.


    Last edited by sendaz on Fri Jul 15, 2016 10:45 am; edited 3 times in total
    Back to top
    View user's profile Send private message
    hyzmarca
    Prince


    Joined: 14 Mar 2011
    Posts: 3450

    PostPosted: Fri Jul 15, 2016 3:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

    Koumei wrote:
    Not that it can happen without the EU actually liking it, but what is the EEA+ deal in the "Won't crash UK economy" and "Acceptable to Leave voters" crossover?


    If I had to guess, I'd say that it means that Britain leaves the European Union while remaining part of the European Economic Area, which isn't technically impossibly, just bizarre and unusual enough to cause a lot of butthurt.

    Basically it would mean that the UK would still be part of the EU's internal market but wouldn't be subject to any of the EU's regulatory bodies.

    Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway have similar arangements, they're part of the EEA but not the EU, so it isn't unprecedented.


    Last edited by hyzmarca on Fri Jul 15, 2016 3:50 pm; edited 1 time in total
    Back to top
    View user's profile Send private message
    Shatner
    Knight-Baron


    Joined: 07 Mar 2008
    Posts: 869

    PostPosted: Fri Jul 15, 2016 3:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

    Relevent CGP Grey video.
    Back to top
    View user's profile Send private message
    Koumei
    Serious Badass


    Joined: 07 Mar 2008
    Posts: 12797
    Location: South Ausfailia

    PostPosted: Fri Jul 15, 2016 4:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

    Oh right, European Economic Area (with a plus for PLUS EVEN MORE GOODNESS JUST FOR US WE CAN TOTALLY DO THIS GUYS). I should have remembered that, given Australia has certain EEA benefits (mainly stuff like not needing a Visa to wander around for a few months, just a passport, and some trade-based stuff). You can take a moment to look at a map and check just how close we are to the European area.

    Regular EEA will mean precisely dick for the UK if they get that much.
    _________________
    Count Arioch the 28th wrote:
    There is NOTHING better than lesbians. Lesbians make everything better.
    Back to top
    View user's profile Send private message
    tussock
    Prince


    Joined: 07 Nov 2009
    Posts: 2549
    Location: Here

    PostPosted: Sat Jul 16, 2016 10:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

    There's been suggestions in the NZ media that England leaving the EU may mean all the stuff that NZ and Oz got for getting access to the EU (because we had good deals with UK) when Britain joined the common market may also be subject to renegotiation.

    Because they were never really negotiated with us in the first place, it was just part of the deal for Britain going in. More problematically for us in NZ, we have about zero diplomats left who speak German or French because LOL, just go through England to the EU.
    _________________
    news://rec.games.frp.dnd
    Back to top
    View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
    maglag
    Duke


    Joined: 02 Apr 2015
    Posts: 1115

    PostPosted: Mon Jul 18, 2016 7:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

    England now has a Brexit minister. If that is not proof that they want to drag negotiations down to a crawl I do not know what it is.

    Said minister David Davis first plan is to start screwing with EU migrants before article 50 is triggered. So yeah. Why negotiate when you can just unilaterally change the rules to your benefit?
    _________________
    FrankTrollman wrote:

    Actually, our blood banking system is set up exactly the way you'd want it to be if you were a secret vampire conspiracy.


    Last edited by maglag on Mon Jul 18, 2016 7:17 am; edited 1 time in total
    Back to top
    View user's profile Send private message
    Koumei
    Serious Badass


    Joined: 07 Mar 2008
    Posts: 12797
    Location: South Ausfailia

    PostPosted: Mon Jul 18, 2016 7:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

    It seems very frequent that a situation crops up where the EU hadn't planned for something happening and it later on bites them in the ass. Like "what to do if there's a huge financial crisis that is spreading through multiple countries in the EU" back when they panicked and tried to convince wealthy countries "Don't worry you won't have to bail anyone out!" while telling in-crisis countries "You can't leave, someone can bail you out! That's why you joined!"

    Not including "A process for kicking someone out of the club" seemed like a really obvious and stupid mistake. Having that there would really solve this problem as Germany could in fact say "You have until X to either execute Article 50 or make the formal declaration that you are not doing it. Otherwise you get a Dishonourable Discharge and instead of negotiations, we just flat-out treat you the same as Kuwait*."

    That would at least force the UK to do something and stop dicking everyone around.

    *If it turns out Kuwait actually does have some kind of reasonable trade deal with the EU, then substitute in some other country that is not even remotely part of the EU and doesn't have bullying power or kind-of-friends status and is 100% "Someone else".
    _________________
    Count Arioch the 28th wrote:
    There is NOTHING better than lesbians. Lesbians make everything better.
    Back to top
    View user's profile Send private message
    Display posts from previous:   
    Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Gaming Den Forum Index -> MPSIMS All times are GMT
    Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 9, 10, 11 ... 13, 14, 15  Next
    Page 10 of 15

     
    Jump to:  
    You cannot post new topics in this forum
    You cannot reply to topics in this forum
    You cannot edit your posts in this forum
    You cannot delete your posts in this forum
    You cannot vote in polls in this forum




    Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group