(June 24, 2016 at 11:44 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote:

(June 24, 2016 at 1:30 am)Tiberius Wrote: Referendums only work when the population is educated on the matter at hand. They should be reserved for civil rights matters and not for complicated economic issues.

If you held a referendum to end taxes, how many idiots do you think would vote yes?

Well I live in Washington State, where we have almost yearly referendums to end various taxes and they almost always fail. People are always mad at the process used when it doesn't get the results they like.

(June 25, 2016 at 12:41 pm)Losty Wrote:

(June 25, 2016 at 12:17 pm)Bella Morte Wrote: I think Texas would be better off without the US.

I guess they have oil. However most oil countries aren't doing that well at the moment. The US would be better off without Texas if you ask me. However it's a myth that Texas has the right to succession in their state constitution or that it was part of the deal to become a state anyway.

(June 25, 2016 at 1:06 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: I'm sort of surprised that it only takes 50.1% to decide something serious like this. It seems a little like you could have the tyranny of a tiny majority over 49.9% of the people with that sort of system. I mean in the US lots of things require 60% of congress or the voters to pass.

51.9% or 3.5% of the total voters more than remain.

(June 25, 2016 at 3:35 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: See, this really hurts. At one time, I was sure that you thought I was the biggest twat on this forum. But it seems now that you've changed your feelings on this matter, and I have perhaps lost a place in your constellation of twattery.

Anyone know how to tie a noose?

Don't worry dude, you still have a special place in my heart.

(June 25, 2016 at 12:32 pm)madog Wrote:

(June 25, 2016 at 12:15 pm)Emjay Wrote: Okay, thanks for the info... it makes a lot more sense how it all fits together... the Council of Europe is separate from the EU, and it is the Council of Europe that is responsible for the ECHR. And you're saying that the EU itself is not bound by the ECHR and is only as good as the values of its members... so if right-wing countries join they can influence policy which is then not accountable to the ECHR? But I think abaris says, everyone has to vote (?unanimously) on it for anything to pass, so shouldn't that be a safeguard?

First you have to note that members of the European parliament MEP's don't have to be particularly clever or knowledgeable about Human Right Law.

The European Commission (not elected) draw up directives and then all the MEPS discuss, maybe ask for changes, then vote ....

You have MEP's now from Eastern Europe, but France can get Right wing MEP's ... and some are pretty way of the scale right ...

Note for some reason right wing politicians get voted in as MEP's, look at Nigel Farage ...

I don't feel comfortable with a lot of the MEP's that can Direct Europe from Directives drawn up by the EU Commission (not elected).

What others think of my right to vote on my conscience, doesn't concern me. It's my vote and my conscience and I trust my research right or wrong above sound bites from those that disagree ....

Would you liken the European Commission to the Civil Service as depicted in Yes Minister? Sir Humphrey Appleby et al... unelected and unaccountable policy-makers who propose and advise M[E]Ps according to their own agenda?

But anyway, yeah, I get what you're saying and where your concerns lie... and it's understandable if you've been directly dealing with these institutions for years on end. But nonetheless I'm still a remainer... against the nationalism that could be a much more immediate threat. But each to their own.

(June 25, 2016 at 1:00 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(June 25, 2016 at 10:24 am)Bella Morte Wrote: I strongly disagree with him on a lot of issues by the looks of things, particularly this one but he's still not worth getting angry over.

Does anyone online merit that sort of emotional investment?

Yes.

(June 25, 2016 at 1:18 pm)Emjay Wrote: Would you liken the European Commission to the Civil Service as depicted in Yes Minister? Sir Humphrey Appleby et al... unelected and unaccountable policy-makers who propose and advise M[E]Ps according to their own agenda?

But anyway, yeah, I get what you're saying and where your concerns lie... and it's understandable if you've been directly dealing with these institutions for years on end. But nonetheless I'm still a remainer... against the nationalism that could be a much more immediate threat. But each to their own.

What goes on inside is pretty secretive even MEP's are on the outside .... sorry never really watched Yes Minister

Yes I can see the fear of Nationalism, which I share ... Note my personal, I have also had a case before the European Parliament through the Peti -Committee, issues have been built up from experience, which is why I never tried to sway anyone prior to the vote ....

(June 25, 2016 at 1:27 pm)Bella Morte Wrote: Yes.

I take that as a compliment since I value everything you say on social issues. Even though I consider every one of your political views as an attempt at self hurt.

(June 25, 2016 at 12:17 pm)Bella Morte Wrote: I think Texas would be better off without the US.

Based on what exactly?

(June 25, 2016 at 1:37 pm)Faith No More Wrote:

(June 25, 2016 at 12:17 pm)Bella Morte Wrote: I think Texas would be better off without the US.

Based on what exactly?

Think it was a joke.

(June 25, 2016 at 1:06 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: I'm sort of surprised that it only takes 50.1% to decide something serious like this. It seems a little like you could have the tyranny of a tiny majority over 49.9% of the people with that sort of system. I mean in the US lots of things require 60% of congress or the voters to pass.

It was incredibly unbelievably stupid. Having the public vote was bad enough, but setting it to 50% was trouser wettingly totally bat shit moronic. Utter overconfidence, Cameron obviously thought this was a formality. Set it to 60 and we'd have been fine. Fucking idiot Cameron. You brought this on, and you fucked it up. He could go down in history as the most stupid person ever, to cause the highest damage in the most avoidable way possible.