[REMOVE ADS]




Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5
Results 201 to 234 of 234
  1. #201
    Why do you call it racist when both Jo Cox and her killer Thomas Mair were from the same race?

  2. #202
    Quote Originally Posted by 144man View Post
    If I'm really honest with myself, there were a few moments when I was beginning to waver. The racist killing of MP Jo Cox during the campaign galvanized me into voting Remain, reinforced by not wanting to be on the same side as creeps like Nigel Farage and John Redwood.
    Yea, it is very easy to go for whole "we want our country back" thing, it's a very simple and appealing idea. Jo Cox's death was so sad though. Was it a race-motivated killing?

  3. #203
    Quote Originally Posted by theboyfromxtown View Post
    Why do you call it racist when both Jo Cox and her killer Thomas Mair were from the same race?
    Because Thomas Mair was an extreme right-wing sympathiser, and was presumably motivated by Jo Cox's stance on racial equality. A Not Guilty plea has been entered on his behalf, so no doubt further details will come to light during the course of the trial.
    Last edited by 144man; 10-21-2016 at 08:07 AM.

  4. #204
    Quote Originally Posted by 144man View Post
    Because Thomas Mair was an extreme right-wing sympathiser, and was presumably motivated by Jo Cox's stance on racial equality. A Not Guilty plea has been entered on his behalf, so no doubt further details will come to light during the course of the trial.
    Thank you for explaining, 144man
    I heard somewhere that people would have been quick to call it a "terrorist" attack if the killer had been Muslim

  5. #205
    I begin with a disclaimer - I voted "remain". (Not going to explain my reasons here, it goes beyond the scope of this post.)

    Having said that, it's a logical fallacy - guilt by association - to call the Brexit vote "racist." Yes, racists presumably voted overwhelmingly for Brexit, but this was not nearly decisive. Exit polling suggested that the white vote was about 53% to 47% in favour of Brexit, compared to a final result of 51.9% to 48.1%. Support for Brexit was weaker among ethnic minorities than whites but still substantial, and it could not have passed without this support. The results suggested that age and class/education were better predictors of how one voted (older and less-educated voters tending to favour Brexit more).

    The vote was anti-immigrant, but the immigrants the Brexiters want to keep out are the poor from Eastern Europe - who are white Christians.

    Standard economic theory of trade says that free trade increases overall output through increased efficiency, but the benefits are not distributed evenly. The wealthy and highly skilled of both countries benefit, as do the poor of the less-developed country, while the unskilled/uneducated of the wealthier country are the losers. Beyond the effect free trade has on manufactured goods, mass immigration of poor people also puts downward pressure on wages in services. Politicians (not economists) have been telling people for years that everyone is a winner in globalisation, but the people on the bottom in the wealthier countries see their own reality.

    I have a friend whose father was a carpenter. Within a few years after the eastern European countries entered the EU, his income plummeted and he left his work to take another job, at lower pay than he had made previously. If you're a homeowner, it's great that you can hire Polish workers for a fraction of the price you used to pay. And nothing against these Polish workers, they're just trying to make a better living as all of us are. But why should we be surprised if the globalisation losers vote for Brexit?

    Resources are limited and there is a value judgement to be made - how do you prioritize the poor of your own country against the poor of other countries?

    Canada has a very strict immigration policy. Their goal is to take people who they expect will contribute more than they take out of the system. Also, they deport illegal immigrants (which is why they don't need a wall). This protects their own poor, unskilled, and uneducated. Does that make Canadians racists? I don't think so.

    There is another problem with open borders which is being revealed in the EU - "brain drain". More than 1 million Greeks (out of 10 million) have already left Greece for other EU countries just in the past few years, primarily going to Germany, the UK, and Denmark, and more are leaving every day. These tend to be the people with skills that Greece needs, also the people who would pay more in taxes there. Recently it was reported that nearly all newly-trained medical doctors and nurses in Greece and Portugal leave their country upon completion of their training (the UK benefits from this). What they leave behind are the pensioners and unskilled, and lower tax revenues. Greece is already in a death spiral, perhaps Portugal also.

    This is not a problem with illegal immigrants in the US - since it's illegal, it's the unskilled and uneducated who make the journey. But if you open the border for anyone to immigrate legally, you can expect many, if not most, medical doctors (as just one example) to leave Mexico for the US. For those who remain in Mexico, things could get much worse.

    Though I voted remain, I find it very unfair to dismiss those who lose out through globalisation as "racists." This also just reinforces their belief (which I tend to agree with) that the "elites" simply do not care about them.
    Last edited by calvin; 10-28-2016 at 07:17 AM.

  6. #206
    I see that Tony Blair is now calling for a new referendum.

  7. #207
    The recent EU-Canada trade deal has taken something like seven years, I think. I guess we will have to do our own separate one now.

  8. #208
    The UK will be leaving the protection of being an EU member just when Trump is cooling towards NATO. Suddenly the world seems a much scarier place.

  9. #209
    Apparently Nigel Farage wants to be America's new ambassador to the EU!! Lol

  10. #210
    Quote Originally Posted by TomatoTom123 View Post
    Apparently Nigel Farage wants to be America's new ambassador to the EU!! Lol
    I suspect France and Italy are going to call on his services shortly! He will be spoilt for choice

  11. #211
    Quote Originally Posted by 144man View Post
    The UK will be leaving the protection of being an EU member just when Trump is cooling towards NATO. Suddenly the world seems a much scarier place.
    Hate to break it to you 144man but based on his NATO rhetoric, "cooling" is an understatement.

    He seems to be backing dat booty up (back peddling) all of a sudden but his base is NOT trying to see and or hear that.

    Pu#$y grabber elect is a disaster waiting to happen not just here, but all over the world. Assad is jumping with glee as I'm sure, so is ISIS.

  12. #212
    Nigel Farage becomes the first British politician to meet Donald Trump

    Name:  image.jpg
Views: 149
Size:  19.8 KB
    Are they supposed to look completely crazy or was that just an oversight?

  13. #213
    Quote Originally Posted by ms_m View Post
    Hate to break it to you 144man but based on his NATO rhetoric, "cooling" is an understatement.

    He seems to be backing dat booty up (back peddling) all of a sudden but his base is NOT trying to see and or hear that.

    Pu#$y grabber elect is a disaster waiting to happen not just here, but all over the world. Assad is jumping with glee as I'm sure, so is ISIS.
    But of course Trump knows how to beat ISIS overnight [Deep irony].

  14. #214
    Quote Originally Posted by theboyfromxtown View Post
    I suspect France and Italy are going to call on his services shortly! He will be spoilt for choice
    The possibility of Marine Le Pen of the National Front becoming President of France next year is too horrible to contemplate.

  15. #215
    Quote Originally Posted by theboyfromxtown View Post
    Why do you call it racist when both Jo Cox and her killer Thomas Mair were from the same race?
    Further to my post #203, from today's Metro:

    "Labour MP Jo Cox was shot and stabbed to death by a constituent who repeatedly shouted "Britain First", a trial heard yesterday... Aide Fazila Aswat tried to defend her boss and heard Mair, 53, yell "Britain First, this is for Britain, Britain will always come first", said prosecutor Richard Whittam QC. He added that it was a premeditated murder for a political and/or ideological cause...Mrs Cox's caseworker Sandra Major said she heard him say "We're British independence" during the alleged attack."

  16. #216
    Now Nigel Farage wants to be the UK's ambassador to the US! According to Donald Trump "many people" would also like him to be. Apparently "he would do a great job..." Lol

  17. #217
    The USA may be a powerful country, but it doesn't pick our ambassadors.

  18. #218
    Quote Originally Posted by 144man View Post
    The USA may be a powerful country, but it doesn't pick our ambassadors.
    You would think so wouldn't you?! I can't believe the guy is still around, with him having lost the leadership of his party, then suddenly regaining it, "winning" the EU referendum, resigning as leader, becoming leader again, planning to step down as leader - and then visiting the US and being offered a job that doesn't even exist! Lol

  19. #219
    And FIFA can go and take a running jump as well. How dare they tell us we can't wear poppies on Armistice day in memory of those who lost their lives!

  20. #220
    Yes, they claim that teams can't send out any "political or religious messages"

    Does seem very unnecessary to ban people from remembering soldiers who lost their lives fighting for the country

  21. #221
    I don't see how it's political because members of all political parties lay wreathes at the Cenotaph, and I don't see how it's religious because atheists wear poppies in remembrance. It is a mark of respect.

    And FIFA are now taken action against Wales because some of their fans were wearing poppies. That surely must be ultra vires FIFA's charter and an infringement of the fans' civil liberties.

  22. #222
    Quote Originally Posted by TomatoTom123 View Post
    There should have been a third option along the lines of "I'm a bit miffed with the EU but I don't really want to leave it"
    I think that was David Cameron's position!!

  23. #223
    Good seeing you on Friday, Roger.

    No one has mentioned here about whether parliamentary approval is needed before triggering Article 50. Based on my elementary knowledge of the British Constitution (which I studied at school for two years in the 1960s before it somehow morphed into O Level Religious Knowledge), I don't see how the Supreme Court will be able to do anything but rule against the Government.

  24. #224
    Quote Originally Posted by 144man View Post
    Good seeing you on Friday, Roger.

    No one has mentioned here about whether parliamentary approval is needed before triggering Article 50. Based on my elementary knowledge of the British Constitution (which I studied at school for two years in the 1960s before it somehow morphed into O Level Religious Knowledge), I don't see how the Supreme Court will be able to do anything but rule against the Government.
    Good to see you too 144man, it was quite a little get-together of SDFers, needless to say I've been busy reading through the book I bought there over the past few days

    It will be interesting to see what the Supreme Court rules, especially as it was my understanding that it was David Cameron's intention to invoke Article 50 within a few days back in June if the result was "Leave".

    Of course there was a landmark vote in Parliament on Wednesday (after your post) where MPs, in principal, signified their approval of the Government invoking Article 50, so it seems unlikely that it won't go ahead irrespective of any verdict.

    Not sure how studying the British Constitution night have morphed into studying Religious Knowledge .. it sounds like a connection that King Henry VIII etc. might have made back in the Tudor era!!

    Roger

  25. #225
    I was a big surprise to all of us who were studying British Constitution as no one had pre-warned us that we would end up doing RK instead.

    It's best that the Supreme Court make a ruling before Article 50 is invoked whether parliamentary approval is required otherwise the Government could have been found to have invoked it illegally.

  26. #226
    I had to do religious studies and I hated it! I wouldn't mind learning about other religions and being taught to be tolerant but having to take exams in the damn thing, c'mon!? Lol

    I really don't know much about what's going on with the courts and everything but what's clear to me is that it's one big mess! Hehe

    It seems as though leaving the EU has triggered a separate debate on the powers of government vs the powers of the executive vs the "will of the people" - oh my, what is going on...?

  27. #227
    At its extreme, the "will of the people" can spill over into mob rule, in which case minorities need their rights safeguarded. Remember Hitler often operated by getting his actions approved by plebiscite.

    The situation is complicated by the UK's not having a written constitution, so the judges will come to their decision using "precedence".

    The way I see it, the following facts are material:

    1) In the UK's system of representative democracy, referendums are not a normal way of governing.
    2) When the UK entered the Common Market, the referendum result was enabled by Parliament, so the same should apply on leaving.
    3) In the recent unsuccessful referendum on voting reform, the terms were specifically included that parliamentary approval would not be required. The fact that no such rider was enshrined in the Brexit referendum implies that parliamentary approval is necessary.
    4)Triggering Article 50 without parliamentary approval is tantamount to governing by decree.
    5)The fact that Scotland, Northern Ireland and Gibraltar all voted to remain in the EU raises serious constitutional issues.

  28. #228
    I was pleased to see that the Supreme Court agreed with my view that to be legal Article 50 would have to be triggered by an Act of Parliament. My only surprise was that the decision was not unanimous.

  29. #229
    Quote Originally Posted by 144man View Post
    I was pleased to see that the Supreme Court agreed with my view that to be legal Article 50 would have to be triggered by an Act of Parliament. My only surprise was that the decision was not unanimous.
    Yes... 8 judges to 3 I believe

    Remember The Daily Mail running this headline...
    Name:  image.jpg
Views: 46
Size:  17.1 KB
    Last edited by TomatoTom123; 01-26-2017 at 01:33 PM.

  30. #230
    Stupid of the Daily Mail. The judges were not making law, but stating what the existing law is. Parliament, not the government, is the supreme authority, and if the Supreme Court does not have the power to ensure that this remains the case, who else does?

  31. #231
    Quote Originally Posted by 144man View Post
    Stupid of the Daily Mail. The judges were not making law, but stating what the existing law is. Parliament, not the government, is the supreme authority, and if the Supreme Court does not have the power to ensure that this remains the case, who else does?
    Hear hear!! If I were in Parliament I would have clapped and jeered and shouted out at you in agreement. Lol

  32. #232
    Brexit has had its first direct effect on my life.

    I participate as a volunteer in a medical control group the objective of which is genetic mapping of certain diseases in minorities. Despite early successes, EU funding of this project will cease in the middle of 2018, and unless alternative funding can be obtained, which appears to be unlikely, future research will then stop.

    Thank you for that, Brexiteers
    Last edited by 144man; 02-24-2017 at 07:55 PM.

  33. #233
    Wow. Sorry to hear that 144man.

    But now we're leaving we can put all those billions/trillions/gazillions of pounds back into the NHS instead of sending it to the Brussel sprouts. At least that's what I read. Or did my bus lie to me?

    You know, I remember reading that the areas of the UK receiving the most funding from the EU were the ones that actually voted to leave (e.g. Wales)...

  34. #234
    So PM Theresa May says that it is fundamentally unfair to ask the Scottish people to make a crucial decision on independence without the necessary information.

    Just what does she think the whole of the UK electorate ended up having to do when voting in the referendum to leave the EU?

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

[REMOVE ADS]

Ralph Terrana
MODERATOR

Welcome to Soulful Detroit! Kindly Consider Turning Off Your Ad BlockingX
Soulful Detroit is a free service that relies on revenue from ad display [regrettably] and donations. We notice that you are using an ad-blocking program that prevents us from earning revenue during your visit.
Ads are REMOVED for Members who donate to Soulful Detroit. [You must be logged in for ads to disappear]
DONATE HERE »
And have Ads removed.