Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

FUCK YES LET'S LEAVE GET HYPE YEY

Casual yes, let's leave and get independence done with

Meh, probably just scribble all over my vote ballot to spite tryhards

Casual no, let's remain and get integration done with

FUCK NO LET'S REMAIN GET CALM YEY

[Starver]

Come back Gillray, all is forgiven!

(Japan's joined the international cry of "we're happier dealing with a European Britain", I see. And it can't all be because they want to simplify their rollodexes.)

[Loud Whispers]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Cutting it down. I'm not on my PC and too much text is mentally tiring on touchscreen keyboard.

Ok, time to get laaconic

(Struckout 'trade' because its not just trade, its all deals but...)
Geography means nothing in a globalised world. Just because the English channel is reputedly the busiest shipping lane on the world doesn't mean we have to be involved in the trade that passes through it.  Transatlantic flights don't need to stop off or terminate on the UK. Spain could host an international banking sector the size of London's, if necessary. The euro might have had its problems, but the pound could easily tumble if enough scary scenarios hove into view,  or even suffer a split if Scotland leaves ([South] Sudanese Pound, anyone?).

Geography means nothing? So I can compete with Australian dairy in access to the Chinese consumer? No. Can we afford to neglect the Channel, or Hormuz, or Malacca? Nope! Can we patrol the entire Atlantic to secure its wealth? Yep! The English Channel is one of the busiest shipping lanes in the world, specifically the Straits of Dover ARE the busiest part of it and the busiest in the world. We are involved in our own trade, unless in the last 5 minutes the 4th richest country in the world just went bankrupt and its entire merchant navy got bombed. Trade is not a raw resource to be tapped into, flowing through channels to be harvested; it is a network of opportunities being exploited, to that end our enviable position in the Atlantic leaves us with a rather comfortable position. Transatlantic flights need not terminate at the UK because not all Americans want to see the UK, they also want to see Germany, France and the more Eastwards countries, but for commercial airliners the shortest route across the Atlantic thanks to Geography if they're not violently opposed to making money it is the transatlantic bridge. Least till global warming or some shit like that turns us into Netherlands 2: The Sequel. Of all the top 10 busiest commercial Transatlantic routes, only 3 of them don't end at London.
Spain cannot host an international banking centre the size of London, "if necessary." It has enough space to build stuff but none of the capital needed, their politics are in opposition to this and it has no international confidence, least of all given that it's Spain whose been having great trouble with the Eurozone crisis. One does not simply build the economic capital of the world if necessary, otherwise everyone would do it and there would be nearly zero reason not to. Strong rule of law without corruption means foreign investors across the world need not fear corrupt guards trying to shake them down for extortion money as in say, the ME or SE Asia. Strong political stability without any worry of socialists or the state seizing foreign investment assets makes it an attractive destination for those looking to store wealth where their own home nation may attempt to take their wealth. Our city has long been a commercial centre since before recorded history and throughout the last two centuries become a financial hub for a great wealth of technicians, financiers, clubs, brokers, bankers, insurers, specialists, experts and business owners meaning if you want to start up any project then there is no other place in the world where the person you're looking for is a 10 minute tube ride away, given how interconnected the city is. When Continental Europe merged all of their stock exchanges under one, unified exchange, London's alone still is larger, and it has earned us enmity - with London being favoured across the world from America to Arabia and China, but not Western Europe. So to then place us under the regulative authority of them strikes me with uncertainty. The Euro has been a dismal failure and the Pound could tumble if enough disasters hove it so, yet as it stands Godzilla has not dumped the sterling and had we joined the Euro we would have been in the same shitty boat as their needless crisis. We can manipulate the Sterling as our needs change for as long as our own currency is controlled by our own central bank, lest we be in the same humiliation as the Greeks or Spaniards who must ask the Germans for permission to run their own country. There will be financial volatility for about 2 years in the UK and the EU on event of Brexit. I'm not too worried for Britain, it's already happened before, we recovered from Europhiles before we can again.

You must understand that I'm not looking at this through the lens of short term gains and losses, but rather long-term security. And looking at our past I see again and again pro-EU ministers fucking over Britain for the benefit of the EU whilst lauding their negotiations as a fair deal. The UK had 80% of Europe's waters under its control. It had the largest fishing fleet in all of Europe. Its stocks were plentiful and not depleted, as the French, Spanish and Italians had done to the Mediterranean. Then our Prime Minister Edward Heath, in his eagerness to join the EU even though Britons did not, agreed to Brussels' demand to merge all of our waters into a common European resource (in violation of international law), reducing our fishing waters from 200 miles beyond coast to 12. The Spanish and French sent their trawlers to our water and due to the quota system Brussels placed upon us, we were only allowed to use a portion of our own fish, and any excess any trawlers caught was to be dumped into the ocean. The EU fixed this by requiring trawlers to bring all fish to land, where the excess was dumped in landfills. This has led to entire British fish stocks being wiped out and fishing towns turned destitute, I wrote about this earlier ITT. "This was hailed by John Gummer, our then-fisheries minister, as “a good deal” for our fishermen." Both John Gummer and Edward Heath were educated in Oxbridge, this is the same Edward Heath under investigation for child sexual abuse.
Or again, when the UK entered into the European Exchange Rate Mechanism, pegging our sterling to the ECU/Deutsche mark. I said this earlier where our intellectual proponents claimed we needed to join the EERM for financial stability or we would become irrelevant and bankrupt whilst their critics said it would merely be used to usurp national democracy by removing their ability to set their own budget more on that here. Nevertheless we entered into it and very well could have joined the Euro had we not been monumentally fucked by currency speculators who realized that the UK was propping itself up for easy exploitation; in order to back the Sterling to uphold the European Exchange Rate the British had to keep selling Forex reserves, all the whilst currency speculators borrowed ludicrous sums of money to buy Sterling, accumulating a sufficient stockpile to short it. And of course, they eventually short the Sterling, leading to a crash of the Sterling and a forced withdrawal from the European Exchange Rate Mechanism. With the money made from the forced devaluation of the Sterling against the D-mark the speculators who instigated this bought up British assets, which owing to the panic caused by the crash were incredibly low. Of course once the panic ended and the British took control of their economy we had 20 years of economic growth and falling unemployment, said assets became even more valuable thus boosting the speculators' profit further at the expense of British citizens and to the gain of no one but them. Most famous of all of them was George Soros, who's just a pretty poster boy for how blatantly he doesn't give a shit, but I must stress it's a plural not a singular faulty one here. Soros, the cheeky poster boy, still says to this day we should join the Eurozone and the Schengen Area. He's also a backer of the ESI that is responsible for the plan that humbled the European Union against Turkey and gave the EU and Merkel the open asylum plan they mindlessly followed so I wonder if they like causing instability for fun. Sure they profit off of triggered instability but when you reach that level of wealth you could go without working for the rest of your life, so why continue? Must just be it's fun. Yet the point still stands the ESI is backed by this guy and got its plan enacted upon a continent without anyone noticing, caring or voting, and the plan defies logic being all drawbacks that promote instability in exchange for nothing. Only dank bank profit

And that we can, upon being ejected from the EU, immediately resume 'independance' and sovereign relations with the world..?

Spoiler: These are the countries we have current diplomatic missions with, the Foreign Office is not an idle one (click to show/hide)

Ours is one of the largest networks in the world, I think only the USA has us beat since they have diplomatic relations with all countries on the planet except a handful (Iran, North Korea, Syria).

It'll take some time, and bargaining from a postition of weakness and urgent necessity, which is sure to draw in the carrion-eater kind of deals from all quarters, while we try to ward them off and get (what we think are) deals of truer worth.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

What countries are stronger than us? When it comes to industry: USA, China, Japan & Germany. When it comes to Finance: USA, tech business Japan. When it comes to military: USA. When it comes to soft power: USA. When it comes to cultural enrichment projection: No one. When it comes to education: USA. We do not need a fraction of the power we have to be independent, good gods, tiny Asian countries with far less resources have far more confidence in their countries than Britons do in Britain.

We're a little island (or set of ones) on the edge of Europe, and we got 'big' because of some fortunate geology, philosophy, engineering, politicing and bare-faced cheek to go and claim lands that belonged to nobody but those that already lived there.  We don't maontain any of these advantages, any more.

Industrialization propelled our country to heights never before seen, they will not be seen again. For 200 years Britain led the world, which pales in comparison to the two millennia of history we have. No one today lived to see Victoria so I do not get the obsession with attempting to usurp the USA with Euros, it's unnecessary and the way they've gone about it has doomed itself already. Our Empire is long dead, so why try to make ourselves a province of a failing Empire? Think like Britain

Not uneqivocally, anyway. And barring an indepedent space-programme (luckily ESA is European by name, but not an aspect of the EU, but the fact remains that we haven't had a British spaceflight since Prospero), or something weird involving parallel dimensions, we're stuck as far as new territories are concerned.

We are not waging wars of conquest or seeking political subjugation of lesser partners. The Commission couldn't even afford its own Eurobailout, it had to get bailed by the USA through the IMF. With its dwindling tax base and its double demographic time bomb, it has long since overextended and I don't want to go down with the ship. Our islands are much more easily maintained without our wealth being plundered to pay for a failing social project.

The means by which we'd punch better alone than as an interested party in the EU camp (giving advantages to fellow EUers, getting some things in return...) elude me. It'd probably require massive geopoitical shake-ups, and those usually don't come without a price...

What do we get in return for dismantling our state? The fragile beast is dying:

"Even if the EU survives its current challenges largely unscathed, even a 'small' future crisis could threaten the sustainability of current institutional frameworks, if it coincided with negative public sentiment and populist political developments," the report said.
It came as Mervyn King, the former governor of the Bank of England, warned that the eurozone faced four “unpalatable choices” as policymakers struggle to lift the bloc out of its economic malaise.
Lord King said the single currency area would have to choose between an economic "depression" in the south, higher inflation in northern states like Germany, permanent fiscal transfers or a "change of composition of the euro area".
However, he told an audience in Frankfurt that there was "a limit to the economic pain that can be imposed in pursuit of a federal Europe without risking a political reaction.
"There are no empires in Europe any more and our leaders would do well not to try to recreate one."

And the Commission's response is to remain course, the outcome is predictable

...And this is already getting too unwieldy to edit, on less than half the screen available to me, but let's correct one misapprehension. I'm not saying that the EU is paying for populist money-sinks (although doubtless they are, according to which subjective POVs you subscribe to) I'm saying that an our own elected government (of whatever flavour) will spend not-the-EU's-any-more money on money-sinks, rather than practical things that do actual good. And I predict that virtually none of the withheld EU monies will go towards the NHS (maybe a little, to drag themselves out of the current dispute about their fallacious seven-day-NHS arguments) and doubt it'll go towards either debt or defecit reduction, in any noticable way.

Why do you say that? Why do you have no faith in our own elected government's ability to spend our money on our vital institutions yet place faith in the EU to spend our money for that instead, as opposed to merely spending money to boost its own popularity? Look at our public spending. We spend our taxes on vital institutions, we don't just collect taxes to stockpile sterling - it has to be spent repaying our debts, paying our pensions, our healthcare, our education - our governments have no choice in the matter because if they don't then the United Kingdom collapses. The EU on the other hand can use our money however they want irregardless of the consequences, they can use our money on other countries, they can use our money boosting their popularity in our country, whatever. Let's say if we never recovered from the EERM, we simply would have been left to die, made dependent upon the EU whilst the economic capital moved to Frankfurt or Paris.
What is the point of them spending our money if it's just used to boost their popularity? I'd be fine if they were using German or French taxes to try and subvert our institutions, but they're using our own money to do so! The cheek!

And, for some reason, some people seem to think that every EU member state can be a net recipient of EU cash. Disagree with some of where it is going, but don't suggest that net-funding countries can drop out without repurcussions for the rest. If it's a cost to us that helps develop the overall prosperity of the Union, then perhaps we benefit.

We don't, we shouldn't pay the cost of Germany's exploitation, least of all if it will merely continue as normal. Much better to use our foreign development fund to help develop countries we are actually trading with, that benefits us, benefits countries whose people most need the help and does not require us surrendering our entire country to them. The best part is, none of our money would be going towards paying the retirement fund of European bureaucrats :D

But we've been hooked on the low-grade blow for so long that going cold turkey is going to be a stressful experience.  And we've yet to see if our little chat with our supplier about the possibility of giving up the habit will make him consider our position as preferential customer, one of the few not already guaranteed to get family-rates.
This is why I have strong feelings against certain Brexit arguments, although I have strong opinions against certain Remain statements, too. You're just the unlucky one who shouted up first.  I remain, as before, undecided.  With a small but notable lean towards status quo. Or perhaps pink floyd.

I am not unlucky in any respect, I like a lively BOGO thread. I just wish there was less walls of text and the subject matter wasn't so stressful, yet it must be otherwise the quality would rapidly decrease. T`he way I see it is if we are permanently docked in the EU then that means the majority of unapathetic Britons will have decided that with their enviable position, they cannot lead themselves. There is that issue of media control, academic control and state control by the EU and so on but that's just adding to the point. From there my interest will mostly drop to just banter, observation and personal profit; I'm not sure if it hasn't already.

Another problem. If almost half of us vote out, does that mean we should opt-out even more, or are they really saying "don't go further in", by way of protest? And if almost half of us say "remain" are we going to get a smart-arse europhile taking that as a will for closer union?

That's the plan m8y

David Cameron wants to use the upcoming EU referendum to “dock” Britain permanently to Europe, the EC president Jean-Claude Juncker has claimed, in remarks that will be met with dismay in Downing Street.

And thst ignored 51:49 split as a possibility, or closer yet.

EU and referendums are Fun

Lol jk they ignore them when they want to

Wew that took a long time to write. My hope and optimism is fleeting but my lights are still on, it was a sunny day and the channel was dotted with lily petals, golden light piercing our grey skies - for this once, white. Mug of tea in hand I should hope I never have to up sticks this immemorial land, for as long as I recognize it as my land of a thousand years! Fitting too; even a thousand is finite. So ends Kali Yuga, so new life springs from the ashes

Preliminary counting of Mayoral votes says Cheeki Sadiqi has won versus his rival Zac Goldsmith, unsurprising even if Barnet bants hadn't happened since only Lord Bogo could have defeated the Breeki one. Interestingly this round of elections seems to have left everyone happy: The Liberal Democrats are happy to have gained seats in Scotland (avoiding total extinction), the Greens too, Tories did well across the field, UKIP in Wales and Labour didn't lose horribly giving confidence to the Corbyn leadership and future campaigns! Never seen such a round of elections where everyone was happy over something!

That'd still be a lot of text on a touchscreen keyboard.
Anyways, the Tories are the same as the conservatives in http://www.politico.eu/article/uk-elections-live-blog-wales-scotland-northern-ireland-london-vote/ and what's the various assembly stuff about?

Tories and conservatives are the same thing, literally they are the same thing - just two names for the one party/party members
Basically 200 years ago the Tory party broke apart due to infighting over Corn tariffs, splintering into many factions. One of those factions survived and became the Conservative party under Benjamin Disraeli, which persists to this day, hence why Tory and Conservative are still to this day used pretty interchangeably.
The various assemblies are basically like smaller Parliaments that are full of people elected to scrutinize and pass/reject budgets set out by regional governments, set forth policy and pass some laws. Essentially it functions as a regional version of the House of Lords, capable of delaying certain bills and causing a ruckus if something horrendous is identified, like a bill that required the killing of every firstborn or an attempt at melting a canal through the Arctic with toasters.

The mother of all political cartoons. Christ.

Spoiler: I have gazed upon the abyss of perfection and seen its glory (click to show/hide)

[Starver]

The English Channel is one of the busiest shipping lanes in the world, specifically the Straits of Dover ARE the busiest part of it and the busiest in the world.

You say that like I had not already acknowledged it.  And as if it matters that ships heading from wherever to.Rotterdam/etc are a significant part of this traffic, to our economy. Point?

Transatlantic flights could land in Ireland (Republic of) if they want an earlier stop-off, as that diagram shows clearly.

Of all the top 10 busiest commercial Transatlantic routes, only 3 of them don't end at London.

Because there are good reasons, right now, and not a little tradition/historical expectation. No guarantees to the future if a canny Eurozone takes the initiative. (Right now, there's fewer reasons to invoke internecine rivalries, but a UK-less EU wouldn't have too many qualms about undercutting the UK, if it helped Eire, perhaps. Or reason to stop France just muscling in over British interests as much as it wanted.

You miss my point about Spain (or any other in-EU country) usurping London. Build it, and moreover support it with sufficient political will, and they will come. It's a possibility, not a certainty, but that's wbat I've been saying all along...  The Unknowns worry me, moztly.

Our city has long been a commercial centre since before recorded history and throughout the last two centuries become a financial hub for[...]

And the Clyde had some of the greatest shipyards and Sheffield probably the best steelworks and the pottery of Staffordshire rivaled the rest of the world and, and, and... Permanence and historic rights to continuation is an illusion, and on a knife-edge too that just needs enough people to be unsure or unwilling about something and move elsewbere.

And then you have arguments against the way the EU has been run. As if that's solely the domain of the EU. Whither the coalfields, since the 1980s? Heavy industry? The Empire itself, if you want me to avoid "maybe the EU had a hand in that" events.

(Note, I distrust politicians. You seem to think that local politicians will do things better than EU beaurocrats. I disagree not because it's the EU, or not, but because of the type of people they are. Which is not to say that I like beaurocrats, either, but they are a necessary element to keep populist knee-jerks in check,  IMO. To this end, I dislike the same Europhile politicians that you hate, but I also dislike the Euroskeptics and Europhobes, too. Unfortunately, some of them will still be around after the Referendum, however the penny falls.)

Our Empire is long dead, so why try to make ourselves a province of a failing Empire?

Something I already said I'm not keen on.  Not that I agree that it's definitely failing, just that itvs curreny on a bumpy road. But that's a side argument. If the EU is teetering and Britain leaves, causing the EU to fragment, then do we benefit? Geopolitically, Russia gets a chance of reabsorbing ex-Soviet states that were angling towards the EU, if not already in it, and who knows how that'll end up. Frictions within tbe EU will ramp up (as with France/Spain/Ireland competing with Britain in political, financial and other arenas).  The law of unintended consequences.

Thus (without desiring greater integration), I like the idea that we can (from the sidelines, but not beyond them) help create an EU without less problems than now. Not that I think that'll work, but it definitely won't if we don't do it...
{Note this much later strikethrough edit!  Whoops!}

What do we get in return for dismantling our state?

We're doing that through devolution. And, again, I'm not really a fan of the 'dismantling' that is Federalisation, or otherwise Unifying, so that's not the question to ask me.

Why do you have no faith in our own elected government's ability to spend our money on our vital institutions yet place faith in the EU to spend our money for that instead, as opposed to merely spending money to boost its own popularity?

By chance, I explained tbat above. But, to reiterate, it's popularism and soundbite politics that I dislike. There are indeed other ways to mess things up, but this is where I see it going wrong upon Leaving.

...irregardless...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irregardless

There is that issue of media control, academic control and state control by the EU and so on[...]

Media control is relative. Anything one doesn't like is obviously the fault of the opposing interests, while ignoring the satisfactory elements that the other side say is influence by your lot.  And then there's mutually disliked, but monatomic, viewpoints that seems to simultaneously be in support of both opposing parties, and biased against each side's own. Not that anyone in an echochamber would notice this.

Wew that took a long time to write.

Tell me about it. I want cursor keys! I nearly extinguished phrases that I wanted to reply to, and even clicked 'forward' somewhere, accidentally, and had my heart in my mouth as I clicked back again to see if I would need to do everything again, up to the advanced point I had ready reached.

The Liberal Democrats are happy to have gained seats in Scotland (avoiding total extinction),

Did they? I thought they went from five down to zero, in the table I glanced over. But not sure this is the same subset of Scottish elections as you mean.

Essentially [an assembly] functions as a regional version of the House of Lords, capable of delaying certain bills and causing a ruckus if something horrendous is identified, like a bill that required the killing of every firstborn or an attempt at melting a canal through the Arctic with toasters.

Gotta disagree with you, there. Regional Assemblies and the Scottish Parliament just add 'localisation rules' in various allowable aspects of UK-wide law (noting that Scottish law ready differed from England-and-Wales law prior to the reprovision of its own Assembly-named-as-Parliament, in a number of ways), which does include the possibility of nullifying (certain Westminster-led) UK-wide policies, e.g. prescription charge hikes, but it works as a patch, not a Lords-like "we are concerned about this bill, and would like you to redraft it before passing it" voice of reason. Or meddling old fools, depending on your personal feelings about the issue at hand.

I quite like the HoL. I don't think it's perfect, but making it into a fully-elected Second House would remove pretty much everything I do like about it. But that's an argument for another thread, if I haven't already participated in one such upon this board already, in the past.

[smjjames]

Confirmed for sure: http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/06/europe/uk-london-mayoral-race-sadiq-khan/index.html?adkey=bn He's of Pakistani descent (via parents) apparently.

I wonder what Trump would have to say about that, heh....

[Starver]

Looks like I already posted the (half complete, editwise) reply to LW, two posts up. To that end, I've copied the text from my properly finished (barring typos) version and overwritten the original misposted one. And sorry that it's a monster. Shonuld perhaps have added segmented Spoiler-hiding, but accesing the [] characters is a pain, already, for quote/unquote tags. Or, rather, unquote/requote ones.

[Loud Whispers]

Confirmed for sure: http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/06/europe/uk-london-mayoral-race-sadiq-khan/index.html?adkey=bn He's of Pakistani descent (via parents) apparently.
I wonder what Trump would have to say about that, heh....

Why apparently? He is
Also lol we had a debate on banning him from the UK I don't think this is much else of note

London is the world’s greatest commercial centre – the business capital not just of Britain, but of Europe. We are an established world leader in finance, creative industries and business services, and a growing force in newer industries such as tech, low carbon and life sciences, as well as having some of the most innovative manufacturing businesses around. Because it is such a great place to live and work in, London attracts organisations, talent and investment from across the globe. But retaining our place at the top is not a given. We need to work hard together to stay competitive, to increase productivity, and to make the most of opportunities for growth in our traditional and new industries.

Pretty dank so far

His big policies:

• Freezing travel fairs for the next 4 years. Apparently going to get this done by making the TFL more efficient or something, I don't think that'll be enough. He'll also be exploring some other revenue-raising opportunities, dunno what that's gonna be yet but that sounds more promising.
• Create a Business Advisory Board – "made up of experts, not of political allies" – to provide guidance and insight to find the solutions to London’s growth challenges and to provide A Manifesto for all Londoners Business, prosperity and opportunity feedback on policy. Should help business fears of Corbyn rather well.
• Usual stuff about equality
• Obligatory stuff about continuing greenification
• Broker a deal between providers and local authorities to provide better access to public property and land for the installation of better infrastructure (probably the highest priority infrastructure development issue up there with transport and water). Very good that it's in his attention.
• Appoint a Chief Digital Officer to oversee growth "in the sector" and advise on cyber-security and digital inclusion. Bretty good as long as he finds the right Officer
• Create a central London data Office (long term project? Will be useful long term).
• Work with businesses, builders, investors, Westminster and Councils to build tens of thousands of affordable houses with Londoners given priority purchasing rights over foreign investors. Interesting, will be a monumental challenge - will slow foreign investment but if successful will solve the housing crisis. Is it worth it? Fuck knows, but seems worth trying.
• Use City Hall as a centre to attract institutional investers into pensions, housing mortgages and so on. Sounds like more power is being centralized to City Hall under Khan, so it will be interesting to see the Mayor of London in future be even more powerful and important than previously (already being quite important).
• Force landowners who have secured planning permission to begin building or sell their land. Intended to stop people just buying London land and then keeping it as a safe asset (thereby excluding the possibility to develop it into houses or literally anything else useful), I hope he adjusts the wording so people don't just buy land and not seek planning permission.
• Promoting Landlord Licensing schemes across London on a borough by borough basis whilst making a case to Westminster to impose London-wide Landlord Licensing.
• Direct development to brownfield sites, seeking to protect and keep the green belt undeveloped (aw yiss).
• Introduce a hopper ticket that allows multiple buss travel within an hour. An hour seems a little short, but eh seems to be a pilot project.
• Be ambivalent towards cable car and routemaster developers (whether he'll cut funding or not is another question).
• Continuing the Cycle Superhighway project
• Breaking down more of the geographical barriers of London, such as by supporting a Rotherhithe-Canary Wharf pedestrian and cycling bridge (holy shit)

Looks like I already posted the (half complete, editwise) reply to LW, two posts up. To that end, I've copied the text from my properly finished (barring typos) version and overwritten the original misposted one. And sorry that it's a monster. Shonuld perhaps have added segmented Spoiler-hiding, but accesing the [] characters is a pain, already, for quote/unquote tags. Or, rather, unquote/requote ones.

Truth
I'll get to you tomorrow as I am 2 well tired

[Loud Whispers]

Spoiler: tl;dr reply to Starver (click to show/hide)

You say that like I had not already acknowledged it.

With a shred of ambiguity, with your fear being uncertainty, so I strive for certainty - my purpose is self-discovery and alleviation of this in any way :D

And as if it matters that ships heading from wherever to.Rotterdam/etc are a significant part of this traffic, to our economy. Point?

Matters immensely, means the Northern range can't get too uppity :D
In regards to our economy, Rotterdam effect; trade is wonderful for most all involved and the Dutch have a really sexy port.

Transatlantic flights could land in Ireland (Republic of) if they want an earlier stop-off, as that diagram shows clearly.

Yeah but why would they want to? Besides ones that are based in or terminate at Dublin, Heathrow is larger, better stocked, better integrated with local transit, more attractive destination for business and leisure, better security and stopping at Dublin vs Heathrow does not shorten intercontinental flights, least of all it being a distance covered in about 40-50 minutes, has more international airlines based in it with more routes using it? And if we're talking EU here, we used to have an agreement with the USA that restricted trans-Atlantic air travel to certain British air companies to avoid total domination by the financially superior USA and that agreement was made void as of 2008 by the EU, so if you're worried about that we can now only trust in the faith of our workers. Alas, we are lucky to have such "fair" deals! :D
Luckily British Airways and their ilk are bretty good

Of all the top 10 busiest commercial Transatlantic routes, only 3 of them don't end at London.

Because there are good reasons, right now, and not a little tradition/historical expectation. No guarantees to the future if a canny Eurozone takes the initiative. (Right now, there's fewer reasons to invoke internecine rivalries, but a UK-less EU wouldn't have too many qualms about undercutting the UK, if it helped Eire, perhaps. Or reason to stop France just muscling in over British interests as much as it wanted.

I WANT COMPETITION
I WANT THE EU TO THROW VAST SUMS OF EUROS AT IRELAND TO MAKE DUBLIN AIRPORT AN INTERNATIONAL WONDER TO MANKIND
COULD YOU IMAGINE DUBLIN BEING AS GOOD AS HEATHROW? TWO HEATHROWS! EVERYONE PROFITS!
Bloody hell if the EU has the capabilities to make Ireland prosperous there is zero reason not to. I want them to take the initiative and actually fucking do something towards making its members wealthy, not just Germany. There are good reasons why London dominates in so many fields, that is because it competes - not tradition or historical expectation (though that helps with Chinese investors heh), but because if our services are shit, overpriced and undermarketed no one has to use them. Pretty much the only people who would have to use them are the British, the tens of millions of international travelers choose us because we offer the best for their options. I don't want the British to become as EU protectionists, using political power to force people into buying their products instead of making products and services that people are happy to use.
I mean Jesus Christ, look at what Heathrow offers - airlines like Virgin or BA, whilst Dublin offers Ryanair
In what world would the EU throwing gorillions of dollars at Dublin not be a victory for all mankind?

You miss my point about Spain (or any other in-EU country) usurping London. Build it, and moreover support it with sufficient political will, and they will come. It's a possibility, not a certainty, but that's wbat I've been saying all along...  The Unknowns worry me, moztly.

The will to power =/= Actual power
The notion of Spain usurping London is laughable, I mean I love Spain but the UK has a higher credit rating than the entire European Union, we're not even talking Spain xD.
Literally this whole endeavour falls flat at step one. "Build it." Build London?!! Rome was not built in a day Starver, as it stands the only two cities that would stand a chance of doing so are Paris and Frankfurt. I hope they keep their focus on Paris since Germany's influence in the EU's large enough as is, and it would be nice for the French to be able to look at their Germanbros eye to eye. Also the fact that London and Paris are only two hours away by Eurostar leads me to joy :D
"Support it with sufficient political will," Starver it takes more than will to succeed. Germany twice devoted its entire Empire towards creating a state to last a thousand ages and both times they lasted a few years. There are 1.71 million high-skilled jobs in London, you can't politically will the appearance of 1.71 million highly skilled workers with businesses, capital and ideas into existence, you'll just be a director whose thrown trillions of euros into building a worthless city without people to make it what it is. Frankfurt was a Roman settlement, a Free City of the Holy Roman Empire and centre of the European Central Bank. Paris was founded 300 years B.C. by Celts, the capital of the Franks and one of the cultural centres of the world. London was a Roman settlement, the capital of Great Britain and is a cultural and financial capital of the world. You don't make these kinds of cities overnight, even at its fastest it takes 3-4 generations of people dedicated unflinchingly towards the task of creating an attractive foreign investment centre, centre of trade, culture, (or just a shit load of oil). There can be no corruption, no indecision, democracy itself may have to be curbed alongside civil rights, and whether you succeed even then rests on half luck and half the back of your labour. The only young city I've seen achieve this is Singapore city.
Amusingly the Malayans kicked out the Singaporeans believing that without access to their single market, Singapore would crumble. That is why I like those who take nothing for granted and use necessity to compel them to greater heights.

Our city has long been a commercial centre since before recorded history and throughout the last two centuries become a financial hub for[...]

And the Clyde had some of the greatest shipyards and Sheffield probably the best steelworks and the pottery of Staffordshire rivaled the rest of the world and, and, and... Permanence and historic rights to continuation is an illusion, and on a knife-edge too that just needs enough people to be unsure or unwilling about something and move elsewbere.

Hahaha, because of diversification or lack thereof Starver. Clyde relied on shipbuilding, when it could not compete with global shipbuilders it had to be nationalized. When Sheffield's cheap steel began being eroded by the rising industrialization of the world they adapted to making higher-quality steel using their expertise, diversifying - though not enough, given China's cheeky EU steel banter. You might even say they're having quite the steal :D
And there just aint much money in ceramics as there was 300 year ago.
Just saying, when London wool and furs started going out of business, London cotton was born. When that too was getting fucked, industrialization was born. When that too was getting fucked, financial development explosion of London!
Innovation or stagnation, give me shekels4ideas or give me death4comfort

And then you have arguments against the way the EU has been run. As if that's solely the domain of the EU.

Starver that is a rather odd point to make, whether it's solely the domain of the EU or not is irrelevant because other governing bodies are not trying to take over Europe :P
It's rather impressive the scale of permanent damage the EU has caused. Can't unfuck an exodus :D

Whither the coalfields, since the 1980s? Heavy industry? The Empire itself, if you want me to avoid "maybe the EU had a hand in that" events.

1. We hit peak coal a hundred years ago and made the switch to gas, diesel and nuclear
2. British investors found it cheaper to hire Americans to do the same job, nowadays pretty much the same only with Indians and Chinese. The alternative would be to pay more for the same products but from Britons, but as a free market that defeats the purpose
3. Overextension, de-colonialism, the rise of the USA, nationalism and total economic devastation from two world wars
We just finished repaying our WWI debt 2 years ago
They were very costly times

(Note, I distrust politicians. You seem to think that local politicians will do things better than EU beaurocrats.

I've not seen any of my local politicians fuck up an entire continent before

I disagree not because it's the EU, or not, but because of the type of people they are. Which is not to say that I like beaurocrats, either, but they are a necessary element to keep populist knee-jerks in check,  IMO. To this end, I dislike the same Europhile politicians that you hate, but I also dislike the Euroskeptics and Europhobes, too. Unfortunately, some of them will still be around after the Referendum, however the penny falls.)

There is no one to keep them in check, and they are the check, balance and executives. At home our populists have no political power. Why should I sacrifice my country to unnecessary bureaucrats to thwart people without any cards?

Our Empire is long dead, so why try to make ourselves a province of a failing Empire?

Something I already said I'm not keen on.  Not that I agree that it's definitely failing, just that itvs curreny on a bumpy road. But that's a side argument. If the EU is teetering and Britain leaves, causing the EU to fragment, then do we benefit? Geopolitically, Russia gets a chance of reabsorbing ex-Soviet states that were angling towards the EU, if not already in it, and who knows how that'll end up. Frictions within tbe EU will ramp up (as with France/Spain/Ireland competing with Britain in political, financial and other arenas).  The law of unintended consequences.

Oh yeah, like Russia is going to take on NATO. Our troops are already in place in Poland and the Baltics with twice their number in American allies, if the EU collapses and the Europeans get their democracies back that is a victory, if it doesn't and the EU is finally forced to restructure into a democracy and listen to Europeans that is a victory, if literally nothing happens then that is a victory. I'm more concerned with the EU's continual expansion in the most retarded ways, given what they did in Ukraine and what they're doing in Turkey xD

Thus (without desiring greater integration), I like the idea that we can (from the sidelines, but not beyond them) help create an EU without less problems than now. Not that I think that'll work, but it definitely won't if we don't do it...

If we are within the EU we are not on the sidelines Starver, we are in them. The EU's court will continue to have supremacy over ours, the Commission supremacy over our state and they will be able to integrate us at a time of their choosing, whether or not they've made any attempt to solve their problems.

What do we get in return for dismantling our state?

We're doing that through devolution.

What the fuck hahaha
Delegating powers to local authorities is not dismantling. It's not like how the Europeans dismantled their central banks, their currencies, made their parliaments managers and executives subservient, their supreme courts not supreme, dismantling their borders and security checks and so on.

And, again, I'm not really a fan of the 'dismantling' that is Federalisation, or otherwise Unifying, so that's not the question to ask me.

Doesn't matter what you're a fan of, integration will continue for as long as the EU exists and is capable of seizing sovereign powers. Barroso began plans for a federal Europe in 2013 and has only been interrupted because of their open asylum catastrophe. There's a silver lining to every disaster I suppose.

Why do you have no faith in our own elected government's ability to spend our money on our vital institutions yet place faith in the EU to spend our money for that instead, as opposed to merely spending money to boost its own popularity?

By chance, I explained tbat above. But, to reiterate, it's popularism and soundbite politics that I dislike. There are indeed other ways to mess things up, but this is where I see it going wrong upon Leaving.

What would be messed up?

...irregardless...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irregardless

fite me irregardless fam xD

There is that issue of media control, academic control and state control by the EU and so on[...]

Media control is relative.

It's not. Keep in mind what I've linked you to is what I found regarding the coverage of the rape gang scandal, so it's a very, very heavy read and is soul-crushingly depressing, that you can only laugh. The take home point is with publicly available information it's demonstrable; media heads, faculty heads, managers going down the hierarchy, and it's very easy to follow the money. Just takes time. Oh! There's also some stuff about EU, Russian, British and American strategic media funding

And then there's mutually disliked, but monatomic, viewpoints that seems to simultaneously be in support of both opposing parties, and biased against each side's own. Not that anyone in an echochamber would notice this.

I call them basic bitch arguments

Wew that took a long time to write.

Tell me about it. I want cursor keys! I nearly extinguished phrases that I wanted to reply to, and even clicked 'forward' somewhere, accidentally, and had my heart in my mouth as I clicked back again to see if I would need to do everything again, up to the advanced point I had ready reached.

RIP in peace your patience, I can't imagine doing all this via tablet. I remember when I tried doing so quality dropped like a cliff xD

The Liberal Democrats are happy to have gained seats in Scotland (avoiding total extinction),

Did they? I thought they went from five down to zero, in the table I glanced over. But not sure this is the same subset of Scottish elections as you mean.

They got 5 seats in Scotland but greens have overtaken them

Gotta disagree with you, there. Regional Assemblies and the Scottish Parliament just add 'localisation rules' in various allowable aspects of UK-wide law (noting that Scottish law ready differed from England-and-Wales law prior to the reprovision of its own Assembly-named-as-Parliament, in a number of ways), which does include the possibility of nullifying (certain Westminster-led) UK-wide policies, e.g. prescription charge hikes, but it works as a patch, not a Lords-like "we are concerned about this bill, and would like you to redraft it before passing it" voice of reason. Or meddling old fools, depending on your personal feelings about the issue at hand.
I quite like the HoL. I don't think it's perfect, but making it into a fully-elected Second House would remove pretty much everything I do like about it. But that's an argument for another thread, if I haven't already participated in one such upon this board already, in the past.

Well you've changed my mind on the HoL
I still want to get rid of the Bishops in it though

In other news

The International Monetary Fund has told eurozone finance ministers they must immediately begin negotiations to grant debt relief for Greece despite German opposition, upending carefully orchestrated negotiations ahead of an emergency meeting on Monday.
High quality global journalism requires investment.
In a letter to all 19 ministers sent on Thursday night and obtained by the Financial Times, Christine Lagarde, the IMF chief, said stalemated talks with Athens to find €3bn in “contingency” budget cuts, which have gone on for a month, had become fruitless and that debt relief must be put on the table immediately, or risk losing IMF participation in the programme.
“We believe that specific [economic reform] measures, debt restructuring, and financing must now be discussed contemporaneously,” Ms Lagarde wrote. “For us to support Greece with a new IMF arrangement, it is essential that the financing and debt relief from Greece’s European partners are based on fiscal targets that are realistic because they are supported by credible measures to reach them.”
The IMF has come under intense criticism in Greece, where senior officials in Alexis Tsipras’s government have blamed Poul Thomsen, the IMF’s European chief, for making excessive austerity demands and holding up an agreement on the €86bn bailout’s first review.
But Ms Lagarde’s letter makes clear the IMF wants less austerity, arguing that the budget surplus target agreed last year between the EU and Athens — a primary surplus of 3.5 per cent of gross domestic target by 2018 — is unrealistic and should be drastically reduced.
A primary surplus is a country’s budget surplus when debt payments are not included.
“A clarification is needed to clear unfounded allegations that the IMF is being inflexible, calling for unnecessary new fiscal measures and — as a result — causing a delay in negotiations and the disbursement of urgently needed funds,” Ms Lagarde wrote.
Athens is facing €3.5bn in debt payments in July that it needs bailout aid to pay, and EU officials have told Greek government officials they do not want messy negotiations to continue during the Brexit campaign — meaning if no agreement is reached this month, leaders will not begin discussions again until just weeks before a possible default.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/eb9e5ab8-1367-11e6-91da-096d89bd2173.html#axzz480iEyWqI

rip in pes greks

[Starver]

With a shred of ambiguity, with your fear being uncertainty, so I strive for certainty - my purpose is self-discovery and alleviation of this in any way :D

I still think that there's more uncertainty if we leave Europe entirely (we now compete with Europe, and our position has changed) than if we stay in our current position. All I know I know is that I know nothing (about the future). But I know less about one branch of future than the other, and I've never been one to expect that the Lottery win is just one improbable ticket away.

Yeah but why would they want to [land in Ireland, transatlantic planes]?

Because the tide turns in favour of that? You say (later) that you want competition, but what if that competition outstrips our level? In a hypothetical future where Europe where Europe wants to replace the UK as primary first-footing hub for transatlantic flights, it could invest in a completely new/enlargened airport hub and infrastructue wherever it liked, with the purchasing power of a continent, v.s. an island, while courting the right oversees contacts with the right sweet words. They just need to choose wisely, something I know you are already doubtful of. This is not me perduading you, just giving the scenario that tarnishes your perfect vision of the future.

The notion of Spain usurping London is laughable, I mean I love Spain but the UK has a higher credit rating than the entire European Union, we're not even talking Spain xD.

Assuming a bad exit does not depress our nation in the world's view. And, if our luck is ripe for yet another blow, just in time to see the EU boost in the eyes of the rest of the world through some coup de gras of some kind.

Hahaha, because of diversification or lack thereof Starver. Clyde relied on shipbuilding, when it could not compete with global shipbuilders it had to be nationalized. [...] When that too was getting fucked, financial development explosion of London!

From up this way, London appears to be an undiverse town, totally reliant upon Finance and dependent businesses. Which, within the last decade, has proven to be a very shaky industry in its own right, without the propping up denied to tangible industries of all kinds. At least at home. What happens when the current model fails?

(When it comes to coal, it's an industry that was in decline, I know, but the near-total (and now, I think finally total) shutdown of the coalfield communities forced deprevation in many NotLondon parts of the UK, plus the purchase of browner and browner coal stocks from abroad to feed continuing needs, when perfectly good (still carbon-heavy, but not as polluting with sulphur, etc) supplies could yet have been extracted to fuel the remaining users of the product.)

2. British investors found it cheaper to hire Americans to do the same job, nowadays pretty much the same only with Indians and Chinese. The alternative would be to pay more for the same products but from Britons, but as a free market that defeats the purpose

Don't forget that home producers will still be competing with European ones. Possibly more unless we throttle trade with the EU (which, apparently, won't be affected if we leave - or so goes the other argument against staying in).

I've not seen any of my local politicians fuck up an entire continent before

Because they're local... Never ascribe to a lack of incompetence what may just be down to the lack of ability... 

At home our populists have no political power.

?

That's exactly who has political power.

Oh yeah, like Russia is going to take on NATO.

What's NATO got to do with it.  I'm not talking as if in Red Storm Rising...  probably...

[...] if the EU collapses and the Europeans get their democracies back that is a victory,

And how labout if Greece (frexample) becomes a non-democracy, again? Since it apparently invented the concept (which, incidentally, involved Sortition, something no modern politico seems to want, in favour of the version they like better... Bring back Sortition, I say!) how much of the time has Greece been democratic?  (Browsing just the 20th Century, and discarding foreign occupation, it seems that there were far too many internal upsets to conclude that hoi poloi thought that there was power in the hands of the people for long periods of time. Greece would just end up in hock with China, if some things I've heard are true, the greatest democracy in the world... wait, no.

I get that you don't like the unelected parts of the EU which, to my mind are more like the Whitehall component ofngovernment than Westminster. Like it or not, though, it's a better mix than some fragments of the EU would get if it falls (and, if it doesn't, will be the coordinating effort behind the isolation of England-and-Wales, in a suitably dire scenario).

Delegating powers to local authorities is not dismantling.

Not delegating. Abdication of responsibilities. Local authority now collects business rates, to spend how it sees fit? Now each authority has to try to be more competitive with its neighbours, and spend the money wisely whilst no longer having the explicit backing of the government. If things go wrong (as they will, to at least one local authority, because roughly half of them will operate at below-average efficiency) an example needs to be set (especially if it Opposition-controlled!) and suddenly it's in the equivalent of Special Measures. Doesn't matter if it's a mere 'blip', pure chance or the result of national-level interference. (If things improve immediately, overseeing government takes credit. If they don't then blamed on "starting from a right mess, can't be improved overnight"...)

Your "dismantling" is what I'd call "merging". Unifying. "Mantled", if you like. But it's putting a larger frame around the various smaller frames, which is awkward when the original frames were built to differing specifications and tolerences, which is where the problems with a unified Europe (whether from Brussels or Paris or Berlin or Rome, i.e. in the various ages that such things have been tried, noting that Rome did it best and for longest) stem from. Not easy, whichever way.

For me, it's dismantling when you cut loose various parts of the ship and dare them to float on their own (and here I'm talking about UK regionalism, not cutting loose failed states from the EU, or the cutting loose of a lifeboat by it's occupants which is wise if the ship is sinking but less so otherwise). And both approaches have problems that I would rather avoid.

[The liberals] got 5 seats in Scotland but greens have overtaken them.

Looks like I misread something, or read it before enough declarations. They had five seats, still have five seats, for zero change.

I still want to get rid of the Bishops in [the House of Lords] though

Keep (some of) the Lords Spiritual, I say, for their representation of the nation, but add othet representatives of other brands of religion (and Secularism, for good measure). The details to be bashed out elsewhere.

In other news

Is the IMF better or worse than Europe? I can't tell...

[Loud Whispers]

Spoiler: An introduction (click to show/hide)

I still think that there's more uncertainty if we leave Europe entirely (we now compete with Europe, and our position has changed) than if we stay in our current position. All I know I know is that I know nothing (about the future). But I know less about one branch of future than the other, and I've never been one to expect that the Lottery win is just one improbable ticket away.

We compete with Europe now and I don't know what the hell will happen when the EU takes control of our finances and our currency, southern Europe tried and they got a sovereign debt crisis, we tried and we got broken by speculators; all I know is their track record is absolute incompetence and they face zero consequences if they fuck up the UK intentionally or accidentally through their policies. So I oppose giving them any inch of control on British policy tooth and nail! :D

Spoiler: On stranger tides (click to show/hide)

Yeah but why would they want to [land in Ireland, transatlantic planes]?

Because the tide turns in favour of that?

Yeah why Starver? I'm not in the business of deciding things upon abstract hippy tide turning, I analyze concrete factors that determine the probability of things happening so. No people willing Empires into existence through psionic pressure, no tides of fate turning Bhutan into a space-faring Empire, no Atlantis rising from the depths to wage nuclear war upon mankind - solid factors. I've listed all the reasons why things are as they are now and the turning of the tide can only swallow up a few houses on Dover :P

Spoiler: On competition and the Ryanair Empire (click to show/hide)

You say (later) that you want competition, but what if that competition outstrips our level?

Increase British investment in Ireland obviously, if they outstrip our level they provide a superior service we can use and gain profit from. Look at our airfleet, how many Boeings do we have in our service? They do a mighty fine job with the power of American engineering, and they've competed very well with our own BAE systems - even just last year Boeing started working with BAE systems to start updating one of their up and coming warplanes with an advanced integrated electronic early warning system. Fucking teamwork A :D
Seriously our companies works with Europeans, Arabs, Americans, their companies work with ours - wonderful things are accomplished. Why wouldn't you want competition? It keeps people working to innovate, and if they fail to innovate they fail. I can tell you now no amount of political will can stop a stagnant company from dying.

Spoiler: The EU are the Hindenburgs of aviation investment (click to show/hide)

In a hypothetical future where Europe where Europe wants to replace the UK as primary first-footing hub for transatlantic flights, it could invest in a completely new/enlargened airport hub and infrastructue wherever it liked, with the purchasing power of a continent, v.s. an island, while courting the right oversees contacts with the right sweet words. They just need to choose wisely, something I know you are already doubtful of. This is not me perduading you, just giving the scenario that tarnishes your perfect vision of the future.

I don't have a perfect vision of the future, much work is to be done in order to avoid the calamity the EU is self-inflicting :D
First off the European Union cannot just build airport hubs and infrastructure wherever it likes, it actually has to be economically viable and well thought out.

Local authorities are spending some 205 million zloty ($58 million), including more than $44 million in EU subsidies, to build runways and a new terminal that could accommodate more than 1 million passengers a year. The Olsztyn Mazury Airport is scheduled to open next January, but traffic and revenue forecasts developed by the project’s backers are “very far from reality,” says Jacek Krawczyk, a former chairman of LOT Polish airlines who advises the EU on aviation policy through its European Economic and Social Committee. He predicts the airport could close within 10 years.

Szymany adds to a burgeoning supply of costly new airports across Poland. Since 2007, the EU has spent more than €600 million ($666 million) to build or renovate a dozen Polish airports. That’s 21 percent of all EU spending on airport infrastructure across the 28-nation bloc. In Szymany and elsewhere, new airports have been promoted by local authorities as a boon to tourism and economic development. Krzystof Pawlowski, commercial director of the new airport, says it will serve a region with some 2.5 million people, many of whom currently live hours from the nearest airline hub. The airport also will “open this beautiful region to tourists,” says Pawlowski.

Mostly, though, Poland’s new airports have been a financial bust. A report in December by the European Court of Auditors found that EU-subsidized airport projects in Poland, as well as others in Estonia, Greece, Italy, and Spain, had “produced poor value for money.” Traffic at most airports fell far short of projections, and there was little evidence of broader economic benefits, such as job creation, the report found. Under EU rules, local authorities don’t need approval from Brussels for airport projects, such as Szymany’s, that receive less than €50 million in EU subsidies.
https://skift.com/2015/05/21/polands-new-airport-is-the-latest-that-europe-doesnt-need/

The EU has a proven track record of not giving a shit about their money, because I suppose who gives a fuck it's not like they care whose money they're spending xD
I mean seriously, this attitude of "yeah m9 if we do it and just keep throwing enough money and pillow talk at it" is dismal and its efforts are pretty self evident. When you can afford to not compete - you can never afford to not compete.
Also note, instead of spending money in the UK helping to develop Heathrow - the EU's most important airport, they spend our money making themselves more popular. Instead of trying to turn Dublin into a titanic international transit hub, they waste our money enabling Poland to make financial flops. The EU has a long history of being a failure when it comes to state intervention in aerospace industry.
And you know what? If we had surrendered our Central Bank and had given the EU control over our airports as other Europeans have, our plans to expand Heathrow would have been blocked.
I trust in the capabilities of our workers more than I trust in the certain knowledge of the EU trying to sabotage us with either malevolence or an inability to comprehend competition. That's not a hypothetical future, that's a fact. Heathrow expansion has been delayed. Land purchasing, let alone construction has not even begun.
Certain retardation in the literal sense of slowing everything down - they don't give a shit about competitiveness because they can keep boosting German exports by enlarging the Eurozone, I want naught to be taken for granted and I won't stand for the incompetent running us down with such impunity.

Spoiler: Suicide is the leading cause of national democracy collapse (click to show/hide)

The notion of Spain usurping London is laughable, I mean I love Spain but the UK has a higher credit rating than the entire European Union, we're not even talking Spain xD.

Assuming a bad exit does not depress our nation in the world's view.

Hahaha there is no amount of depression our nation could endure that would turn Spain into London, it would take the North Koreans to successfully nuke us before that happened, or literally all of the UK getting depression and committing suicide

Spoiler: Eurodolla is a fickle beast prone to panic (click to show/hide)

And, if our luck is ripe for yet another blow, just in time to see the EU boost in the eyes of the rest of the world through some coup de gras of some kind.

Some nondescript coup de gras they totally have the means to deliver once the UK suffers some nondescript disaster that affects us in the world's eyes in a nondescript way? In the event of a Brexit they'll be forced to consolidate their hold on their current states and stabilize the already shaky Eurodolla.

Spoiler: On culturally enriching one's economy (click to show/hide)

From up this way, London appears to be an undiverse town, totally reliant upon Finance and dependent businesses. Which, within the last decade, has proven to be a very shaky industry in its own right, without the propping up denied to tangible industries of all kinds. At least at home. What happens when the current model fails?

I don't know where up you're at, but London is pure, distilled, ENRICHING DIVERSITY

DIVERSITY FOR DAYS AND DAYS YOU'LL BE EATING AT A DIVERSITY BUFFET!

Dead serious too, if you pardon the excited caps locks. Very few times I get to sincerely talk about the strength of London's diversity. People joke that if London were a country it'd be the 15th richest country in the world and they're not far off the mark.
Let me give you the run down from the Department for Business Innovation and Skils:
-4.9 million private sector bussiness in the UK at the start of 2013
-These businesses employed an estimated 24.3 million people, with an estimated annual turnover of £3,300 billion. The majority were small businesses (0 to 49 employees), 31,000 were medium-size (50 to 249 employees) and 7,000 were large (>250 employees).

For private sector companies, by industry the apprx. numbers of businesses in each field are:

-891,000 were in Construction
-687,000 were in Scientific and Technical work
-500,000 were in Creative industries
-496,000 were in Wholesale and retail trade, repair
-380,000 were in Admin and support service activities
-333,000 were in human health and social service activities
-306,000 were in Information and Communication
-275,000 were in Transportation and storage
-274,000 were in Manufacturing
-263,000 were in 'Other service activities'
-256,000 were in Public education (also known as private ed. for any Americans)
-205,000 were in Arts, entertainment and recreation
-169,000 were in Accommodation and food service
-153,000 were in Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing
-90,000 were in Financial and Insurance activities
-89,000 were in Real estate activities
-28,000 in Mining, Electricity, Gas and Water
That's not including all the other state-funded fields of employment or tourism :D

DIVERSE AS FUCK, INNOVATE OR FAIL - And then try to innovate again and again because success is as much built on lessons learned in failure as success!

Spoiler: The Codex Astartes approves of China's steel rain (click to show/hide)

(When it comes to coal, it's an industry that was in decline, I know, but the near-total (and now, I think finally total) shutdown of the coalfield communities forced deprevation in many NotLondon parts of the UK, plus the purchase of browner and browner coal stocks from abroad to feed continuing needs, when perfectly good (still carbon-heavy, but not as polluting with sulphur, etc) supplies could yet have been extracted to fuel the remaining users of the product.)

Pretty hard given how British coal was extracted so efficiently to the point where very few coal pits were economical when compared with gas, cheaper coal imports and recent massive political pressure to not completely tear up the environment. Coal had to go; a lot of our steel perhaps needlessly went, but then again we'd also have had to have subsidized them for decades and would be still subsidizing them for decades more given how China shows no signs of stopping ENDLESS STEEL RAIN. Funny that, the EU cannot... Compete, with Chinese steel.

Spoiler: No step on snek (click to show/hide)

2. British investors found it cheaper to hire Americans to do the same job, nowadays pretty much the same only with Indians and Chinese. The alternative would be to pay more for the same products but from Britons, but as a free market that defeats the purpose

Don't forget that home producers will still be competing with European ones. Possibly more unless we throttle trade with the EU (which, apparently, won't be affected if we leave - or so goes the other argument against staying in).

Of course they'll be competing with European producers in European markets, and they'll be competing with American ones in America and Nigerian ones in Nigeria. What do you want, state mandated consumerism levied by the EU? I would leave this country before this country left the EU if it tried doing that xD
Besides, we all know if the EU tried conducting state mandated consumerism it'd fall to the benefit of German industry on London capital.

Spoiler: tfw you ruin a continent (click to show/hide)

Because they're local... Never ascribe to a lack of incompetence what may just be down to the lack of ability... 

I don't, which is why I seek to destroy that ability. I've never seen any local politician in my area permanently fuck up a continent and I've never seen them permanently fuck up a borough, but once you fuck up a continent you can't unfuck it, you either laugh or you cry ;P

Spoiler: Surprise BNP strike soon (click to show/hide)

At home our populists have no political power.

?
That's exactly who has political power.

Ok who, because I don't think we live in the same Britain. Where's Nick Griffin now?
Conservatives - 330 seats, Cameron, Osborne and May - all pro-EU. The only potential Tory successor who is pro-UK is Bogolord Boris.
Labour - 232 seats, Corbyn, Khan - all pro-EU. There are no potential successors who are pro-UK.
SNP - 54 seats, Nicola Sturgeon and Stewart Hosie are all pro-EU. There are no potential successors who are pro-UK.
Liberal Democrats - 8 seats, Tim Farron is pro-EU. There are no potential successors who are pro-UK.
DUP - 8 seats, Arlene Foster is pro-UK. Whoever succeeds her will prolly be pro-UK.
Sinn Fein - 4 seats, Gerry Adams is pro-EU. Whoever succeeds him will prolly be pro-EU.
Plaid Cymru - 3 seats, Leanne Woods is pro-EU. You get the idea with successors, it's gonna be pro-EU.
SDLP - 3 seats, pro-EUUUUU
UU - 2 seats, pro-UK
UKIP - 1 seat, pro-UK as fUK
Green - 1 seat, pro-EUUUUUUUU
Independents - 4 seats, doing their thing

Where the populist power at?

Spoiler: Sorry Sergarr (click to show/hide)

Oh yeah, like Russia is going to take on NATO.

What's NATO got to do with it.  I'm not talking as if in Red Storm Rising...  probably...

What's NATO got to do with containing Russia? It contains Russia

Spoiler: RIP in peace wise Hobo, Winter got him (click to show/hide)

[...] if the EU collapses and the Europeans get their democracies back that is a victory,

And how labout if Greece (frexample) becomes a non-democracy, again? Since it apparently invented the concept (which, incidentally, involved Sortition, something no modern politico seems to want, in favour of the version they like better... Bring back Sortition, I say!) how much of the time has Greece been democratic?

If Greece goes from being a non-democracy as it stands now to being a non-democracy post EU removal - a wise homeless man once said to me that if you're born with nothing, and you die with nothing, what have you lost?
If Greeks cannot choose their destiny, and cannot choose their destiny, what choice have they lost?

Spoiler: What do the numbers mean Mason? (click to show/hide)

I get that you don't like the unelected parts of the EU which, to my mind are more like the Whitehall component ofngovernment than Westminster. Like it or not, though, it's a better mix than some fragments of the EU would get if it falls (and, if it doesn't, will be the coordinating effort behind the isolation of England-and-Wales, in a suitably dire scenario).

Better mix than what? I like your opinion but until you demonstrate how the EU is actually helping anything it's just an opinion, I like proof because it gives certainty. What "fragments" - they used to be called countries, with their own names, need the EU's undemocratic governance? Why are they incapable of providing it themselves? What mechanisms does the Commission possess to isolate the UK?

Spoiler: I wish to delegate semantics to grammar nazis, I would harvest the ensuing rage as renewable energy (click to show/hide)

Delegating powers to local authorities is not dismantling.

Not delegating. Abdication of responsibilities. Local authority now collects business rates, to spend how it sees fit? Now each authority has to try to be more competitive with its neighbours, and spend the money wisely whilst no longer having the explicit backing of the government. If things go wrong (as they will, to at least one local authority, because roughly half of them will operate at below-average efficiency) an example needs to be set (especially if it Opposition-controlled!) and suddenly it's in the equivalent of Special Measures. Doesn't matter if it's a mere 'blip', pure chance or the result of national-level interference. (If things improve immediately, overseeing government takes credit. If they don't then blamed on "starting from a right mess, can't be improved overnight"...)

When you entrust someone less-senior with a responsibility, this is called delegation. When you renounce those responsibilities entirely, this is called abdication.
So when Westminster reduces the rate at which it collects business rates from 50% to 0%, and local authority collection rates from 50% to 100% - delegation of power has occurred. Local authorities will not just have council tax at their disposal, they will also have business rates at their disposal, giving them a financial incentive to develop their own treasury through developing their own tax base and local businesses. They will no longer have to seek Westminster's approval for projects that inherently favour those with louder voices and deeper pockets!
This does not exclude country-wide projects obviously, given that the British tax base is strong. Just look at how Sadiq Khan brilliantly makes note of how Southwark Council and Tower Hamlets Council can commence their immense local development projects as much as they like, for larger projects like the Jubilee Line that was passed or the up and coming bridge from Rotherhithe to Canary Wharf - Westminster makes things that cross boroughs happen. Granted it gets approval. For the big things that's easy enough, but for a small council that only needs a few tens of thousands of grand to renovate a local library or office block or something it's honestly better just to delegate. Helps keep the regions happy too since their success is directly in their hands! :D
Where do you get this below-half efficiency number from? Delegation of power makes local governance more efficient, there is less bureaucracy involved in getting funds from point A to B since they go from Business -> Council -> Development -> Business growth, not Business -> Westminster and Council -> Council to Westminster -> Westminster to Council -> Development - > Business growth
Regarding competition, that is indeed the point - settle for the highest standard! Compete!

Spoiler: Euthanasia is a pretty word for DEADLY ASIA (click to show/hide)

Your "dismantling" is what I'd call "merging". Unifying. "Mantled", if you like. But it's putting a larger frame around the various smaller frames, which is awkward when the original frames were built to differing specifications and tolerences, which is where the problems with a unified Europe (whether from Brussels or Paris or Berlin or Rome, i.e. in the various ages that such things have been tried, noting that Rome did it best and for longest) stem from. Not easy, whichever way.

Merging, unification, mantling, all pretty names for dismantling all the tiny frames of the countries that once ruled themselves in the mainland. Call it what you want, the process of dismantling remains the same, and of our frame? The same future "unification" remains, for as long as we remain. This is just like how the EU calls destroying national banks or taking over your regulatory bodies "harmonization." All very pretty words to describe total surrender of your country's ability to budget itself and manipulate its own economy, pretty words for ugly butchery

Spoiler: Apples to Crocodiles (click to show/hide)

For me, it's dismantling when you cut loose various parts of the ship and dare them to float on their own (and here I'm talking about UK regionalism, not cutting loose failed states from the EU, or the cutting loose of a lifeboat by it's occupants which is wise if the ship is sinking but less so otherwise). And both approaches have problems that I would rather avoid.

That's fine and all but you're using that word incorrectly, our devolving has dismantled no British institutions whilst the EU has, and the EU cutting loose ruined states it "harmonized" up is called disintegration, as the EU loses yet more of its never established cohesion.

Spoiler: Westminster stole Clegg's soul (click to show/hide)

[The liberals] got 5 seats in Scotland but greens have overtaken them.

Looks like I misread something, or read it before enough declarations. They had five seats, still have five seats, for zero change.

Yah, they're well chuffed they still exist
Seems sort of weird, I remember a time when they had ambitions to become the 3rd party of UK politics
RIP in pes Nick

Spoiler: I'm enlightened by my Bishops (click to show/hide)

I still want to get rid of the Bishops in [the House of Lords] though

Keep (some of) the Lords Spiritual, I say, for their representation of the nation, but add othet representatives of other brands of religion (and Secularism, for good measure). The details to be bashed out elsewhere.

We don't need a Lord spiritual of secularism, whether you believe we need Lord spirituals at all or not :P

Spoiler: The troika is one of the nicest sounding names ever (click to show/hide)

In other news

Is the IMF better or worse than Europe? I can't tell...

The UN and the EU are pretty buddy-buddy and they tend to have bureaucrat bants pretty often - the troika is real

I don't think the distinction is even needed tbh

[Powder Miner]

Well, I'm a 'murican so I'm hardly an involved perspective, but I'd personally like to see the Brexit happen -- I've come to feel that the EU is something of an undemocratic institution, as non-UK-elected (and in some cases non-elected in general) officials place down increasing restrictions on what the UK can or cannot do.

[Starver]

How best to edit this?

And should I ignore the ones with "you've missed the point" or "we know what you think, but it's just not a fact"? Probably not. Let's just try to be brief.  - er.

Spoiler: An introduction (click to show/hide)

We compete with Europe now and I don't know what the hell will happen when the EU takes control of our finances and our currency,

Your argument of "if not out, then further in" makes too many assumptions (but not as many as your opinion that outwards lies pure Nirvana).

Spoiler: On stranger tides (click to show/hide)

analyze concrete factors that determine the probability of things happening so.

.my speculation, I label as speculation and guess and basic what-ifs. Your speculation, will be so, apparently. Somebody is doing this wrong.

Spoiler: On competition and the Ryanair Empire (click to show/hide)

Increase British investment in Ireland obviously,

So, stop spending money on Europe and start spending money in Europe... Something screwy with that vision.

Spoiler: The EU are the Hindenburgs of aviation investment (click to show/hide)

much work is to be done in order to avoid the calamity the EU is self-inflicting [...] Instead of trying to turn Dublin into a titanic international transit hub, they waste our money enabling Poland to make financial flops.

Ever thought that there was no need for the flops? And that once there is a need, it can be done without flopping?

And you know what? If we had surrendered our Central Bank

We didn't, and there's no reliable sign we will, and I'm ok with that. Find yourself a Europhile to argue this with.

Spoiler: Suicide is the leading cause of national democracy collapse (click to show/hide)

Hahaha there is no amount of depression our nation could endure that would turn Spain into London,

London (Britain/England'n'Wales) into below (Madrid/Barcelona/wherever) Spain/wherever, was the rough example at this point.

Spoiler: Eurodolla is a fickle beast prone to panic (click to show/hide)

Some nondescript coup de gras they totally have the means to deliver once the UK suffers some nondescript disaster that affects us in the world's eyes in a nondescript way?

The fortunes of politics and finance can turn on a dime. Or the requisite number of eurocents. Your prognostication might be better than mine. I already said it's the dark fuzziness of my visions that I find unenticing, but your clearer images do call you into the tunnel of light, I know.

In the event of a Brexit they'll be forced to consolidate their hold on their current states and stabilize the already shaky Eurodolla.

Yes, and perhaps end up with a solution.

Spoiler: On culturally enriching one's economy (click to show/hide)

For private sector companies, by industry the apprx. numbers of businesses in each field are:

... number of employees, I think you mean. The numbers add to ~5.4 million, probably close to the right number of working adults for the population of 8 million or so.

As an example:

-256,000 were in Public education (also known as private ed. for any Americans)

Sounds like a lot of Public Schools (US: Private Schools), but could be individual Private Tutors, suitably registered for VAT,  etc.
Note that there are 3,119 schools (of all recorded types) in the whole of London (both inner and outer).

Never mind, as this helps your figures.  Financial companies can employ far fewer people to move money than Transportation And Storage do to handle the necessary goods (I assume, rather than being a weird conjunction of mass-transit and posession archival) to support those moving the money. Some people think this a Good Thing™, while others do not.

But apart from some possible oddities (is Mining just an unrepresented element of its supercategory, or does that include Crossrail diggers/etc, not already in as Construction?), many of the workers in one field (e.g. Health) support those in all the others. Or those in none (Social Services)! Remove or diminish Finance, and there's knock-on in other fields. Especially the Real Estate one. And Social Services might increase recruiting.

DIVERSE AS FUCK, INNOVATE OR FAIL - And then try to innovate again and again because success is as much built on lessons learned in failure as success!

Innovate, yes, and do not stagnate. And don't assume that institutions that were "too big to fail" will remain. Remain too big to fail or remain in London to the same degree.

Capitals (and unnecessary profanity) aside it's a meaningless statement in context of your assertion.

Spoiler: The Codex Astartes approves of China's steel rain (click to show/hide)

Coal had to go

But not that way. Supply was cut quicker far quicker than demand did even after the pressures of forced importation. Local coal was still of good quality and availability, and it was years until Environmental pressures were significant (so an accidental early benefit the environment, perhaps, if not for the bituminous coal bought in to replace the anthrecite supply). It was a petulent mess of a policy.

And steel was so hit in the '80s that many recent projects cannot have used British steel stocks for key elements because we do not make that type of steel anymore (even though we originally developed it) because of defundings and closures. And that situation was exploited by international rivals, not caused. The latest thing with China is just a cherry on top, but I warrant that you'd not heard so much about the issue as I, until the recent headlining news, whilst I've been much closer the action for most of my life.  Like one handshake away from someone directly involved and two handshakes away from someone who may have helped sell a supergun pressure vessels to Saddam Hussein, in one direction and in another direction someone behind the success of this test of a nuclear flask (No, not the namechecked Group 4, but I also know someone who did prisoner escort for them, as at happens. )  Look, trust me, it's a historically raw subject, although I don't want to pull 'rank' on this one if I can help it.

Spoiler: No step on snek (click to show/hide)

Spoiler: tfw you ruin a continent (click to show/hide)

I've never seen any local politician in my area permanently fuck up a continent and I've never seen them permanently fuck up a borough, but once you fuck up a continent you can't unfuck it, you either laugh or you cry ;P

An easily found counter-example: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-35946977 (Sorry, I recall you dislike the BBC, but, it was the first link.)
Learn not to extemporise so glibly, please.

Spoiler: Surprise BNP strike soon (click to show/hide)

Ok who, because I don't think we live in the same Britain. Where's Nick Griffin now?

Where'd that come from? I grant you he's/they're populist to a certain minority, but they weren't even anywhere near my rather extensive shortlist. And didn't he quit, years back?  An unconsidered trifle.

No my list starts something like your list of "where are the populists in this?"...

Conservatives - 330 seats, Cameron, Osborne and May - all pro-EU. The only potential Tory successor who is pro-UK is Bogolord Boris.
[...]

...but you're all skewed with your commentary, so don't expect my comments added. (Except you use "pro-UK" like certain others use "pro-Life", and all the bias behind it that entails.)

Spoiler: Sorry Sergarr (click to show/hide)

What's NATO got to do with containing Russia? It contains Russia

Militarily, yes, but that wasn't my gist, as I said.

Spoiler: RIP in peace wise Hobo, Winter got him (click to show/hide)

If Greeks cannot choose their destiny, and cannot choose their destiny, what choice have they lost?

Point missed again.

Spoiler: What do the numbers mean Mason? (click to show/hide)

What "fragments" - they used to be called countries, with their own names,

Sorry, I obviously used flowery language when you were reading it as entirely stone-cold literal. A flaw of mine, at least as far as I can actually take that blame.
But, to put it plainly, we're tlking about balcanisation. And not just in the Balcans, this time round.

Spoiler: I wish to delegate semantics to grammar nazis, I would harvest the ensuing rage as renewable energy (click to show/hide)

When you entrust someone less-senior with a responsibility, this is called delegation. When you renounce those responsibilities entirely, this is called abdication.

You are right.  "Setting Up For A Fall" is a better word, or would be if it weren't a phrase.  But that's not Europe (that I know of), and I forget how you got me on this path, now...

They will no longer have to seek Westminster's approval for projects that inherently favour those with louder voices and deeper pockets!

I dislike people with Louder Voices (c.f. Farage, who doesn't have an 'indoor voice') and Deeper Pockets get their way far too much. Not sure what you're arguing, but now you know my stance, at least.

Where do you get this below-half efficiency number from?

I don't. I said that roughly half of (most things, actually) are below average (on any given measure, in this case it was efficiency, but average efficiency could be 90% or yet higher, and the minimum only just below this). This starts to be untrue with odd skews to the data, perhaps a single outlier to one side or another, but unless all measurements come out identical, there will always be at least one below-average datum points to pick on.

Simple maths (and of course I mean mean, before anyone asks, although median would apply for most practical distributions too). And in tomorrow's class, we'll discuss Reversion To The Mean...  (Well,  we won't, but we could...)

Regarding competition, that is indeed the point - settle for the highest standard! Compete!

And then hope that there's a mechanism to deal with runaway monopolies just because one party wisely invested/reinvested just as quick as they could, to the disbdnefit of their neighbour... Just for things that matter, of course.

Spoiler: Euthanasia is a pretty word for DEADLY ASIA (click to show/hide)

Merging, unification, mantling, all pretty names for dismantling all the tiny frames of the countries that once ruled themselves in the mainland.

So, there's no longer a French Parliament, an Italian Finance Minister, a use for the Reichstag Building, given that therevs no Bundestag to sit in it? (The RB was updated by a Brit, as I'm sure you know, and it's a very nice dome to walk up into, I can tell you!)

No real dismantling, just integration into a bigger structure, making some of the original structural elements less independent in motion.. Because that's what everyone wants when they intend synchronised movement between elements of different component structures.

(It would be more efficient to ditch the old frames, make the big frame less flexible and reach all the way down to the ground, but there's no sign of that happening. So there's a loose federal structure with designed in wiggle-room, rather than anything as rigid as the US's federal structure, perhaps.)

Spoiler: Apples to Crocodiles (click to show/hide)

That's fine and all but you're using that word incorrectly, our devolving has dismantled no British institutions

I was expecting the National Curriculum to be skinned, gutted, then thrown away in its entirity, to give just one obvious example that you might have missed, but the U-turn on the needless Academification of all schools may have left it only partly sliced'n'diced by the chef.

Spoiler: Westminster stole Clegg's soul (click to show/hide)

Seems sort of weird, I remember a time when they had ambitions to become the 3rd party of UK politics

Which era? Not their original 'before they slipped to 3rd' one, obviously, but are you thinking pre-SDP?

Spoiler: I'm enlightened by my Bishops (click to show/hide)

We don't need a Lord spiritual of secularism,

I had intended to put Humanist, but had a brainfart over the correct term, as I was writing... 

[Starver]

Well, I'm a 'murican so I'm hardly an involved perspective, but I'd personally like to see the Brexit happen -- I've come to feel that the EU is something of an undemocratic institution, as non-UK-elected (and in some cases non-elected in general) officials place down increasing restrictions on what the UK can or cannot do.

Most countries have laws enacted over them that they (the country) don't like, but is the will of Europe.  Some countries get opt-outs (e.g. Malta opting out of not being allowed to shoot migrating birds whose numbers are in decline) and some countries just ignore the 'rules' that were still set for them when they don't feel like complying.

Being British, we don't ignore so many rules, so we are more or less forced to stick with our subset of negotiated opt-outs.  (e.g. single currency, purely-metric weights and measures, Schengen...)

And no sign that we're ditching the mile, for everyday use, so I say the system isn't being drawn into a sociopolitical black hole centred somewhere around (although, ironically, not in) Switzerland.

[Powder Miner]

Well, I'm a 'murican so I'm hardly an involved perspective, but I'd personally like to see the Brexit happen -- I've come to feel that the EU is something of an undemocratic institution, as non-UK-elected (and in some cases non-elected in general) officials place down increasing restrictions on what the UK can or cannot do.

Most countries have laws enacted over them that they (the country) don't like, but is the will of Europe.  Some countries get opt-outs (e.g. Malta opting out of not being allowed to shoot migrating birds whose numbers are in decline) and some countries just ignore the 'rules' that were still set for them when they don't feel like complying.

Being British, we don't ignore so many rules, so we are more or less forced to stick with our subset of negotiated opt-outs.  (e.g. single currency, purely-metric weights and measures, Schengen...)

SOME EU laws that are disfavored by the member countries aren't enacted, but many are, and it's that breach of democracy I have a problem with.

[Orange Wizard]

* Orange Wizard wants to see a more centralised European Union

...

what?

[Sheb]

Well, I'm a 'murican so I'm hardly an involved perspective, but I'd personally like to see the Brexit happen -- I've come to feel that the EU is something of an undemocratic institution, as non-UK-elected (and in some cases non-elected in general) officials place down increasing restrictions on what the UK can or cannot do.

Most countries have laws enacted over them that they (the country) don't like, but is the will of Europe.  Some countries get opt-outs (e.g. Malta opting out of not being allowed to shoot migrating birds whose numbers are in decline) and some countries just ignore the 'rules' that were still set for them when they don't feel like complying.

Being British, we don't ignore so many rules, so we are more or less forced to stick with our subset of negotiated opt-outs.  (e.g. single currency, purely-metric weights and measures, Schengen...)

SOME EU laws that are disfavored by the member countries aren't enacted, but many are, and it's that breach of democracy I have a problem with.

Why, if they are voted for by the democratically elected EU Parliament?