Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Poll

IF YOU COULD VOTE TO LEAVE OR REMAIN WITHIN THE EUROPEAN UNION AS A SUBJECT OF HRH (PBUH) WITH PERMANENT RESIDENCE IN THE UK OR CITIZENSHIP ABROAD, HOW WOULD YOU VOTE?

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

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 107

Author Topic: Breeki British Brexit thread  (Read 155461 times)

Powder Miner

  • Bay Watcher
  • this avatar is years irrelevant again oh god oh f-
    • View Profile

I can't say I much appreciate the tone on that one, Sheb.

I'm aware that the British government extends well beyond the parliament, and that the two houses of said parliament do not constitute the whole of the British government (even if they do constitute much more than the Congress does in the US). But when I am talking about legislative layers, it should be a safe assumption that I am referring to the parliamentary section of the British government when I say "government", and there shouldn't be any need to ignore the rest of the content of my post just to nitpick that specific usage.

And just in case I have to specifically spell it out, a government is the system that, well, governs a country, dealing with laws, enforcement, defense, and seeing for the general welfare of the country that it oversees. A parliamentary government is a certain variety of structure of said system, largely combining the legislative and executive tasks to a single body of legislators, strictly regimented by party and often characterized with multiple parties and strong party power, that choose an executive leader (the Prime Minister) from within their ranks, though certain countries such as France augment this with an additional executive official, a more directly elected president.

Britain's government is a parliamentary system, so the parliament is incredibly central to the top level decisions made within the government, but it does not constitute the entirety of said government, as agencies and such define the government's abilities and responsibilities outside of legislation, and flesh out said government. While the European Union is not a country as such, it still largely centers around a parliamentary hybrid system -- the effective upper house is the directly elected European Parliament (as earlier stated, a Parliament), and my silly meme "xzibit levels of parliament" is a response to the fact that it is two layers of parliament between the EU and the British people, and parliaments as a system (especially the British system) tend to heavily lean against the minority, considering that party solidarity combined with the fact that the executive functions are controlled by the party with the largest amount of seats, even in the European Parliament -- it is the majority of the European Parliament that chooses the members of the European Commission, after all, which functions both in a way as the lower house and as the executive service of the EU's "government". The point I was making was that minority British opinions are likely to be utterly quashed between the two, which I counted as undemocratic.

As for my comparing of the parliaments with the commission... the number of members is an utter triviality, and the structure of said legislative services, for lack of a better term I can think of right now, really does not even matter when the comparison made is one of function -- the European Commission fulfills several legislative functions, and the executive functions it and its President do fill are in many ways similar to the executive functions fulfilled by the parliament and the Prime Minister (who, while admittedly not technically chosen by the majority party of the House of Commons, is for the vast majority of Prime Ministers chosen on that criteria). The comparison is not an unnatural one in the slightest.

I would much rather you attack the content of my argument rather than strike at my specific usage of terms and move things to the matter of my technical knowledge. Especially since I don't even think my knowledge of the whole thing is that poor.
« Last Edit: May 09, 2016, 10:52:37 pm by Powder Miner »
Logged

Loud Whispers

  • Bay Watcher
  • They said we have to aim higher, so we dug deeper.
    • View Profile
    • I APPLAUD YOU SIRRAH

Please chill guys, no ad hominems only banter!

Powder Miner

  • Bay Watcher
  • this avatar is years irrelevant again oh god oh f-
    • View Profile

Alright, I'm sorry. I got worked up.
Logged

nenjin

  • Bay Watcher
  • Inscrubtable Exhortations of the Soul
    • View Profile

Brash Banter Births Bans?
Logged
Cautivo del Milagro seamos, Penitente.
Quote from: Viktor Frankl
When we are no longer able to change a situation, we are challenged to change ourselves.
Quote from: Sindain
Its kinda silly to complain that a friendly NPC isn't a well designed boss fight.
Quote from: Eric Blank
How will I cheese now assholes?
Quote from: MrRoboto75
Always spaghetti, never forghetti

Powder Miner

  • Bay Watcher
  • this avatar is years irrelevant again oh god oh f-
    • View Profile

that alliteration is both wonderful and terrifying in its implications
Logged

Loud Whispers

  • Bay Watcher
  • They said we have to aim higher, so we dug deeper.
    • View Profile
    • I APPLAUD YOU SIRRAH

Spoiler: On formatting (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: tfw you sold the world (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Triple trifle threat (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Crocodiles to Robots (click to show/hide)

Loud Whispers

  • Bay Watcher
  • They said we have to aim higher, so we dug deeper.
    • View Profile
    • I APPLAUD YOU SIRRAH

On culturally enriching one's economy, because Taiwan London #1 and I ran out of characters
Quote
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.
This makes me so happy, there are so many businesses in London they can legitimately be confused for the working population, I can only imagine such pride is what Americans are ;-;7
There's about 14 to 15 million people in the Metropolitan area that's connected to London but is legally outside of its boundaries, that's not including those who commute to London from the surrounding area to get to work or the people employed by London based businesses who don't work in London.
To clear things up as to how there are so many businesses:
-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).
-99.9 per cent of private sector businesses are SMEs, employing an estimated 14.4 million people.
-75.3 per cent of private sector businesses do not employ anyone beside the business owners.
So there aren't 5.4million gargantuan world-devouring conglomerates, the vast, vast, vast, vast majority are local businesses with local ambitions, and of them a vast, vast majority are one-man startups, think like cornershop business deals, kebab van enterprise or merchantry in general


Quote
DIVERSE AS FUCK, INNOVATE OR FAIL - And then try to innovate again and again because success is as much built on lessons learned in fa
ilure 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.
THEY ASSUMED THEY WERE TOO BIG TO NEED INNOVATION

THEY WERE WRONG! :D

Capitals (and unnecessary profanity) aside it's a meaningless statement in context of your assertion.
Pardon me, but I must you see for diversity is an OFFENSIVE SHOTGUN OF ELECTRICITY TO THE FACE, it jolts you into action to INNOVATE or PERISH!

In regards to whether London's economy is diversified, I have demonstrated so. In response to your original question on what happens if it fails, then that is the collapse of the international economy and there will be nowhere in the world to flee to; what happens thereafter will look like fallout without the brown filter.
I advise that in the event of the collapse of the global economy you place your hands together, your head on the ground, and pray!

Loud Whispers

  • Bay Watcher
  • They said we have to aim higher, so we dug deeper.
    • View Profile
    • I APPLAUD YOU SIRRAH

martinuzz: Actually, I'd love to see a constitution too (and not the 150-page crap they trie to call a Constitution last time. A Constitution should be understandable), but I don't think it's a sine qua non condition for democracy. Again, the UK are also lacking a proper, written constitution.
Oh, and triple reply my God, but this caught my eye. Yeah we're a Constitutional Monarchy, we have hundreds of years of legal papers, documents, famous statutes and stuff like the Magna Carta (if any of them survive harmonization :|), we have no one codified singular document called "the constitution" because we had no revolution - our Constitution is the sum of all Laws, Statutes, Judgements, Treaties and Decrees

MetalSlimeHunt

  • Bay Watcher
  • Gerrymander Commander
    • View Profile

Little does anyone know, but the Lords Spiritual are in fact 100% infiltrators and the plot twist is that they're 50% euphoric and 50% rad trad Pius X Catholics.
Logged
Quote from: Thomas Paine
To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead, or endeavoring to convert an atheist by scripture.
Quote
No Gods, No Masters.

Erkki

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
  :P

I'm afraid that within the month Greece will again start blackmailing money form the rest of the EU and that'll finally ensure the brexit.
Logged

Starver

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

I have to make serious replies to the message before, and this one looked simpler to do in one go, but then it expanded larger...  Picking up the quick points,  coming back later for the intensive ones...

This makes me so happy, there are so many businesses in London they can legitimately be confused for the working population, I can only imagine such pride is what Americans are ;-;7
... my other idea was...
Quote
-The majority were small businesses (0 to 49 employees),
...the large amount of 'self employed' individuals, with or without a workmate or two.  And wondering how many of these are "technical employees" of their own personal company (of 1),which is in turn contracted to work (zero-hours or otherwise) for a larger company, for 'administrative' reasons.  (For high professionals, to most benefit the person, for many others to only the benefit of the company that contracts the company that manages the individualisitic companies that contain one employee (or maybe a handful, whatever is most 'convenient'). Also means multiple companies per person, though zome shared.)

Quote
Public education, not public schools - in addition to tutorage, online courses, language courses and so on.
You really complicated that one by suggesting Public Schools (UK) as per Private Schools (US).

Quote
Not just financial companies, all companies!
Yes, but you had lauded the financial companies, said they were the core, so I ws running with that.


Quote
and mining businesses aren't underrepresented because there are a lot fewer of them in the UK,
You musread what I thought I wrote there. I was musing that in "Mining,  Forestry and Tap Dancing Schools" (or whatever the category was) that people mining, in London, would be pretty sparse.  (Whilst Forestry, probably a different catagory but beyond scroll-back horizon, covers various Royal Park employees and tree surgeons both independent and Council employed, so I was not surprised to see that one mentioned)

Quote
THEY ASSUMED THEY WERE TOO BIG TO NEED INNOVATION

THEY WERE WRONG! :D[
I thought the problems were too much financial 'innovation'. "Tell you what, how about we let people bet on the outcome of other people's bets that major company's bets about whether a homeowner had corectly bet that he could pay his mortgage off, if he actually won the Lottery? But we hedge a bet against them, just to make sure!"

Quote
I don't get a say as to who is Prime Minister (to any practical degree).
You don't participate in party elections?
No, because I've never been a member of a political party. (Tempted by the OMRLP, though. Either that, or try to join all of them. Well, the palatable ones, at least.) But I don't have a party allegience, so I never thought it worth it. I support candidates by voting for them in elections, whoever I find personally appealing, including which side of their own party they lie.

The choosing of a Prime Minister is layers of abstraction away from that interaction. I hope that my vote for my candidate leads to their party coming top, with (now, or in the future) a leader at their swing, in the intra-pary spectrum. But it's a low hope, in the face of other people voting good MPs out of office because they don't like the current leadership (of a different hue) or vote bad MPs in just because they like the cover-photo face of the party concerned. But I work with what I have.

Quote
We don't even vote between the two (or more) candidates selected for our benefit by people who were mandated to select those that their parties deemed worthy enough to enter the race on their behalf (to simplify things) like happens with US presidents.
I thought we all got to pick our local MP[/spoiler]
Well, if we're in general concordance with our neighbours, perhaps. But, even then, <see above for details>...

(No, I don't support PR. That gives me even less say about which person my vote puts into parliament, let alone government. Although then I'd probably play "chase the nicer leader", like I can't/won't do now. And then suffer those others that I don't like who were put high on the party list for <reasons>, while other amicable 'listers' just don't make the cut. Or do I bet on how far down the list my vote will count for?)
Logged

Sheb

  • Bay Watcher
  • You Are An Avatar
    • View Profile

martinuzz: Actually, I'd love to see a constitution too (and not the 150-page crap they trie to call a Constitution last time. A Constitution should be understandable), but I don't think it's a sine qua non condition for democracy. Again, the UK are also lacking a proper, written constitution.
Oh, and triple reply my God, but this caught my eye. Yeah we're a Constitutional Monarchy, we have hundreds of years of legal papers, documents, famous statutes and stuff like the Magna Carta (if any of them survive harmonization :|), we have no one codified singular document called "the constitution" because we had no revolution - our Constitution is the sum of all Laws, Statutes, Judgements, Treaties and Decrees

Yeah, and the same for the "constitution" of the EU, also a bunch of laws, statute, decrees and treaties, although they're not as old and solid as the one in the UK, I'll grant you that. But martinuzz seemed to have an issue with that.

Quote
I can't say I much appreciate the tone on that one, Sheb.

I'm aware that the British government extends well beyond the parliament, and that the two houses of said parliament do not constitute the whole of the British government (even if they do constitute much more than the Congress does in the US). But when I am talking about legislative layers, it should be a safe assumption that I am referring to the parliamentary section of the British government when I say "government", and there shouldn't be any need to ignore the rest of the content of my post just to nitpick that specific usage.

Yeah, sorry, but it's hardly worth addressing all your post until we know we're talking about the same thing. Especially since government tends to be used differently in the US and Europe. Here it's also commonly used to refer to the topmost, elected layer of the executive (in a usage similar to the US 'administration' as in 'Obama administration' I think). So for exemple when we say that Belgium spent one year and some without a government, it doesn't mean everything stopped working as in a US government shutdown. It just means we couldn't agree on who was to ministers.

Also, the EU is a bloody complex thing, and I honestly wouldn't expect most Europeans to be able to tell the Council of Europe from the European Council (Yes, they are two totally unrelated things), so it's not really that far a stretch to assume you're not familiar with it either.*

That being said, you're wrong. The Commission isn't a lower house of parliament in any form. Commissioners don't vote on legislation. It's much more like the British Cabinet (and don't tell me the 100% Tory cabinet is well representative of minority views. It's not, and it's not its job either).

Quote
and my silly meme "xzibit levels of parliament" is a response to the fact that it is two layers of parliament between the EU and the British people,

That is also wrong, as the EU Parliament is directly elected by the European people, including the Britons. It should also be noted that while technically a parliamentary system, the EU parliament is proportional, not FPTP, and got a strong culture of consensus, which result in minority parties not being as sidelined as you would think. Juncker's EPP only had 220 out of
750 seats, and was voted in with broad support from the socialists and liberals parties as well as from a bunch of individual MEP.

Then, we haven't even talked of the Council (of the European Union). While its true that the Lisbon treaty did away with the requirement for unanimity is most case, replacing it by a qualified majority system which require a supermarjority of both countries and population, there is still a whole bunch of things for which it is required (aka, any national government has a veto) like taxation or defense or justice. Even still, consensus is the norm: about 75%-85% of the decisions are taken with all state voting in favour.


*Case is point, I then mixed up the European Council and the Council of the European Union (which are both different from the Council of Europe) and had to check on wiki. I'm willing to take a bet that no one here can describe the three without going to check first :p I'll change my avatar to one of Boris if someone manage it.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2016, 05:57:56 am by Sheb »
Logged

Quote from: Paul-Henry Spaak
Europe consists only of small countries, some of which know it and some of which don’t yet.

Sheb

  • Bay Watcher
  • You Are An Avatar
    • View Profile

Oooops, double post.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2016, 05:45:16 am by Sheb »
Logged

Quote from: Paul-Henry Spaak
Europe consists only of small countries, some of which know it and some of which don’t yet.

Orange Wizard

  • Bay Watcher
  • mou ii yo
    • View Profile
    • S M U G

Quote
I then mixed up the European Council and the Council of the European Union (which are both different from the Council of Europe)
Fuck me
Logged
Please don't shitpost, it lowers the quality of discourse
Hard science is like a sword, and soft science is like fear. You can use both to equally powerful results, but even if your opponent disbelieve your stabs, they will still die.

Sheb

  • Bay Watcher
  • You Are An Avatar
    • View Profile

There is also the European Council of Regions which is also part of the EU. I think we should just ban the word "council" actually.  :P
Logged

Quote from: Paul-Henry Spaak
Europe consists only of small countries, some of which know it and some of which don’t yet.
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 107