Yes, and mostly populated by white people… but many people voted Leave because of the lies peddled by Farage about keeping out people who aren’t… of course others fell for the lies told by the other Leave campaign about saving the NHS… and a much smaller number went along with the “the only way to nationalise” line of people like Lynch… and here we are…
If anyone could come up with a good reason for leaving it would make my day.
There are good reasons (think about what the EU did to Greece) but pragmatically it was only ever going to go one way.
How can I? I didn’t know that there is a connection between brown people and the EU.
I suppose it depends on whether you're looking for an actual connection or what a number of people think is a connection. I just gave you an answer to the latter. If I'm wrong and Garage's poster is baseless then... well, it's almost like the British public were sold brexit on a lie, isn't it.
Edit: My point was, quote : “the EU is run mostly by white people”.
The EU is run mostly by Europeans.
Odd, that.
I didn’t know that there is a connection between brown people and the EU.
As you can see from this very informative graphic, if we had not voted for Brexit we would now be inundated with brown people from Turkey, Iraq and Syria.
Your pre-edited comment cougar:
WTF is your point here Ernie? That white-dominated countries are represented by a white-dominated parliament?
Obviously you decided to edit because even you could see that you had hit the nail on the head:
I asked what the connection was between the EU and brown people, after someone appeared to suggest that there was one.
You then told me "you tell us", which was a bit weird bearing in mind that it was me asking the question.
I said that I didn't know of any apart from the fact that there aren't many brown people in Europe.
Now your latest post appears to agree with me - there isn't a connection.
The EU is run mostly by Europeans.
Odd, that.
It would be odd if it were true.
Who else apart from Europeans are running the EU?
The EU isn't mostly run by Europeans, it is only run by Europeans. Unless you are some sort of New World Order conspiracy theorist.
Your pre-edited comment cougar:
I edited it to be less confrontational.
I asked what the connection was between the EU and brown people, after someone appeared to suggest that there was one.
...
Now your latest post appears to agree with me – there isn’t a connection.
No, I don't disagree. There isn't a connection. I've made this point several times over now.
But there is a persistent belief amongst brexity types that there is.
The EU isn’t mostly run by Europeans, it is only run by Europeans. Unless you are some sort of New World Order conspiracy theorist.
I only said "mostly" to hedge my bets because I figured if I said "only" you'd have pulled out some random non-European diplomat I've never heard of from 30 years ago in order to prove me wrong.
I don't understand what battle you're trying to win here. It's your bedfellows that don't approve of swarthy foreigners, not mine. See above.
BREAKING POINT
THE EU HAS FAILED US ALL
WE MUST BREAK FREE OF THE EU AND TAKE BACK CONTROL
[A gurning Farage imposed over a photo of refugees walking miles to get to Slovenia, bollocks all to do with the UK]
That's your "brown" link, right there. UKIP et al deliberately stoking up racial hatred. And you're dancing on semantics in order to defend it.
Gents
Do not feed the trolls. We can all see you mean well, but Ernie entered this conversation earlier with a crappy motte and bailey fallacy and has been shooting out other fallacy bait and intellectual dishonesty ever since.
He does not represent the majority opnion on here, or in the country, I think he does not even represent his own opinon. So why are you all wasting your time filling up a decent discussion by arguing with attention seeking trolls? You have to learn not scratch that little mossie bite.
There are lots of people with thought proving intelligent arguments in the discussion above here that can sway us or at least make us think. Talk to them...
The OP was Mick Lynch for PM.
Yay or nay?
I am liking v8ninetys summary:
Re. his Brexit views; nobody is perfect, but at least he articulates an opinion that is based in his and his members honest experience, that isn’t obviously rooted in underlying fear of brown people. So he’s worth listening to, even if only to understand where we are now.
Other than that, his sublime ring running around reporters, interviewers and MPs time after time are just golden to watch. I don’t think he’s destined for politics, he’s too straight forward. But he’s a likeable, obviously dedicated individual who knows his stuff and isn’t afraid to speak his mind. More power to his elbow.
and agree, that its not enough for Lynch to be Pm..
There are good reasons
Come off it, you can do better than than a sketchy rant about the Greeks. Give us some reasons.
I think the British public have become so used to seeing either:
a) beige, interchangeable Tory politicians with too little to say (in fact, their sole objective is to say nothing of value), and too much media training, or
b) Tory Politicians who seem so ill prepared to say anything to the press, that they stumble through an interview repeatedly contradicting themselves and tying themselves in knots/lying, that they lose any credibility that they had in the first place.
I think Mick and some of the union spokespeople just appeal to the public because they are neither of those things ^
I'm singling out tory politicians above, because I actually think the Labor front bench has got some decent people in it who can speak with the same passion and coherence as Mick - I don't think it's fair to lump them in with Tories.
As for Brexit, I'm disappointed but not surprised that he supported Brexit on a single, ideologically-based issue, rather than taking a more considered view of the potential harm to his members.
Brexit means something different to almost everybody who voted for it. It's success/failure is entirely dependent on whether those implementing it are aligned with what it means to you. I think anyone voting for Brexit thinking that it was going to be anything other than what it's turning out to be is (hopelessly?) naïve - as people/activists on the far left tend to be.
I support re-nationalization (in some form) of key industries in the UK, but wouldn't have voted for Brexit in order to achieve that (nor would I need to have) - it's just too great a cost.
Can’t see this shambles touting nationalisation as a Brexit bonus. Removing workers rights to withdraw their labour on the other hand…
I think Mick and some of the union spokespeople just appeal to the public because they are neither of those things ^
I think maybe he appeals because he doesn't put up with those things.
It just goes to prove that people who voted for brexit didn’t really think it through.
Come off it, you can do better than than a sketchy rant about the Greeks. Give us some reasons.
It wasn't a rant and I voted remain. I gave you a reason but clearly you're not interested so I'll leave it there.
It just goes to prove that people who voted for brexit didn’t really think it through.
*Some* didn't.
I do feel that perhaps the same is going on with the rail strikes.
The government without a doubt is clueless over the future of the railways. Most of the private companies just seem to be stumbling along trying to turn a profit. The current arrangement of companies and contracts of staff is causing part of the chaos.
That said, I feel that a lot of the 'wants' of the union are either unrealistic or not pragmatic. In feel that thier ideology is contributing to the chaos.
The government don't want a debate about the future if railways - so they keep turning this back to (only) a pay issue.
So I have every sympathy with the rail workers looking for more money. I'm running out of any sympathy when 'workers rights erosion' includes rights that no-one else has, or pay requests that are unreasonable, when thier union's have contributed to the chaos.
Sadly, I think we're about to see the collapse/near collapse of the railways.
My own organisation this week has put effort into investigating long distance buses and bookings, into a new hire car contract and we even discussed it from a Health and Safety point of view, having had staff unable to complete rail journeys and left abandoned and struggling to get home at the end of a working day. I'm due in London at end of February - I paid £210 for tickets yesterday, and yet I've also ensured my own big car is available as I am betting I'm going to end up driving it.
You can't trust the trains, and the union is contributing to that lack of trust.
That said, I feel that a lot of the ‘wants’ of the union are either unrealistic or not pragmatic. In feel that thier ideology is contributing to the chaos.
Its about negotiation isn't it, they have to have an aim, I expect they will be lucky to get a tiny amount of what they want. If govts will be successivley dishonest and negotiate hard you can't say "give us reasonable pay and conditions and we will be happy" because they will gut that in negotiations.
He has some good points but is still an intransigent Brexit moron which rules him out as a reasonable person. It's not just getting it wrong in the first place, but the inability to learn from reality. Moron.
He has some good points but is still an intransigent Brexit moron which rules him out as a reasonable person. It’s not just getting it wrong in the first place, but the inability to learn from reality. Moron.
I fundamentally disagree with his stance on Brexit, but think he's doing a great job for his members, and in exposing the incompetence of the government and the media.
To dismiss people as "morons" because we disagree with one aspect of their beliefs is unwise and self-centred, and will not help any of the issues facing the country be resolved.
Having converted two whole brexiteers I refuse to write anyone off. He is parroting a line. he said he would see the result of any new ballot, so that at least shows a willingness to change. Everyone makes mistakes, if he changes with better evidence then thats fine.
However, he isn't PM material..
"great job for his members"
Yeah it's all worked out so well for them. They must be delighted.
Yeah it’s all worked out so well for them. They must be delighted
So what's the alternative? Join the race to the bottom?
So I have every sympathy with the rail workers looking for more money. I’m running out of any sympathy when ‘workers rights erosion’ includes rights that no-one else has, or pay requests that are unreasonable, when thier union’s have contributed to the chaos.
Just because others have had their rights taken away doesn't mean everyone has to
Having read a few articles I now see I disagree with him on
Brexit: he's supported it on misleading grounds and I disagree with it.
Electric cars: I own one that costs half what he claims and it provides cheaper transport that the equivalent ICE for places not reached by public transport.
Working from home: it eliminates commuting and some people prefer being "a battery chicken in their own home".
And I agree with him on:
NHS, academy schools and the welfare state in general
An extensive subsidised affordable rail network
His image: Arthur Scargill, Red Robbo... union leader on an ego trip and forgetting to act in the best interests of his members because his life has become divorced from the workplace, his lifestyle divorced from that of the working man and he's too rich to feel the pain of going on strike or losing his job.
PM? No ta. Good orator, lousy negotiator.
So what’s the alternative? Join the race to the bottom?
It is not the bottom - some of the requests and protections are things that no-one else in any other industry enjoys. It is a modernising of the service.
Just because others have had their rights taken away doesn’t mean everyone has to
Exactly, also arguing amongst ourselves is what they want us to do.
Surely the railworkers getting increased rights just sets the precedent for the rest of us. Let them have it, then we all might get it.
Or are you just working on the politics of envy?
– some of the requests and protections are things that no-one else in any other industry enjoys.
So those other industries are the bottom then?
Why should workers just give up protections and perks, it is a constant to remove these from workers and the only people who benefit are the boards and shareholders
It is a modernising of the service.
It is about the jobs of his union’s members and others they work with. Those working in ticket offices, as cleaners, as guards… the government (it is not the train companies, they have no say in this, they are being paid and instructed directly by the government now) wants to get rid of their jobs. To sack them. The terms being offered mean the end of their roles.
1 good thing from Brexit: Agricultural policy can be better than the shitshow that was the Cap. Seems to be in Wales? IANAF.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-55320005.amp
So what’s the alternative? Join the race to the bottom?
The alternative was membership of the EU that helped to protect employee rights in a number of ways.
As a union rep myself, I saw it in action.
Anti-competitive protectionism was never the way forward. Tories are always gonna tory, but with the EU they were more limited as to the harm they could do. As I think we are all seeing, at least those of us with our eyes open. People who are still too blinkered or stupid or deluded to see it are basically no use to anyone.
l only said “mostly” to hedge my bets because I figured if I said “only” you’d have pulled out some random non-European diplomat I’ve never heard of from 30 years ago in order to prove me wrong.
I don’t understand what battle you’re trying to win here.
Oh so it's my fault that you came out with some nonsense about the EU being "mostly" run by Europeans! Not only am I responsible for what I write but now I am also responsible for you write! 😂
And I wasn't trying to win any "battle", I asked a straightforward question. Someone seemed to make a connection with the EU and brown people and I asked if there was one as it didn't seem to me that there was.
For reasons best known to yourself you decided to take issue with my question. And then to complicate matters it turns out that you totally agree with me - you also don't believe that there is anything intrinsically notable about brown people and the EU.
I have absolutely no idea what you arguing about. You seem to be arguing about something but I'll be ****ed if I know what!
Gents
Do not feed the trolls. We can all see you mean well, but Ernie entered this conversation earlier with a crappy motte and bailey fallacy and has been shooting out other fallacy bait and intellectual dishonesty ever since.
He does not represent the majority opnion on here, or in the country, I think he does not even represent his own opinon. So why are you all wasting your time filling up a decent discussion by arguing with attention seeking trolls? You have to learn not scratch that little mossie bite.
I appreciate that the general consensus among some is that everyone should broadly share the same opinion on political threads, and that anyone who doesn't play but that rule must by definition be a troll.
But as far as Mick Lynch's political position is concerned, including his views on the EU, I doubt that a fag paper separates me and him.
If you believe that can't be true, I can't possibly agree with Mick Lynch and his opinions of the EU, no one else does, I must therefore be trolling, then fine - don't bother challenging me.
I would be more than happy if every time I posted my personal opinion I wasn't challenged, especially by people who can't come up with anything more constructive than using the default "troll" response. Take your own advice and don't reference my comments.
Getting back to the issue of "Mick Lynch for PM", if the deal clincher is whether he supports rejoining the EU then it suggests that no one who feels it makes him unsuitable will be voting Labour. It also suggests views totally at odds with the wider public, unless of course those making the claim are merely trolling!
You're right ernie that Labour's position on the EU makes them impossible to vote for IMO. If that wasn't enough, their bone-headed opposition to any meaningful electoral reform is another thing that's hard to swallow.
I look forward to 5 years of Labour floundering in power as they fail abjectly to repair the harm the tories have done to the country (brexit being by far the largest part of this) and then another decade or more of tory pillage "because Labour isn't working" or whatever slogan the Daily Hate prints. Sigh.
Well, they probably won't manage 5 years, they will fall apart after 3.
You’re right ernie that Labour’s position on the EU makes them impossible to vote for IMO.
The "IMO" is the critical factor here, currently opinion polls are showing that up to half of the electorate would vote Labour if there was a general election tomorrow.
For all the attempts to keep STW free of dissenting opinions it is very much at odds with the wider public.
Although I appreciate that for some people this is a badge of honour.
For all the attempts to keep STW free of dissenting opinions it is very much at odds with the wider public.
Its really not. maybe its at odds with the folk you mix with but the folk I mix with Brexit and Starmers backing of Brexit is a huge topic of conversation and a huge vote loser
I won't vote labour because of Starmers stance on Brexit
But as far as Mick Lynch’s political position is concerned, including his views on the EU, I doubt that a fag paper separates me and him.
If you believe that can’t be true, I can’t possibly agree with Mick Lynch and his opinions of the EU, no one else does, I must therefore be trolling, then fine – don’t bother challenging me.
I normally decide whether someone is trolling or not based on whether they address my point or start talking about something else entirely.
I challenged you and Mike Lynch's views on the last page. He (and you) said you can't have a nationalised industry in the EU.
I said, technically you can't, in practice you can. See SNCF and any number of other private companies where the government is the largest shareholder. Sure, there's 'competition' from other privately owned companies and best of luck to them bidding against the government owned company.
But you ignored that, said something about brown people, and then accused everyone of ganging up on you.
That's trolling.
Holyrood has taken Scotrail back into state control. Not sure of the exact mechanism
Its really not
And then you confirm that it is by saying :
I won’t vote labour because of Starmers stance on Brexit
Have you not heard the news? Labour are on course to possibly winning their greatest electoral victory in history.
Or are you dismissing it all because of what your mates are telling you?
IMO Ernie is not trolling - trolling is being provocative to get a response.
What Ernie is doing is debating and using some fine debating technique - worthy of Oxford debating society
I don't always agree with Ernie but his position is consistent and well thought thru and argued.
I won’t vote labour because of Starmers stance on Brexit
Same here, how I can I moan about it if I support it.
Starmer needs to give me and the million people that marched a glimmer of hope.
No Ernie - what I am stating is your statement " it is very much at odds with the wider public." is simply not so. It may be amongst the folk you speak with but its false among the folk I speak with and in Scotland in general
I don’t always agree with Ernie but his position is consistent and well thought thru and argued.
Cool, then he (or Mick Lynch) should have no problem explaining why the difference between a nationalised industry and a private company whose majority shareholder is the government is so important that it's worth throwing a huge tranche of workers rights on the Brexit bonfire.
But you ignored that, said something about brown people, and then accused everyone of ganging up on you.
That’s trolling.
Sorry I didn't see your question, although if I had it wouldn't have made much difference other than I would have acknowledged it.
I avoid getting into discussions about Brexit, it's been done to the death, the referendum was over 6 years ago and there won't be another one anytime soon. Carrying on the debate is pointless, a fact which even the Labour Party, led by an arch-remainer, has accepted.
And I haven't accused anyone of ganging up on me, everyone appears to agree with me - there is nothing intrinsically notable about brown people and the EU. A couple of people seem to want to argue about something but I'm not entirely sure what.
I avoid getting into discussions about Brexit,
In modern Britain that must somewhat limit your conversation topics.
But OK, let's ignore Brexit (pretend this is a hypothetical question about a set of circumstances completely unrelated to the B word) so that you (or Mick Lynch) can answer this question.
Why is the difference between a nationalised industry and a private company whose majority shareholder is the government so important that it’s worth throwing a huge tranche of workers rights on the bonfire?
