holystove

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/07/5-us-independence-movements-inspired-by-brexit-214010 “If Britain can leave the EU then New Hampshire can leave the U.S,” the leader of the newly founded NHexit movement (as in, New Hampshire exit) said a few days later, as he staged a secessionist protest in front of a federal building in Manchester. Larry Kilgore, who is now running for governor of the state of Texas in 2018, said in an interview that Brexit was a great thing because “it will encourage other nations to rise up against their oppressors.” When I asked him who he meant by “other nations,” he rattled off a few names, including California and North Carolina. “In the wake of the U.K.’s 'Brexit' vote, we are receiving queries from all over the world— is a ‘Vexit’—Vermont nonviolently seceding from the United States of Empire—next?” “We have the blueprints, we have the platform, we have the book, we have the passport, and we have the flag,” wrote Williams.

Missed it in 2013, 2014 and 2015. Back in 2016; hope none of our Algerian members were offended!

I disagree with the first part of your post. The members of the UK Parliament are elected by the people and ever since the UK joined the EU the UK Parliament has ratified every treaty that has given more powers to the EU. *edit*: just read that Mike already replied to you on that issue. I do somewhat agree with the second part of your post, although I wouldn't have worded it that strongly. (I realize you were being sarcastic). I do believe because of the massive disinformation (on both sides, but that's exactly the point) and because of the anti-establisment sentiment people were voting for or against something other than the EU. See entry #1130.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/boris-johnson-lookalike-left-terrified-8338124

I'd say a cohesive team with great tactics. (for teams with mostly average players). Italy and Wales have both. Belgium and England had neither. (Although we did have the Hungary (and Ireland) game).

Just heard the interview. He really threw wilmots under the bus (rightfully so in my opinion). Too bad belgian fa is too poor to be able to afford the top manager these players need.Disagree about his level of play. At least for belgium he has been excellent. Top keeper.

Oliver is actually quite funny with all the Brexit stuff; better than I expected of him.

Thought so too. His finishing was crap though and thats what hes being paid for.

Not impressed with witsel but no way is he past his prime. I think hes 27.

Wonder if wilmots gets sacked now. Shameful loss. To be fair to him though.with vertonghen and vermaelen this might end 0-1. Well done wales and good luck. Shame about ramsey.

I feel the same way. Because of our own crappy defense Belgium will need to score at least 3 times against a solid Welsh defensive bloc, which I dont see happening. You never know with two Lukakus on the pitch though :-).

It's OK. I should have known you were just winding me up. (and if you weren't, please re-read the thread from page 1 :thumbs up: ) Although I do think the fact that you use the same bold and invalidated statements as 20 pages are a show of ill will (or dementia).

For 10m €. These prices ..

The United States of America haven't done too bad though. Anyway, the article I posted is also about why the EU in its current form is set up to fail. "Zielonka agrees that further integration of Europe’s governing systems is needed as economies become more interdependent. But he says Europe’s often-paralysed hierarchy cannot achieve this. Instead he sees the replacement of hierarchy by networks of cities, regions and even non-governmental organisations. " Anyway, it's not gospel, just food for thought for those who want to read it.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3656541/Fellatio-cafe-customers-receive-oral-sex-drink-40-coffee-opened-Geneva.html have fun, Matt.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22329850-600-end-of-nations-is-there-an-alternative-to-countries/ Interesting article on the end of nation states. Worth a read.

Greece is a bad example because their national government committed massive fraud. The majority of member states now believe austerity is the way out for the Greeks. They are still receiving billions of Euro though. Portugal would be a better example of a country that has been part of the EU for decades and has greatly benefited from European integration.

It says EU citizen on my passport, I assume it does on yours aswell. The EU is not a sovereign nation, it also isn't just an international organisation. It is a supranational organisation ('sui generis' if you want to get technical) which has certain exclusive competences, where sovereignty has been transferred from the member state to the EU (the EU being the grouping of 27 (28) member states, not some faceless bureaucratic institution) because the 27 (28) members decided that some issues are better decided at a European level. So in simple terms you could actually say that concerning certain areas the EU is a country in your sense of the word (how else could one explain decisions taken at a European level by 27 (28) countries with majority voting). Anyway I'm not going to get into it that much because it won't convince you in the slightest, but what I wrote is the gist of it.

I was typing the same thing when I got a pop-up saying "show new post" (or something to that extend) and turns out you had already said it better. I was against the 2004 enlargement but now I can live in Prague, so it's not all bad . It's one of the things that was bothering me about the remain camp. There was only scaremongering about dire economic consequences.. The focus was purely on why it could be bad for Britain to leave the EU. Did anyone vote remain in hope of a better life for Eastern and Southern Europe and eventually for them to be at the same level as us, even if it would mean a temporary lower standard of living right now? Everybody was thinking about what is best for the UK, not what is best for Europe. I know it could be perceived to be naive but it would be one of the main reasons for me to vote "remain".

Maybe the language barrier is making me misunderstand what you meant, but the fixed parameters in your example would never materialize so I think it's an invalid hypothesis? 1/ there would never be 5 million turks migrating to belgium because that wouldn't be in their own intrest 2/ I assume the 5 million was just a hyperbole for excessive migration, but I agree with Makis in that Turkey would only be allowed in the Union if they are a more "advanced" country and the Turks would then presumably feel a lesser need to migrate in massive numbers. Regarding migration; I can't speak for the UK, but every problem with migration in Belgium has to do with migration from outside the EU (from Syria, Iraq, Morocco, Afghanistan, ..)

Why should you plan for a hypothesis that is never going to happen?

On eof the polish just got a yellow card and underneath his name it said "misses next match". I thought all yellow cards were cleared after round of 16??

I know this will seem weird to you but for the same reason there isn't a control mechanism to organize migration between Wales and England, or Scotland and Wales, or Texas and Georgia. But a necessity for that to work is that there aren't countries in the Union that are economically much less advanced than others (see my previous post about the 2004 enlargement). This only in addition to what Makis wrote who I fully agree with regarding Turkey.

Good offensively, but much like his brother not a tactical genious .. leaves a lot of space in his back. He would have started anyway instead of Vermaelen with Vertonghen pairing up with Alderweireld. Now that Vertonghen is out aswell, Denayer will play in the middle. Denayer is very fast, which is good in hopes to stop Bale's rushes. Sadly, Denayer was also crap in his last couple of games for Belgium. Belgium have now lost Vertonghen, Kompany, Lombaerts and Vermaelen in a defense that was shaky to begin with. I have zero confidence for tomorrow and fear Bale will score a hattrick.

The majority of the 27 member states want their people to be able to live wherever they want within the economic union, so much so that they make it a 'conditio sine qua non' for any third country that wants to have access to the common market of 27 european nations.. in essence, there's not much more to it than that. Edit: To follow up on what Makis said: it is indeed a core value of the EU; but only of the EU. To be able to live and work wherever you want within 27 nations is a good way to create a common identity. But that also means it is somewhat irrelevant towards third parties like the UK, with whom is unnecessary to create a common identity.