Independence and autonomy might seem like a good thing on an individual citizen level but think about what happens if you are running a company. Imagine if you were running a business in PA and wanted to sell to NJ, NY and Ohio except now these are different countries not just different states. Different rules, different trade agreements, taxes, customs issues, etc. What about trying to hire someone from an adjoining state and having to deal with immigration, legal status, etc. or set up an office in an adjacent state. That's why the EU makes sense. So many different countries squeezed into a small area. You need to have universal agreements otherwise it's a nightmare.It always boggles my mind when people think moving around mainland Europe is a big deal. If you think of the different countries of Europe as equivalent to states here in the US (Alaska & Hawaii included), and realize that the US is more than TWO times the land mass of Europe.
Its like saying a kid has an opportunity to work in Boston, Chicago, NYC & DC here in the US.
Europe is a diverse region because of its different cultures. The US is not AS diverse, but we do have diversity of culture here as well.
Having the EU does allow for more ease of travel between countries, like we can between states. But since these are independent countries, they always don't have a desire to share the same culture or rules of a neighboring country. Independence & autonomy is a good thing!
For our friends in The UK...
- Thread starter ericstratton-rushchairman
- Start date
What does this say about Norway, which I believe was the only invited nation to turn down EU membership. Seems they're doing just fine without all the benefits.
LOL...you need to look outside what the MSM is feeding you. TX has a massive concentration of military outposts and people. Tons of government workers. They have the largest boarder with a neighboring country than any other state except Alaska. Dugs, Illegal Aliens, and massive expanse of rural areas contribute.
Let me make a suggestion; before you go quoting "statistics" go check to see how those stats are calculated.
Exactly. Placing the fate of your economy and possibly the world's up to a vote by, at best, the uninformed and worse, the moronic, is beyond comprehension.
This one must have tested well in the focus groups
We do pretty much the same thing every 4 years.
The more likely scenario is that the EU will be gone in 5 years.
This - I live in Texas and love Austin but I would pack up and leave in a second if the kooks outside Austin voted to secede.
All that said, if TX was independent, it would be able to control illegal immigration any way it wanted. The effects of that is a massive reason for the net inflow of fed cash.
There were many issues that probably were more deserving of getting the dander up, but the one that got people off their couch was immigration, so they ran with it.
What kind of country do you prefer? One like Germany that is struggling mightily (and frankly, futilely) against the sea of immigration, or one that will show some grit and tighten the reins (as did the UK)? It will be the vote of a lifetime, imo, and sadly, it will revolve around that one issue... all others will pale by comparison.
as Cam Poe said in Con Air (and Jim Kirk later in Star Trek)... buckle up.
What kind of country do you prefer? One like Germany that is struggling mightily (and frankly, futilely) against the sea of immigration, or one that will show some grit and tighten the reins (as did the UK)? It will be the vote of a lifetime, imo, and sadly, it will revolve around that one issue... all others will pale by comparison.
as Cam Poe said in Con Air (and Jim Kirk later in Star Trek)... buckle up.
I don't think it will be "gone", but it will go back to its reasons for existing in the first place: lowering the impediments to intra-european trade and commerce. cooperation in terms of fighting against crime (including terrorism).
Take the Euro for example...electronics has completely done away with the need for the Euro. currency conversions are done in an instant, nobody needs or uses cash anymore. (at least, they don't have to).
The biggest fear is trade agreements, IMHO. But the UK is so big, nobody is going to stop or impede trade with the UK. In fact, we are now seeing the governmental elements that predicted doom and gloom talking about "using common sense and taking a breath". (looking at you, Angela Merkel)
Well yes of course they do. They also have the Johnson Space Center and a huge amount of NIH health research in Houston, the pork-barrel legacy of a long line of powerful Texas politicians. As I said, TX and most of the deep south would be an economic basket case if not for federal government spending. What part of that do you think is not true?
I don't mind a big chunk of my federal taxes going to support Texas every year. I just have to laugh every time these Texas politicians sermonize on the evils of taxes and federal spending. TX would be oil wells and tumbleweed without Uncle Sam. I guess these guys are only opposed to federal spending when it benefits people outside of Texas.
Very true. If you asked Europeans if they wanted to form a 'United States of Europe' (1 country like the USA) they would say absolutely not. However, the European Union in Brussels thought and acted that way.
They had 1 currency (that killed places like Greece, Portugal etc when they couldn't compensate in economic hard times), had its own parliament superior to member states (60% of the UK parliament laws were simply rubber stamping Euro Parliament laws), the Euro courts overruled the UK Supreme Court when in conflict, immigration policy was made in Brussels and imposed on member states (Merkel unilaterally let in 1 million plus last year and the EU then told each country how many refugees/ economic migrants they were forced to take and support from those entering Germany- with threats for those that didn't comply), they were even discussing the formation of a Euro army, etc.
The bottom line is that they got away from a loose alliance of member states for improved trade and keeping peace on the continent into building a superstate (all while denying they were trying to build a superstate). I know many are upset by the rejection of the 'idealistic' view of the EU. The problem was that the reality on the ground was often very different.
bro, as bad as the feds are with the border, if you think an independent Texas control the Rio Grande would be anything other than an unmitigated disaster . . .
Yeah Boyer! Stop listening to "facts" from the "media". You need to go with Obli's gut.
Well, at least it would be their problem, not ours.
The problem is there are consequences to any move- including staying.
Sometimes you just have to do what you think is right and deal with any consequences. I am somewhat amazed at how differing groups are taking this referendum result to instantly fragment and push their own agendas. It's a problem with politics in how polarizing everything is now (including in the USA).
So not even 12 hours after the vote and the SNP are pushing for another leave referendum for Scotland (that they lost about 2 years ago). It was striking watching the BBC coverage last night. When the outcome was still in doubt the same question was put to an English and Scottish politician. When asked if they could accept the outcome if Scotland and London overruled the rest of the UK to get a remain vote- the English politician said yes. Said its the vote of the whole UK and as a believer in the United Kingdom you would accept the will of the people. When the same question was asked to the Scottish politician they said no and would push for a Scottish independence referendum. It was very clear the SNP would not accept any vote that didn't agree with them.
Irish nationalists are now calling for a 'border vote' (uniting Ireland) given the NI vote to stay (56- 44% IIRC). The unionists in NI and the NI secretary in the UK are rejecting that vote.
The Labo(u)r party are having infighting in trying to replace a feckless leader. They are also trying to spin the defeat as due to the Tories.
The Tories have their own leadership mess now that Cameron resigned and blame the Labor party for the leave vote that was heavy in traditional Labor areas.
Someone there needs to step up and call to unite the country as they move through the next phase rather than allow this personal infighting and party agenda stuff to fracture them even more.
The part that is not true is energy and technology. Add in agriculture.
What you say can also be said about NY and CA. CA is blessed with a massive coast line that has been a historical boon. NY as well. Add in massive corporate taxes and you show their income as positive. Did NY recently do something to deserve that tax income? Did Citi Bank suddenly decide to HQ in NY? So if you are going to parse data, giddy up!
Well, that's about right. You'd no longer be forced to send your hard earned money to Washington for the benefit of the inside the beltway crowd. Net gain, IMO!highly motivated . . . and cost prohibitive. we'd have to bring back the state income tax.
uhm yeah, l would be giving my money to Mexico City instead. Texas is full of the biggest bunch of gun loving pu**ies who would shoot each other while crapping their own pants if a REAL invasion came across the border
Right, because nobody would know how to read and write without public schools!
That is ACTUALLY very true. Prior to Public Schools, the wealthy used education as another way (besides religion and police/military) to control the "public". Education has been the only gap closed somewhat between the rich and poor (we ARE the poor). The rich still have the (police/military/political system/courts).
I cannot figure out what you are trying to say.
If the federal government really went away as Texas politicians are always loudly calling for, New York and California would still have vital mega-economies that make their own weather and are heard all around the world. Texas would not. Texas would wither away without the public teat. I find that amusing is all.
I think you need to take a visit there and look at their economy. Of course, lots of people now live there because their govt careers caused them to move there. But their technology, education, and energy markets are strong and vibrant. If you think that is because they have a lot of military and boarder guards, I suggest you are mistaken. I'd suggest you travel to Dallas, Ft. Worth, Houston, San Antonio, Austin, etc.
I'm hoping Austin would be like a Free Berlin. People could airdrop supplies to us
Look back to when the EU was created. The people that are saying that today are coming from the exact same world view as the people who said the EU would never, ever last more than 5 years. Ok, 7 years tops they'd allow.
The same people who are celebrating today. (I guess it has been a long fight for them or something like that.)
Look it up.
Then there is this pesky problem.....
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...lowing-brexit-vote/ar-AAhBq93?ocid=spartandhp
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...lowing-brexit-vote/ar-AAhBq93?ocid=spartandhp
Thaaaank you. I am on my phone and was not looking forward to typing away manically to set this argument straight.
Perhaps it is that public education that prevents you from seeing just how inept our government is. Do you not pay attention to the high drop out rates and poor rankings versus other countries who spend far less per student than we do?
I was thinking the exact same thing. Putin will exploit the hell out of the volatility in Europe.
This is obviously a complicated topic when you consider the benefits of staying in or leaving the EU (or the disadvantages of staying or leaving). Looking at the divided vote (Scotland and London for stay, the rest for leave), I can't help but think that a lot of U.K. citizens did not understand or care about the entire picture. I wonder just how informed the average person in the U.K. was of the entire ramifications of staying or leaving.
just remember . . . Texas . . . is what we gave to Spain so we could keep Florida.
So we could have annexed our old people to Spain?
ding ding ding we have a winner . . .
Is it possible that Lubert, Surma, Frazier, Peetz et al advised the Brexit group? It looks to be one of those 'sounds good on paper' deals, then there's the reality of it.
Of course, Zurich is not in the EU. But the EU extended the Schvenigan Agreement there. Unless the EU wishes to punish the U.K., that might stay in place--or at least an amended form thereof. Immigrants are still and issue with that form of open borders. But it makes Europe, as the poster notes, much more accesible to the average person. As a traveller, the EU makes my life easier.
