catsmate
No longer the 1
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2007
- Messages
- 34,767
Splitters...Of course, in pretty short order Johnny Foreigner could be joined by Jocky Foreigner, Sean Foreigner and even Dai Foreigner.
- Status
What I did was ask how you arrived at your opinion and then ask: What if everyone used the same method to arrive at their opinion?
What you are saying - if I understand correctly - is that you can't be held responsible for how other people arrive at their decisions. You will judge their decisions, not how they arrived at them.
I can see how that, too, is a consequent application of the principle. Being associated with undesirable outcomes is unpleasant. So by a strict application of the gut-feeling rule, that must not be.
I think there may be a deep cultural difference at play here. I am trying to analyze the decision-making process and to extract universal principles. That's an approach that came out of the enlightenment and gave us the concept of universal human rights, for example. On Great Britain, the political and legal systems largely by-passed the enlightenment.
Seismosaurus
Philosopher
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2003
- Messages
- 6,092
No, you're not understanding that right.
It was more of an attempt via humour to point out that the UK electing a small portion of MEPs does not mean that the EU government is representative of the UK electorate. And highlight the fact that objecting to being governed by those who are not part of your own country is not, in fact, necessarily xenophobia.
I don't see why it should make any difference at all. Apart from I guess it would bring a significant flow of money into London, hosting all those extra politicos and bureaucrats. So that would be nice.
Seismosaurus
Philosopher
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2003
- Messages
- 6,092
And I pointed out that it is not, in fact, the same method.
The method I used to arrive at my decision was "I'm British, I want to be governed by British people". You seem to be equating this to being the same thing as the general case of "I'm X, I want to be governed by X." But that is not 'the same method'. My method is specific to my being British.
I certainly can't be held responsible for how other people arrive at their decisions, no. Who amongst us can?
As for judging people, I will judge people's decisions or methods as I see appropriate, according to what those decisions or methods are. For instance many in the thread seem to base their view in the EU being great for trade and the economy, and thus beneficial, and thus something we should be part of. I can see where they're coming from and respect that line of thinking and the conclusion. I just happen to disagree.
And I keep trying to explain to you that it isn't a universal principle. It's a personal preference.
Last edited:
Information Analyst
Penultimate Amazing
That's like complaining that the UK government is not representative of Wiltshire, because most of the MPs are from counties other than Wiltshire.
Actually, in the context of how member countries are represented in the EU Parliament, it doesn't sound like anything other than xenophobia.
I understand. That was what I was trying to say. I try to extract the general principle while you regard that as invalid.
Explorer
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2003
- Messages
- 1,516
Would you then find American insistence on accepting their chlorinated chicken in order to agree a trade deal enforced on the UK as a condition of that deal, should it arise, unacceptable for similar reasons?
My suggestion is that you will say yes, because it would be something the British government would accept and implement, probably in this case at least, out of desperation, but nevertheless agreed, and would conform to your criterion.
Am I right?
Unbelievable 
Theresa May's grand plan for customs post-Brexit is a combination of the two schemes deemed unworkable. It's like someone pointing out that you cannot go down a set of river rapids in either a submarine or a square-rigged sailing ship and declaring "well then, we shall use a square-rigged submarine !".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44719576
No Mrs May, it combines the worst features of both the previous schemes, forcing much of the effort and cost onto export businesses who will already be hard pressed trying to stay in business and relying on imaginary technology to deliver a solution - whilst still requiring some kind of hard border in, or around Ireland to keep foreigners out.
Can anyone else see the problem of only having a partial solution in place by the end of the transition period ?
And anyway, unless a "partial solution" is government code for "whatever tiny bits of progress have been made by then", the idea that something as complicated as this can be implemented, tested and thoroughly de-glitched in two years is absolutely laughable - even for a partial solution.
The incompetence and complacency is both laughable and frightening at the same time.
Theresa May's grand plan for customs post-Brexit is a combination of the two schemes deemed unworkable. It's like someone pointing out that you cannot go down a set of river rapids in either a submarine or a square-rigged sailing ship and declaring "well then, we shall use a square-rigged submarine !".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44719576
No Mrs May, it combines the worst features of both the previous schemes, forcing much of the effort and cost onto export businesses who will already be hard pressed trying to stay in business and relying on imaginary technology to deliver a solution - whilst still requiring some kind of hard border in, or around Ireland to keep foreigners out.
Can anyone else see the problem of only having a partial solution in place by the end of the transition period ?
And anyway, unless a "partial solution" is government code for "whatever tiny bits of progress have been made by then", the idea that something as complicated as this can be implemented, tested and thoroughly de-glitched in two years is absolutely laughable - even for a partial solution.
The incompetence and complacency is both laughable and frightening at the same time.
Of course an arrangement that the UK government willingly enters into in conjunction with the rest of the EU is somehow an infringement on "sovereignty" whereas an arrangement whereby the UK is forced, through desperation, to accept solo is just fine.
Francesca R
Girl
It means they've thought of the name for it so far.
It's a pathetic half-baked fudge. I'm slightly surprised that May has the cheek to suggest it. Even if May can get her ministers and party to accept the fudge, I can't see the EU accepting it unless the UK is prepared to pay them a whole lot more money, or give them some other bribe such as fishing rights in UK waters for perpetuity.
Assuming the EU says, 'Non', what then? A proper hard Brexit or BRINO? Time will tell.
Assuming the EU says, 'Non', what then? A proper hard Brexit or BRINO? Time will tell.
Andy_Ross
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2010
- Messages
- 69,076
Jaguar Land Rover boss: Brexit threatens £80bn UK investment
Jaguar Land Rover has warned that a "bad" Brexit deal would threaten £80bn worth of investment plans for the UK and may force it to close factories.
The UK's biggest carmaker, owned by India's Tata Motors, said its "heart and soul is in the UK".
But without frictionless trade JLR said its UK investment plans would be in jeopardy.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44719656
Jaguar Land Rover has warned that a "bad" Brexit deal would threaten £80bn worth of investment plans for the UK and may force it to close factories.
The UK's biggest carmaker, owned by India's Tata Motors, said its "heart and soul is in the UK".
But without frictionless trade JLR said its UK investment plans would be in jeopardy.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44719656
Wudang
BOFH
No Mrs May, it combines the worst features of both the previous schemes, forcing much of the effort and cost onto export businesses who will already be hard pressed trying to stay in business and relying on imaginary technology to deliver a solution - whilst still requiring some kind of hard border in, or around Ireland to keep foreigners out.
On the technology front an assessment of current government tech projects.
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/07/04/ipa_report_home_office_projects_undeliverable_and_risky/
tl;dr : More red flags than May Day in Moscow.
Yeah, but the problem is with JLR mentioning it, not the omnishambles that is causing the issue in the first place
Given that Theresa May's sole concern seems to be keeping her job as Prime Minister, what you refer to as "A proper hard Brexit" with the attendant chaos seems to be the only option.
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
Then nothing can be said about it. But you do realise that international negotiations must be based on some kind of general principle, and that the personal preference of a particular individual remains important only to that individual, while negotiators must take account of principles on which they can all at least attempt to find agreement. As your method is specific to your "being British" it can't even be the starting point for agreements with people who are not British.
- Status