Yay I get to use the link! [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acSh15Uw7Vo"]QI - Call My Euro Bluff - YouTube[/ame] This one however I completely agree on.
Air traffic control is very complex. However the issue preventing a singular air traffic control service is one of state sovereignty. One of the critical elements of which is making sure we can still defend our borders and still exercise an appropriate level of control of our air space when needed. It's not a technical issue. An unwillingness to surrender state sovereignty is partly why the Euro zone is in the mess it's in. We have a bunch of countries with no sovereign control over their currency and wildly different economic policies. Many non-EU countries have free trade agreements with the EU and there's no reason to believe the UK would be treated any differently if we left. The UK also trades on one level or another with virtually every industrialised nation on the planet. As well as many developing nations. We don't need to join a super state to have good trading relations. The last year or so has seen British minister and business leaders flying off to China to foster good trade relations there. We're not joining the PRC though. So far as free travel is concerned? EU and UK citizens can travel to the US without a visa for a host of reasons including but not limited to tourism and business matters. Basically we have almost the same open border policy with the US as we have with the EU. We're not part of the USA. At least not yet. And it's worth saying there are still border controls between the UK and mainland Europe. So the free travel argument is almost irrelevant. The main benefit to free travel is the ability to go and work and live in another country without having to apply for a visa.Which has it's pros and cons. There was a family from Ecuador on BBC2 tonight who had managed to get Spanish citizenship. Which of course means they are entitled to all the rights and privileges of an EU citizen. Which includes being able to come to the UK to look for a job in a highly technical discipline. Which you will fail at if you can't speak proper English. And on failure you are then able to claim welfare benefits. Which is exactly what the family featured on BBC2 did. Open borders aren't always a good thing. If we as a country want to be in Europe. We should be in all the way. If we want to be out. Then we should get out and leave Europe to run it's own affairs. British people already go and live and work all over the world. We don't need to join a super state to allow that to happen.
Just some thoughts from an American who doesn't know much about the EU.... ahem.... GROUP INSULT, you got a bunch of people with one shot, good shootin' there tex! I think the benevolent dictator should be Frodo with her deadly banstick hidden in her ninjer uniform. And we Americans have enough of our own issues with the NAFTA treaty. But one thought that did cross my mind is that we get screwed when it comes to the United Nations, we pay like 75% of the UN's expenses.
My sources say 22% of the UN's regular budget and 27% of the peacekeeping budget, which is rather a lot less than 75%. And since those contributions are based on an 'ability to pay' scale, I struggle to feel much sympathy. ...and I've done the maths. Of the top 10 contributing nations to the UN's general budget, adjusting for population, the US is 7th. The top 10 are: 1) UK 2) Germany 3) Japan 4) France 5) Canada 6) Italy 7) USA 8) Spain 9) Mexico 10) China (those cheapskates! Less than a tenth of Mexico's adjusted figure) So, as usual, when you look at the actual numbers, the US is nowhere near as generous as Americans seem to think.
Well, because currently companies and sites have carte blanche to dump any sort of tracking cookie they want onto you and build up a behavioural profile more accurate than you'd believe. And all they need in order to do this is for you not to go through some convoluted process to opt out. So yes, it's going to cost unethical businesses a fortune to do what they should've been doing from the beginning and asking you to opt in to their internet panopticon. I find it difficult to feel sorry for them - and I work in the industry affected at the moment so I'm well aware of exactly what the lay entails. You mean the EAW which has been occasionally misused? The one which still requires the person to face a trial in the country which issues the warrant, and therefore does require evidence? And, since travel within the EU is free and open, what's wrong with taking someone back to the country where they committed the offence in order to face a trial? They can always return afterwards if they're innocent. These would be the laws which were requested by the fruit and veg retailers, who wanted to ensure that the produce they ordered was of a particular quality suitable for sale? Those laws? I'll give you that one. And the ones that are good, are very, very good. For example we actually have guaranteed human rights in Britain now. Before, our rights were simply based on custom and precedence. Another one they're planning to bring in is to allow free transfers across the Union. May not sound like much, but the plan is to allow you to use your debit or credit card in say, Spain, without the banks being able to make an extra charge for use in a foreign country. The cookie law's another - and yes, it is a good thing, no matter how much the panopticon-based businesses might whine. And of course the unification of air traffic control systems would save an absolute fortune - not just in administrative overhead, but also in fuel as airlines would be able to take more efficient routes without having to negotiate every time they cross into a new national airspace. Instead of having to take separate flight path segments for each country, it'd be a case of getting a single, smooth flight path from A to B.
There is a large technical aspect to it, but you're right, the nationalism is a large part of the reason this is proving so hard to move forwards. We also pay import and export duties when shipping to virtually every industrialised nation on the planet. Actually no, we don't. What you sign when you travel to the USA is a visa waiver, which essentially means you have absolutely no protections under visa law. You also cannot extend a visa waiver, you only have a 90 day period in which you may stay in the country, you do not have a right to work. Saying it's the same open border policy as we have with the EU is simply wrong. The border controls are insisted on by the UK, due to the protectionist attitude of many people and the subsequent refusal to fully integrate. Shocking. Except that this same old tired argument crops up again, and again, and again. We have more home-grown parasites than imported ones, by far, and people can leave the UK to work abroad easily now (within the EU), which many people do. The same rules and protections apply to our own citizens as apply to immigrants here. The media will continue to trot out these scandals in an attempt to make it appear like a huge issue, but frankly it's not as common as you're lead to believe by the disproportionate reporting. That's a matter of perspective. I'm glad we agree. Actually we do. British people are limited in their potential to live and work in other countries, due to visa restrictions. Within the EU there are no such restrictions. Someone can travel to another EU country for a job easily, and many do. There's no paperwork, no red tape, no complications.
I'm a Web Developer, I'm fully aware of the information that cookies can collect, but I am also aware that they are an incredibly important part of thousands of web sites and web applications. Those websites and web applications are all going to need to be updated if they are to remain legal - that is going to be expensive and it will damage the user experience. But worse, it wont fix the problem, because the companies who do use cookies for nefarious reasons will continue to do so. It will hurt European businesses without solving the problem they set out to solve. That's the EU at work. You assume that cookies are used primarily for this kind of unethical tracking. That's simple not true. The majority of cookies hold information that is used by the parent site/application to provide data persistence across the site. How will the workarounds prevent tracking cookies being installed? Most of those websites will just require users to accept cookies. The web applications I develop and maintain certainly will. The cookies that are there today will be there in a years time, except now the login page will have some boilerplate that says something like 'By accessing this application you are giving us permission to install a cookie on your machine' and Bam says the lady, I've just complied with the EU law. Look up the case of Andrew Symeou. That is more than enough of an indictment against the EAW to justify scrapping it as far as I'm concerned. That's not what they did though. Hence why it was eventually repealed. Another law designed for a purpose it couldn't fulfill. The EHCR has nothing to do with the EU. The banks will just adjust the currency rate to accommodate for the removal of charges. It will probably make the banks more money than charges. No it's not. It's just not. It wont achieve what they think it will achieve. I absolutely 100% guarantee it. And that is my expert opinion. Yeah, we'll have to wait and see how that project gets executed. I'm particularly looking forward to how it copes with French ATC strikes.
And that's a two way street. Fair enough it's not as open or flexible. But you don't wave your visa rights so far as I can remember. The USA waves the need for you to apply for a visa. Which does mean there are different rules. Not all of them bad. For example if you have a visa and find yourself being denied entry for some reason you can't return for another 5 years. Under the VWP you can return any time you like. They're still there though and for good reason. It's not just because people refuse to integrate. The UK is a magnet for non-EU illegal immigrants. All EU countries sharing borders with non-EU countries also still have border controls with those non-EU nations. The UK as an island needs some way of controlling who's coming from where. Actually the program was hailing the guy as a shining example because he'd gotten a job as a cleaner. The program was about the benefits entitlement culture in the UK. But he was still on benefits because he had to live in London. But why come to a country where you can't speak the language expecting to get a job at all? Doesn't seem to be so difficult to emigrate to a non-EU country. 23,290 moved to Australia in 2005/06. And it's not just Australia we move to apparently. British people move all over the globe to find work.
Quote Actually no, we don't. What you sign when you travel to the USA is a visa waiver, which essentially means you have absolutely no protections under visa law. You also cannot extend a visa waiver, you only have a 90 day period in which you may stay in the country, you do not have a right to work. Saying it's the same open border policy as we have with the EU is simply wrong. you can stay there far longer if you apply for a green card even if it is not granted, my son has been in PA for the past 8 months, also in California they are considering giving visas to people who buy houses there. but back to the fray [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8d42s3EoLE&feature=uploademail"]Farage and Duncan Smith clash on Europe referendum (BBC News - Question Time, 27.10.2011) - YouTube[/ame] you see the issue is not whether we should stay in the EU, it is our democratic right tio decide such matters which is being challenged
Check out Australia's points system. It's not as easy as it looks, and it's damned near impossible if you're not a native English speaker.
The UK is a representative democracy. We vote for representatives. It is the job of those representatives to cast votes on our behalf. If we are not happy with the choices that our representatives make on our behalf, we are given the option of not voting for that particular representative at the next election. That is democracy.
Also Farage is full of horse manure. He says that Cameron promised a referendum on the EU constitution, which is true, but that isn't what the vote in the commons was related to.
Who said anybody in the UK had any "democratic rights"? Strictly speaking we live under the rule of a monarch who "appoints" a prime minister who is then responsible for forming a government. While the UK may currently function like a democracy. It's really not.
...we're a constitutional monarchy, where our constitution stipulates our parliamentary system, which is democratic. We are a democracy. The Queen's only real responsibility in our political system is to ensure that it stays that way.
Well I do know the numbers went down when Reagan told the UN to stick it where the sun don't shine. Most americans are anti-UN any way so seeing us pay less and less is a good thing.
I'm shocked, shocked I tell you. The EU is taking away your cookies??? Whats next Cake and chocolate milk!!!! Fish O Doom is going to be VERY upset!
They're not taking them away, but from now on, you can only call them cookies if they were baked in the town of Cook. Otherwise you have to called them 'biscuits'.
Oh and I suppose you brits are going to start calling potato chips something else just to confuse us???
