Here's a man speaking from experience

Did you get the bit about him telling them they were in denial over the failing euro?
Did you get the bit where he told them about the impoverishment they have caused in the southern European countries with their euro project?
Did you get the bit where he told them they were undemocratic for the way they ignored the results in the Dutch and French votes and carried on regardless?
Did you get the bit were he called them undemocratic for making the Irish have another vote when they didn't like the result of the first one?
Did you get the bit where he called Merkels unilateral decision to invite all and sundry to come to Germany the most disastrous decision since
the war?
I don't rate his opinion.
Neither do the German people:
"Merkel on the ropes!"screeched one headline, after the recent attacks in Germany, before going on to predict confidently that her "premiership is hanging by a thread".
"Calls for Chancellor Angela Merkel to stand down grow," wrote another paper.
But what's interesting about these and similar articles is that they were written by English-speaking journalists reporting from outside Germany.
And in both these cases, the only evidence that Merkel's government was apparently about to fall was a video filmed by Russian TV of right-wing extremists protesting in Berlin. No polling data. No evidence. Just that video.
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-36985861
 
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
I don't rate his opinion.
So you don't agree that the Euro is failing?
So you don't agree that the current plight of Greece and other med countries has been exacerbated by the EU (German) fiscal policies?
So you don't agree that the EU ignored the votes in Holland and France and pressed ahead anyway?
So you don't agree that having the Irish vote again because they didn't like the first result was undemocratic?
So you don't agree that Merkel's decision to unilaterally invite all to come was disastrous?

As to what the German people think, there is an election due there soon enough, we'll find out then.
 
I don't rate his opinion.
So you don't agree that the Euro is failing?
It isn't failing in comparison to the Pound.

So you don't agree that the current plight of Greece and other med countries has been exacerbated by the EU (German) fiscal policies?
No. Please elaborate how you think your postulation is accurate.

So you don't agree that the EU ignored the votes in Holland and France and pressed ahead anyway?
Please explain your postulation.

So you don't agree that having the Irish vote again because they didn't like the first result was undemocratic?
Please elaborate how you think it was undemocratic.

So you don't agree that Merkel's decision to unilaterally invite all to come was disastrous?
Absolutely not. Angela Merkel did not unilaterally invite all to come.
Please explain if you think she did unilaterally invite all to come.
 
It isn't failing in comparison to the Pound.
That wasn't the question, forget the pound, is the euro zone failing or not?
No. Please elaborate how you think your postulation is accurate.
A few days ago the Greek government submitted a list of proposals hoping to break the deadlock with the “institutions” – the European Commission, the International Monetary Fund and the European Central Bank. The government basically agreed to tough primary surpluses: 1% in 2015 and 2% in 2016. To achieve these targets it proposed to raise VAT on a range of widely consumed goods as well as imposing a host of taxes on enterprises and families of “high” income. It also proposed substantial savings on pensions. The measures added up to roughly €8bn over 2015-16, and would be immediately implemented.

The package is certainly deflationary at a moment when the Greek economy is again on the threshold of recession. There is little doubt that it would contribute to output contraction and higher unemployment in 2015-16, particularly as there is little prospect of being offset by an investment programme funded by the EU. It is a major retreat by the government of Syriza.

“institutions”, led by the IMF, was to demand even tougher measures to achieve the same targets. These include more severe increases in VAT, a lessening of the tax burden on enterprises and greater pension savings. If these demands are met, the government will not even be able to claim that it has shifted some of the increased tax burden away from workers and the poor.

For Greece as a whole, the prospect of a deal achieved on this basis would be simply appalling. The country would be forced to adopt harsh austerity measures dictated by the lenders, without any realistic possibility of substantial debt relief, or of a significant investment programme. The “institutions” are once again attempting to impose the policies that have failed abysmally since 2010, causing huge contraction of GDP, vast unemployment and mass impoverishment. It would be a national disaster accompanied by the complete humiliation of the Syriza government.

For those who look at the European Union without rose-tinted glasses, there is no surprise regarding the attitude of the lenders. The EU and the eurozone in particular are in thrall to austerity, even institutionalising it through the so-called six-pack and two-pack. The lenders have inevitably objected to lifting austerity in Greece, and appear to believe – foolishly – that austerity “works”. Furthermore, they are keen to inflict a political defeat on a leftwing government that has dared to challenge the European status quo. Europe has shown a harsh and cynical face toward Greece, whatever might be the faults of Greece itself.
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...mailed-eurozone-troika-syriza-common-currency
Please explain your postulation.
The Lisbon Treaty was designed as a replacement for the ‘Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe’ or TCE, which was rejected in referenda in France and the Netherlands in 2005.
Some view the Lisbon Treaty as much the same kind of deal as the TCE, making it arguable that the French and Dutch governments ignored their TCE referendums.
However, the Lisbon Treaty was changed in an attempt to assuage opposition. For example, it removed references to EU symbols such as the flag, anthem, motto, currency and ‘Europe Day’ that had given rise to fears that a ‘superstate’ was being created.

It was notable that, this time, no other country apart from Ireland held a referendum on ratification.
Some view the Lisbon Treaty as much the same kind of deal as the TCE, making it arguable that the French and Dutch governments ignored their TCE referendums.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...eland-greece-france-netherlands-a7105261.html
Please elaborate how you think it was undemocratic.
Taken from the same article as above, which incidentally is from the pro EU newspaper The Independent.
In 2008, Ireland threw the EU into chaos when it became the only country to hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty – and voters rejected it by a majority of 53 per cent. In order for the treaty to become law, it had to be ratified by all member states.

Amid concern that attempts to streamline and formalise the workings of the EU were being held up by one relatively small member state, Irish and EU politicians urged people to think again. A new referendum was held in 2009 and this time 67 per cent of voters backed the treaty.
It was undemocratic imo because they would not accept the legitimate first vote because it went the wrong way from their viewpoint. The fact that the vote changed from a 53% majority against acceptance to a 67% majority in favour speaks volumes as to the power of the establishment to shape peoples thoughts.
Absolutely not. Angela Merkel did not unilaterally invite all to come.
Please explain if you think she did unilaterally invite all to come.
Well, fair enough she didn't in so many words, but it amounted to the same thing. She suspended the Dublin regulation and told the world that all Syrian refugees would be welcome, this led to refugees who wouldn't have come risking their lives and many dying and also refugees from many other countries coming and discarding their papers on the way to masquerade as Syrian.
Here's an article about how a lot of refugees feel betrayed by Merkel now that the borders are being shut.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world...n-Europe-Lies-Borders-Refugees-Serbia-Balkans
 
Last edited:
Well, fair enough she didn't
I just love the way he goes on to pretend the reverse.

She suspended the Dublin regulation and told the world that all Syrian refugees would be welcome, this led to refugees who wouldn't have come risking their lives and many dying and also refugees from many other countries coming and discarding their papers on the way to masquerade as Syrian.

Did this not happen? Is it not happening right now? Or am I just pretending?
And any arrivals who are given German citizenship will have right of entry into all other EU countries under free movement as it's meant to be applied. Is that not correct? Am I pretending about that also?
Let's not forget the many who have disappeared and will probably be joining the queues at Calais. Or perhaps there isn't a queue at all, maybe I'm pretending about that too.
 
Last edited:
Sponsored Links
Back
Top