Jump to content

Highgate

Member
  • Content Count

    1,628
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Highgate

  1. Maybe they are busy 🙂 There are numerous different figures for global deaths by air pollution floating about though, and it's a difficult thing to pin down precisely. With more research and more data collected all the time, the figures seem to get more alarming each year.
  2. I believe you but what's the point? Are you disputing the assertion that global air pollution is resulting in millions of deaths each year and making millions more healthy people sick ?
  3. I got it from the WHO website, which seems to state the figure I quoted quite clearly. Are you sure you are not quoting old WHO data ? Or maybe you are looking at the Europe only figure? https://www.who.int/airpollution/en/ Obviously these figures are all approximations and extrapolations but it's astonishing that they get so little attention. By contributes they seem to mean deaths that otherwise would not have occurred if they those people had not been exposed to polluted ambient air throughout their lives. The number of deaths is not the whole story either. Air pollution kills off the physically weaker first, those with heart or respiratory conditions, but it also can make people, who would otherwise be healthy, sick.
  4. Whatever about the protesters and whether they are effectively helping or damaging their own objectives, outdoor air pollution alone (as distinct from climate change) kills 4,200,000 people around the world each year according to the World Health Organization. It's an enormous problem that gets very little coverage in proportion to it's dreadful death toll. Imagine the media coverage and the response from governments if ISIS were killing 4,200,000 people each year. Because it's effects are gradual and almost invisible everybody feels comfortable ignoring it. Millions have died as a result. More than 90% of the world has little choice but to live in areas where the air quality is below the scientifically accepted safety standards but yet it never seems to be a major issue at general election time anywhere. Why is that?
  5. So Leave voters want out because they think the UK can't compete with Germany's economic power, and they will be harmed economically in the long-run by staying in the EU? And what about it all being a vanity project for Germany, as mentioned in the original post? Are you on board with that concept?
  6. I'd definitely give a view. Appreciate that.
  7. I've made my point. I don't believe they desire control over other European countries, either politically or economically. Sure they are self interested and they want to help create an environment where they can prosper along with other EU members, which country doesn't? Why are they being singled out as the nefarious puppet masters? Just because they are the biggest player in Europe? or is the reason they create such fear among the average leave voter more historical ?
  8. Well that's a positive contribution! Fair and balanced too I'd say.... 😂
  9. Every nation is driven by self interest. And it could be argued that self interest can often/usually be to the detriment of others. That's hardly the same thing as suggesting Germany is trying to control Europe again by different means. How much is fear of Germany informing the thoughts and decisions of the Leave voter I wonder?
  10. That's an entirely unreasonable and unfounded accusation in my view. I'd say quite a significant proportion of Leave voters share it however, at least to some extent. By all means be against European integration and hold to the model of sovereign nation states doing their own thing. That's up to you, but why suggest machiavellian motives to those who take the view that European integration is a sensible and natural step in our globalized world. The notion that the EU is in fact little more than Germany's latest evil scheme to control Europe is an extreme one.
  11. Point 3 is perfectly valid if you manage not to confuse the words what and why. What people were voting on and why they voted for it are entirely different things. Leave was so ambiguous that's even it's leading advocates can't agree on what it means 3 years after the vote.
  12. They've had more than they deserve 😉
  13. Rowett insisted on his players being poor on the ball.....as far as I remember.
  14. The Hypothetical vs The Incoherent then. 😉
  15. I'll pretend to miss you then. 🙂
  16. That's not related to anything I said. At least not logically.
  17. 1. That's a moot point, had Remain won there would have been no debacle, just business as usual. So the politicians would have been in the dark about the mess that follows a Brexit vote. Therefore no increased fear of offering another referendum in the future had the general public wanted it. 2. The question helps elucidate the motivations behind your vote to leave in the original referendum. If you would have voted leave, even if the current EU were to continue as is for the foreseeable future, then you aren't displaying the sort of irrational behaviour that I was attempting to highlight. 3. The point was that the Leave and Remain options were never equivalent in their ambiguity, as some have suggested. As you say, Remaining is perfectly simple, who can say that about the Leave option? So you seem to agree with the point I was making. Which is the right and wrong option is a matter of opinion, and obviously the simplicity of an option does not mean that it's necessarily the right one to take, but who has. or would. suggest anything of the sort? 4. Tough crowd 🙂
  18. If the EU were not to change in any serious way from what it is now, if somehow you knew that to be the case. would you have voted Leave or Remain? Just a hypothetical question. I'm assuming you voted Leave in the the referendum. The reason why it's so hard to Leave now, is that the UK parliament couldn't agree on any single version of Brexit precisely because the referendum was so vague in the first place. And because in the run up to the referendum, everyone seemingly forgot that the UK would have a land border with the EU which was already subject to an international agreement incompatible with certain versions of Brexit. It's not difficult to leave because of intransigence on the EU's part if that's what you were suggesting. There is no doubt you could negotiate with the EU on any future agreement, as any country could, and the UK has done repeatedly in the past, That's not even debatable. If you don't believe you'd ever get another referendum even if there was a clear demand for it from the public (remember this is after further changes to the EU that the UK does not like) then that's your opinion, I disagree for reasons already stated.
  19. 'You' as in your country, UK. Sorry, if that was dreadfully confusing. 🙂 Vote whatever way you please, as I'm sure you did. But you suggested that the UK won't be able to negotiate with the EU in future (if it remained) merely because it wasn't able to alter previous treaties it had agreed to in the past. That's plainly false in my opinion and that's what I pointed out to you, not that you shouldn't use your own vote as you see fit (no clue how you got that idea into your head).
  20. The same way you got this one, when a political party thinks there are lot of votes in a referendum, it will offer a referendum. Even if they are against themselves. That's democracy for you in every country it seems. Party comes first ! It's true the UK has been incredibly reticent in offering it's citizens but if there are enough votes there, then the parties will follow. Incidentally are you saying that you'd be happy to stay in the EU as it is now, if you were sure it wouldn't change for the worse (as you saw it). But you voted to leave now because you thought you'd never get another chance and you feared what the EU may become? It's not difficult to stay at all. It's remarkably simple. It would have been business as usual. Leave was a gallimaufry of options then! More to your taste?
  21. You couldn't renegotiate any treaties you'd already signed I presume you are alluding to. In future you need not agree to anything that you find unpalatable, and you could argue your case for the EU's further integration or lack of it, as you saw fit. Nobody could force the UK into the Euro, why would the EU be able to force the UK into anything it wouldn't want to do? But it seems a large section of Brexit voters are utterly terrified of what the EU will insist the UK to do in future.
  22. It seems there are some people who voted leave based on their fears of the future shape of the EU rather than what it actually looks like now. If the EU turns into something you don't like leave then, not now. The UK had a substantial presence and influence in the EU and it could have helped decide the future direction of the EU in it's own interests and in the interests of the community as a whole. If, in future, something that was unacceptable to the UK were to be implemented, like a compulsory EU Army (seems highly unlikely), leave then. Why panic and do it right now? This claim that Remain delivers just as much uncertainty as Leave is just nonsense. Disingenuous nonsense. Obviously the future of the EU is uncertain, as is the future of the UK, the future of every other country and the future of every person in every country. That's the thing with the future, it's always uncertain. This simple truism does not serve to support the argument that Remain was just as unclear as Leave. Remain was simply continue in the EU as you have been. Leave was a panoply of options, an amorphous mass of various different arrangements with the EU and the rest of the World. Many of those Leave option were completely unacceptable to other Leave voters. And given the ambiguity of 'Leave' confusion and division in parliament ensued. To argue that the two options in the referendum offered up similar levels of ambiguity just can't be taken seriously. That's not to say that Leave may not have arguments in it's favour, but the lack of clarity in the referendum have hamstrung efforts to implement Brexit from the very start.
  23. And 4 points off the bottom 6. That's mid-table for ya... 🙂
  24. Technically I'd be a BIFFC I think. Doesn't have the same ring to it.
  25. That's probably the worst insult you've dished out in all your 6,163 posts 😂
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.