Emps-World Forum
Miscellaneous => Current Affairs => Topic started by: Rock Gyo on June 24, 2016, 10:42:34 am
-
Introduction & personal thoughts
As I am an immigrant currently living in UK I am by no doubt shocked and concerned about the outcomes of the last night's results in the UK Referendum to leave the Europe, one that has ended although very close, in the favor of the Leave party. I am concerned on the short, as well as the long run, what is to come in the next months, as well as how is this going to affect UK and both its brits and immigrants of all ages on the longer run.
On this subject I would point out something that strikes me quite angry frankly. The youth decided to Remain and as shown in many polls and information gathered, over 70% of the youth was in the favor of Remain party, while the elderly greatly in the favor of the Leave party. Now that not only means that it will divide and create great bad precedent for the relationships of this country between the youth and the elderly, but also that essentially in the end there WAS MADE a decision for the youth, by the elderly, although the youth is to live with the outcome the longest. Now although I am in no position to argue whether the elderly have the right to choose how the youth essentially will live their lives (under what circumstances mostly), it does seem very unfair that the elderly who outnumber the youth, in the end decide in their favor and possibly greatly damaged already the next generations to come.
Quote: "The final YouGov poll before the referendum showed 72% of 18 to 24-year-olds backed a Remain vote - with just 19% backing Brexit. Lib Dem leader Tim Farron said: "Young people voted to remain by a considerable margin, but were outvoted. They were voting for their future, yet it has been taken from them.""
Read more & Source: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/young-voters-wanted-brexit-least-8271517
(https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13533165_1277458442285137_4585477740312713928_n.jpg?oh=433d0085610591cd16b3fd11b5844a62&oe=580122CC)
What happens now
While it is certain that nothing will happen immediately, negotiations regarding the departure of Great Britain will have to start and how long these could take is very early to say; while specialists say it can take years, David Cameron mentioned: "A negotiation with the European Union will need to begin under a new prime minister and I think it's right that this new prime minister takes the decision about when to trigger Article 50 and start the formal and legal process of leaving the EU.". While article 50 is the formal official way of the departure of UK from EU, it is very unlikely that the new Prime Minister (PM) to come will go in the favor of this, and why? Article 50 sets the scene of departure for UK, but the terms of this departure are decided entirely by the other 27 UE countries, without A British vote AT ALL, which would obviously upset the Leave party and put the new PM in a very tough controversial position in which he goes against what was promised for the Leave party in the first place.
Read more & Source: http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2016/06/economist-explains-23
Now it is the time to get real, and the Leave party will have to accept now more than ever that.. they will not have it their way entirely, and that's definitely not because of the Remain party, but because of the implications it would have on UK; quoting the Economist: "Accordingly, the Leave side promised supporters both a thriving economy and control over immigration. But Britons cannot have that outcome just by voting for it. If they want access to the EU’s single market and to enjoy the wealth it brings, they will have to accept free movement of people. If Britain rejects free movement, it will have to pay the price of being excluded from the single market. The country must pick between curbing migration and maximising wealth.". That goes without saying and sets the early scene now towards two potential options:
1. The first is to become like Norway, which is a member of the European Economic Area (EEA), in return for which it is required to contribute to the EU’s budget and allow the free movement of people;
2. The second is to opt out entirely, trading with the EU under the rules of the World Trade Organisation like America, China or any other country.
While the second one is believed to do more harm than good by many specialists, the first one would be greatly upsetting the Leave party, which does not seem to fully understand all the circumstances of their promises towards their supporters, or at the very least not communicate them (intentionally or not) to the public who in the end is the one to misunderstand the situation and the circumstances.
Read more & Source: http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21701265-how-minimise-damage-britains-senseless-self-inflicted-blow-tragic-split
PM's resignation
While it isn't completely shocking that the PM, David Cameron, has officially announced his resignation, it comes probably in a very tough spot right now. He is expected to continue to "lead the ship" at least until a new PM is elected, but whether he will do so at his full extent, essentially promoting now what he has campaigned several months against, is a very disturbing and urging question. He is going to the European convention next week and will present to the UE the official outcome and decisions to be taken, but he is in no position to lead the country through this drastic change at all; not because he couldn't do it, but because he comes from the losing side of the argument in the Referendum, and that will only upset and create havoc among the brit Labour who mostly voted for the Leave.
Read more & Source: http://www.economist.com/blogs/bagehot/2016/06/prime-minister-resigns
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/worst-day-post-war-british-8271905#rlabs=1%20rt$category%20p$4
The fear of precedent
With the shocking outcome of the Referendum, a lot of people are nervous and wondering whether this will set the scene for a great response against UE, especially coming from France where it is most expected from right now. Within the UK borders, it is very likely that Scotland will have a very disturbing response to the outcome of the poll and that it will have yet another urge to detach from the United Kingdom, as there were already attempts in 2014. Certainly the outcome will not be perceived positive by many regions, especially since this seems to have divided the country severely, having the main cities voting for Remain such as London, yet turning the poll around with all the smaller cities who've voted for Leave.
Read more & Source: http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/jk-rowling-wishes-magic-reverse-8271310
What are your thoughts on these events?
-
fuck old ppl
-
fuck old ppl
LOL we voted the UK out of the EU and now the new generation has to deal with it while we'll be dead in a few years. Bloody good joke, Margeret! :kappa:
(http://www.reactiongifs.com/lol/excited_golden_girls2.gif)
-
fuck old ppl
LOL we voted the UK out of the EU and now the new generation has to deal with it while we'll be dead in a few years. Bloody good joke, Margeret! :kappa:
(http://www.reactiongifs.com/lol/excited_golden_girls2.gif)
exactly
-
fuck old ppl
LOL we voted the UK out of the EU and now the new generation has to deal with it while we'll be dead in a few years. Bloody good joke, Margeret! :kappa:
(http://www.reactiongifs.com/lol/excited_golden_girls2.gif)
exactly
remember that the old people started the EU in the first place, and have seen how it became a shithole. leaving is stupid, but the current state of the EU is unacceptable and only profitable for a certain amount of countries within. The EU needs an overhaul, maybe return to how it was BEFORE 2002.
-
@Vindiddy, care to explain how EU has become shit? What was good before and bad now? Who profits and who loses, please in depth explanations because i'm very ignorant :)
-
@Vindiddy, care to explain how EU has become shit? What was good before and bad now? Who profits and who loses, please in depth explanations because i'm very ignorant :)
The EU has been taking control away from countries since it was founded. the original purpose of the EU was great (after ww2 countries could rebuild the economy together and everyone was a winner), every country contributed and trade was easy. in 1998 however the ECB was founded and in 2002 the Euro came in. The euro seemed good at first because it made trade even easier BUT countries lost most control for it and the EU elite gained alot more control. In the stage we are now some countries benefit of the EU (think about greece, spain, portugal) countries with HUGE bugdet deficits. other countries (mainly denmark, holland, belgium, britain,germany, france) are paying for this. is it wrong to give some money to other countries so they can build up their economy? no ofcourse not. but the way this has been handeled was terrible and bad for local economies. (dont get me wrong, germany still profits from the EU since they produce alot.)
one of the big winners these days are the ultrarich bankers and the EU elites who got control of whole of europe.
problem is alot of people just voted because they didnt like immigrants like rock gyo said.
and ofcourse i am not a specialist, you should do some research since it is very interesting imo.
just look past the immigrant bullshit and look at what the EU made possible and what it took away from countries.
-
please in depth explanations because i'm very ignorant :)
yas me2
One Estonian politician said: "Cameron played Russian roulette and shot his brains out" That's basically what has happened. We'll see how things are going to change and i'm pretty sure everyone from the european union is going to regret letting things get this far. It's only a matter of time until Scotland starts their independence referendum and other european countries (e.g. Netherlands) start their referendums to step out of the union.
Even though things might look shit right now, we have to admit that this is one hell of a exciting time to be alive.
just look past the immigrant bullshit and look at what the EU made possible and what it took away from countries.
From my point of view I can say with 100 percent certainty that the EU has made more things possible than the things it has taken away from us.
So many kindergartens, roads and what not have been built thanks to the EU contribution, which Estonia alone for example could never afford from our own budget. The progress our country has made in the past 25 years is just wonderful and most of it is thanks to belonging to the European Union.
When we benefit that much from EU it seems more than logical to give something back. Wether it is allowing some refugees to our country or blocking our trades with Russia(And you have no idea how bad it hurts us right now that we can't sell our crops and other products to Russia).
-
While it is true Cameron "gambled" A LOT on this action, it was never predicted as a lose, and only started to take the shape of a tight battle once the campaigning started and to be blunt the false promises that the Leave party made created this huge turnaround. Now the referendum is over for less than 12hrs. and they ALREADY back off from their promises. The NHS promised money is not going come and I have already seen a lot of people from the Leave supporters drastically complaining against this, but IT'S their fault they believed in so much bullshit and refused to listen to ALL: the UK government, the specialists that continuously explained all aspects of the campaign and these false promises and also David Cameron who urged people to not make the biggest mistake of their lives and UK's future, as he once called this move.
tl;dr while it true the PM David Cameron gambled probably too much on this, it is the stupid people, that believed this was the heaven and paradise promised within the Leave party, at fault.
-
By the way very interesting interview to be watched in full
http://www.itv.com/goodmorningbritain/news/how-will-brexit-affect-us-immediately
-
@ the EU control: personally i think the EU is very absent in control I only hear about it on the news and for the rest it dont do much for the regular ppl in a EU country: you still pay your normal taxes, you can now just drive to another eu country without border checks and theres a couple irregularities that are now handled internationally by eu laws (example is i live in a farmers county, because of EU the milk price is now unified and it can be negative/positive for dutch cow farmers)
I dont feel anything from EU controlling at all tbh, everything is still very nationally regulated
-
@ the EU control: personally i think the EU is very absent in control I only hear about it on the news and for the rest it dont do much for the regular ppl in a EU country: you still pay your normal taxes, you can now just drive to another eu country without border checks and theres a couple irregularities that are now handled internationally by eu laws (example is i live in a farmers county, because of EU the milk price is now unified and it can be negative/positive for dutch cow farmers)
I dont feel anything from EU controlling at all tbh, everything is still very nationally regulated
Yeh it's not like we're using some sort of currency that is being regulated by the ECB oh wait...
OT
(http://i.imgur.com/i519DOA.jpg)
This. This is what is to come.
-
@ the EU control: personally i think the EU is very absent in control I only hear about it on the news and for the rest it dont do much for the regular ppl in a EU country: you still pay your normal taxes, you can now just drive to another eu country without border checks and theres a couple irregularities that are now handled internationally by eu laws (example is i live in a farmers county, because of EU the milk price is now unified and it can be negative/positive for dutch cow farmers)
I dont feel anything from EU controlling at all tbh, everything is still very nationally regulated
Yeh it's not like we're using some sort of currency that is being regulated by the ECB oh wait...
im already happy af i dont have to switch out currency when visiting another country. I visited sweden three times now and i hate having to depend on cash valuta that is entirely different from euro
-
@ the EU control: personally i think the EU is very absent in control I only hear about it on the news and for the rest it dont do much for the regular ppl in a EU country: you still pay your normal taxes, you can now just drive to another eu country without border checks and theres a couple irregularities that are now handled internationally by eu laws (example is i live in a farmers county, because of EU the milk price is now unified and it can be negative/positive for dutch cow farmers)
I dont feel anything from EU controlling at all tbh, everything is still very nationally regulated
Yeh it's not like we're using some sort of currency that is being regulated by the ECB oh wait...
im already happy af i dont have to switch out currency when visiting another country. I visited sweden three times now and i hate having to depend on cash valuta that is entirely different from euro
fuck the euro
-
It's actually disgusting seeing the amount of people my age saying the older generation don't deserve a say. My grandad is the most intelligent person I know and he voted out. I'd rather have someone who's seen what being in the EU has done to this country over the past years have a huge say in our vote than someone who's not been around long enough to see the damage that it has caused.
That's a quote from a close family member of mine, and I think she's absolutely right.
-
It's actually disgusting seeing the amount of people my age saying the older generation don't deserve a say. My grandad is the most intelligent person I know and he voted out. I'd rather have someone who's seen what being in the EU has done to this country over the past years have a huge say in our vote than someone who's not been around long enough to see the damage that it has caused.
That's a quote from a close family member of mine, and I think she's absolutely right.
The damage? dude UK is the 5th economy of the world, but hey I am sure EU damaged it so badly.
Most of the elderly voted out because of the immigrants and the fascist communist ideas they still have, whereas the youth are way more opened to the globalization.
-
It's actually disgusting seeing the amount of people my age saying the older generation don't deserve a say. My grandad is the most intelligent person I know and he voted out. I'd rather have someone who's seen what being in the EU has done to this country over the past years have a huge say in our vote than someone who's not been around long enough to see the damage that it has caused.
That's a quote from a close family member of mine, and I think she's absolutely right.
The damage? dude UK is the 5th economy of the world, but hey I am sure EU damaged it so badly.
Most of the elderly voted out because of the immigrants and the fascist communist ideas they still have, whereas the youth are way more opened to the globalization.
I think one of the big reasons elderly people voted out was because they were brainwashed by all the leave EU propaganda. Fake promises were made and younger people simply looked past the propaganda, not believing it.
-
It's actually disgusting seeing the amount of people my age saying the older generation don't deserve a say. My grandad is the most intelligent person I know and he voted out. I'd rather have someone who's seen what being in the EU has done to this country over the past years have a huge say in our vote than someone who's not been around long enough to see the damage that it has caused.
That's a quote from a close family member of mine, and I think she's absolutely right.
The damage? dude UK is the 5th economy of the world, but hey I am sure EU damaged it so badly.
Most of the elderly voted out because of the immigrants and the fascist communist ideas they still have, whereas the youth are way more opened to the globalization.
I think one of the big reasons elderly people voted out was because they were brainwashed by all the leave EU propaganda. Fake promises were made and younger people simply looked past the propaganda, not believing it.
What? No no no. Propaganda is made for the young people, old people don't fall for tricks. Elders are just more conservative than the youth, which is completely normal too.
@George, "Fascist communist ideas they still have". They are just older and know more of this world. No need to label them with such harsh words.
While it is true Cameron "gambled" A LOT on this action, it was never predicted as a lose, and only started to take the shape of a tight battle once the campaigning started and to be blunt the false promises that the Leave party made created this huge turnaround.
tl;dr while it true the PM David Cameron gambled probably too much on this, it is the stupid people, that believed this was the heaven and paradise promised within the Leave party, at fault.
Stop being so butthurt, please.
As long as I followed the online polls, "leave" was always in favour. "It is the stupid people" - imagine yourself being as old as the ones that voted leave and being called stupid by a 20-something-year old. You know nothing, Jon Snow.
I am 100% certain that the Remain parties also created bullshit stories. It's politics.
Also, mind naming me some of the blunt false promises that were made, which created the huge turnaround? Or is this just rage?
-
@George, "Fascist communist ideas they still have". They are just older and know more of this world. No need to label them with such harsh words.
While it is true Cameron "gambled" A LOT on this action, it was never predicted as a lose, and only started to take the shape of a tight battle once the campaigning started and to be blunt the false promises that the Leave party made created this huge turnaround.
tl;dr while it true the PM David Cameron gambled probably too much on this, it is the stupid people, that believed this was the heaven and paradise promised within the Leave party, at fault.
Stop being so butthurt, please.
As long as I followed the online polls, "leave" was always in favour. "It is the stupid people" - imagine yourself being as old as the ones that voted leave and being called stupid by a 20-something-year old. You know nothing, Jon Snow.
I am 100% certain that the Remain parties also created bullshit stories. It's politics.
Also, mind naming me some of the blunt false promises that were made, which created the huge turnaround? Or is this just rage?
Actually Remain was in favor up until the Referendum day, whereas online polls showed either 50-50% or 51 (Remain) in favor of 49 (Leave) prognostic.
Being 20 year old or 60 year old makes no difference if one is informed properly about a subject; let me put it in simple words for you, you may eat cake all your life, I eat veggie for 5 years; I will know my share and be entitled to an opinion at least the same as you, considering my fare share of knowledge on the matter, if not more than you.
The mediocrity level is very high and the level of information the elderly get is mostly coming from the TV media, where every information is controlled and fed to the mass like a shepherd controlling the sheeps, whereas the youth are exposed to a larger area of information on the online world. That makes for a great difference without even getting on one subject, so always bear that in mind.
Also it is pretty clear you haven't read anything regarding the subject otherwise you wouldn't be so misinformed about the lies sold by the Leave party, I will give you a very rough example, coming only hours AFTER the referendum closed, Nigel Farage exposes the truth behind the promise to give NHS the European money and lies about the numerous ADVERTS that promised this all around their campaign (Read about it: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-referendum-result-nigel-farage-nhs-pledge-disowns-350-million-pounds-a7099906.html).
Oh and btw.. don't jump on this assumption that the elderly are smarter than the youth, because that's just one of the most retarded old generation logic ever that is apparently still believed.
EDIT: Also to read Noam Chomsky's The Chomsky Decalogue: http://noam-chomsky.tumblr.com/post/13867896307/noam-chomsky-10-strategies-of-manipulation-by
-
So the NHS money promise alone created the whole huge turnaround?
And also yes, I haven't read anything about the topic. I'm just pointing out the logical mistakes in your statements.
EDIT: Your statement, that it's easier to feed lies to elders than the youth, is simply wrong. "whereas the youth are exposed to a larger area of information on the online world." That doesn't mean that the information they get is true tho? That just means they get more of it.
Are you seriously this butthurt that you have to start making stuff like this up? It's general knowledge that it's easier to feed propaganda to the youngsters, because they often lack interest in such topics and they follow the masses. Elders on the other hand have their own opinions and they don't believe everything told by the masses.
-
So the NHS money promise alone created the whole huge turnaround?
And also yes, I haven't read anything about the topic. I'm just pointing out the logical mistakes in your statements.
EDIT: Your statement, that it's easier to feed lies to elders than the youth, is simply wrong. "whereas the youth are exposed to a larger area of information on the online world." That doesn't mean that the information they get is true tho? That just means they get more of it.
Are you seriously this butthurt that you have to start making stuff like this up? It's general knowledge that it's easier to feed propaganda to the youngsters, because they often lack interest in such topics and they follow the masses. Elders on the other hand have their own opinions and they don't believe everything told by the masses.
Firstly, I did try to be gentle on your opinion but since you keep being so obloquious and obsolete, I will be blunt on this and say, your arguments are retarded and strongly lack any bit of fact, you call them as you think everything is, and refuse to rely on plain evidence that is being given to you or research your own evidence, for that matter.
You refuse to admit some things and eventually and as it seems you start to contradict yourself; that if the youth get more information than the elders, and literally get unfiltered (by the media) information, that still does not reason any awareness of the youth for a topic on which the elders simply don't have any clue about; no, in your point/opinion, you think that if you are ~60 years old you've known them all, you've seen them all, you don't need to be fed proper information and you will automatically choose smart on anything based on ... years of, something?
That is a very wrong thinking I believe, starting any discussion or argument based on categorizing the elders as a whole, smarter than the youth, purely based on age factor.
You refuse to accept hard proof evidence such as the NHS and have the absolute rudeness, I must say, to call the promise of the NHS money scheme "just a thing" since this thing alone doesn't seem to be enough for you to consider voting for, or against a campaign (and while it is true that one's opinion must not stick to just one campaign promise, being as it may, the starting point of your opinion an NHS Money Scheme promise that is literally a lie, how can you consider further, the smaller promises of one's campaign).
The NHS money was one of their strongest features of their campaign, hence the billboards all over UK coming along with that, so if you think just for a second that hundreds of millions of pounds directed to the Health System is "just a thing", I can already rest my case and leave you waste the air around you.
Sorry.
Oh and by the way, I would abstain from attacking me directly again and calling me butthurt and stuff if I were you, and rather attack my opinion if you feel the need; if you can't maintain a proper discussion then, by all means, please ignore this topic.
-
"refuse to rely on plain evidence that is being given to" -> example?
"You refuse to admit some things" -> example?
"and literally get unfiltered (by the media) information" Information given by the media is not unfiltered? It's filtered by the owners of newspapers, by the directors?
"topic on which the elders simply don't have any clue about" How do you know that the elders don't have any clue about? Stop *insert quote* categorizing.
"based on ... years of, something?" That is called life experience.
"categorizing the elders as a whole, smarter than the youth, purely based on age factor." Not saying that elders are smarter. I'm saying that commonly elders interest more in politics than the common youngster. Sure there are a lot of exceptions, but mostly it is that way.
"You refuse to accept hard proof evidence such as the NHS and have the absolute rudeness, I must say, to call the promise of the NHS money scheme "just a thing"". I never refused to accept proof about NHS and I never called it just a thing. Why are you putting words into my mouth?
You spoke in plural, but only talked about one example, so I simply asked for more?
Sorry.
Oh and by the way, if you can't hold back your emotions while writing statements, put words into my mouth and/or get offended by the word "butthurt", please ignore this topic.
EDIT:
Percentage of participants by age group.
18-24: 36%
25-34: 58%
35-44: 72%
45-54: 75%
55-64: 81%
65+: 83%
So who cared more about the referendum? Who were more interested?
EDIT2:
"and literally get unfiltered (by the media) information"
"information the elderly get is mostly coming from the TV media, where every information is controlled and fed to the mass like a shepherd controlling the sheeps"
So if the youngster gets information from the media, it's unfiltered, but if an elder gets it, it's suddenly controlled aka filtered?
-
"refuse to rely on plain evidence that is being given to" -> example?
I give you examples of the NHS and you say (I quote) "So the NHS money promise alone created the whole huge turnaround? "; I will explain this to you again, they promised over 300 MILLION pounds and billboarded their campaign around this main promise, and ONLY tell the truth about it (obviously that it's not going to happen) after the supporters voted for it (NOT in the campaign, not before the referendum, BUT AFTER).
You think of this as a minor promise since you don't consider this as any relevant for a turnaround, where in fact it was one of the main points for the turnaround.
"You refuse to admit some things" -> example?
Read above.
"and literally get unfiltered (by the media) information" Information given by the media is not unfiltered? It's filtered by the owners of newspapers, by the directors?
That's exactly what I said y'know? THAT THE ELDERS GET FILTERED INFORMATION FROM THE MEDIA (TV, NEWSPAPERS, you call them) WHEREAS THE YOUTH ARE MORE OPEN-MINDED DUE TO THE EXPOSURE TO A GREATER SCALE OF PROPER INFORMATION.
"topic on which the elders simply don't have any clue about" How do you know that the elders don't have any clue about? Stop *insert quote* categorizing.
Second day after the debate people go out and claim "If I'd have known, I'd have voted otherwise. I wish I could vote again". This goes without saying, but if you want me to put it into words for you; they finally understood that a promise that could hardly come as trustworthy from the PM, but from some opposing side campaigner was revealed and understood unfortunately too late for them as a LIE.
"based on ... years of, something?" That is called life experience.
You actually think that if you live 60 years you have the knowledge of all the subjects or something? Your argument is way invalid and very uncalled for.
"categorizing the elders as a whole, smarter than the youth, purely based on age factor." Not saying that elders are smarter. I'm saying that commonly elders interest more in politics than the common youngster. Sure there are a lot of exceptions, but mostly it is that way.
That is wrong, again. Why do you start on the presumption that elders are interested in politics? You actually consider that watching politicians on TV and newspaper and other media resources makes one interested in politics. If you think that the elders have nothing better or had nothing better to do with their lives other than wasting every day of their life actually looking into politics (other than tv feed), you are wrong.
"You refuse to accept hard proof evidence such as the NHS and have the absolute rudeness, I must say, to call the promise of the NHS money scheme "just a thing"". I never refused to accept proof about NHS and I never called it just a thing. Why are you putting words into my mouth?
You spoke in plural, but only talked about one example, so I simply asked for more?
Quote "So the NHS money promise alone created the whole huge turnaround?" End Quote.
Oh and by the way, if you can't hold back your emotions while writing statements, put words into my mouth and/or get offended by the word "butthurt", please ignore this topic.
I am way more than able to hold back, hence why you haven't seen me responding with similar words. In fact, you are the one who went low and started being obsolete, being unable to do anything else really. And I did not put words into your mouth, but you considered a hundreds of millions of pounds scheme as irrelevant stand alone for a turnaround; while they had more promises that will soon unfold as untrue (most likely next in line the Restriction of Free Passing of Immigrants Vs. The access to the EU single market; they won't have one without the other, so supporters will soon be again dissapointed).
Oh and btw https://www.dailyfx.com/gbp-usd going awfully wrong already :)
I won't reply anymore here, go on private if you need to understand other things..
Sorry.
-
"refuse to rely on plain evidence that is being given to" -> example?
I give you examples of the NHS and you say (I quote) "So the NHS money promise alone created the whole huge turnaround? "; I will explain this to you again, they promised over 300 MILLION pounds and billboarded their campaign around this main promise, and ONLY tell the truth about it (obviously that it's not going to happen) after the supporters voted for it (NOT in the campaign, not before the referendum, BUT AFTER).
You think of this as a minor promise since you don't consider this as any relevant for a turnaround, where in fact it was one of the main points for the turnaround.
"You refuse to admit some things" -> example?
Read above.
"You refuse to accept hard proof evidence such as the NHS and have the absolute rudeness, I must say, to call the promise of the NHS money scheme "just a thing"". I never refused to accept proof about NHS and I never called it just a thing. Why are you putting words into my mouth?
You spoke in plural, but only talked about one example, so I simply asked for more?
Quote "So the NHS money promise alone created the whole huge turnaround?" End Quote.
I never refused to believe it. Putting words into my mouth again.
You spoke in plural, but only talked about one example, so I simply asked for more?
"and literally get unfiltered (by the media) information" Information given by the media is not unfiltered? It's filtered by the owners of newspapers, by the directors?
That's exactly what I said y'know? THAT THE ELDERS GET FILTERED INFORMATION FROM THE MEDIA (TV, NEWSPAPERS, you call them) WHEREAS THE YOUTH ARE MORE OPEN-MINDED DUE TO THE EXPOSURE TO A GREATER SCALE OF PROPER INFORMATION.
"that if the youth get more information than the elders, and literally get unfiltered (by the media) information,"
Who is contradicting.
Also look:
"and literally get unfiltered (by the media) information"
"information the elderly get is mostly coming from the TV media, where every information is controlled and fed to the mass like a shepherd controlling the sheeps"
So if the youngster gets information from the media, it's unfiltered, but if an elder gets it, it's suddenly controlled aka filtered?
So you're saying the youth gets unfiltered information by the media and aren't easily manipulated and elders get filtered information by the media and are easily manipulated, but the youth also gets filtered information by the media and isn't easily manipulated and the elders also get unfiltered information by the media and aren't easily manipulated? Wow we have to go deeper.
"topic on which the elders simply don't have any clue about" How do you know that the elders don't have any clue about? Stop *insert quote* categorizing.
Second day after the debate people go out and claim "If I'd have known, I'd have voted otherwise. I wish I could vote again". This goes without saying, but if you want me to put it into words for you; they finally understood that a promise that could hardly come as trustworthy from the PM, but from some opposing side campaigner was revealed and understood unfortunately too late for them as a LIE.
Still doesn't explain how you are almight and know everything, including what elders know and what they do not.
"based on ... years of, something?" That is called life experience.
You actually think that if you live 60 years you have the knowledge of all the subjects or something? Your argument is way invalid and very uncalled for.
I think that as you live more, you see more, you experience more, you understand more.
"categorizing the elders as a whole, smarter than the youth, purely based on age factor." Not saying that elders are smarter. I'm saying that commonly elders interest more in politics than the common youngster. Sure there are a lot of exceptions, but mostly it is that way.
That is wrong, again. Why do you start on the presumption that elders are interested in politics? You actually consider that watching politicians on TV and newspaper and other media resources makes one interested in politics. If you think that the elders have nothing better or had nothing better to do with their lives other than wasting every day of their life actually looking into politics (other than tv feed), you are wrong.
Percentage of participants by age group.
18-24: 36%
25-34: 58%
35-44: 72%
45-54: 75%
55-64: 81%
65+: 83%
Hue.
-
soooooooooooo
who else stopped reading
-
soooooooooooo
who else stopped reading
I did x) @Ekke, you do know that the amount of people in the world is growing insane amounts each year? It's called population aging. It means that there are more older people than younger people. So obviouly not everyone votes no matter what is put on poll, and the percentage is that much different simply because there are too many old people.
-
soooooooooooo
who else stopped reading
I did x) @Ekke, you do know that the amount of people in the world is growing insane amounts each year? It's called population aging. It means that there are more older people than younger people. So obviouly not everyone votes no matter what is put on poll, and the percentage is that much different simply because there are too many old people.
That makes no sense. The numbers show what % of the age group took part in voting. i.e from males/women aged 18-24, only 36% voted, either in or out. Anyways, the more elders there are, the smaller the participation % should be, and that proves even more that elders are more interested.
Or what exactly did you have in mind?
-
shit happens when you party naked
-
Fuck me for seeing this so late, but hey. Here i am.
I can start off by telling you how many times this discussion have been in Norway after WW2.
Every now and then, the theme has been there. "Should Norway join the EU"?
And we have voted for it, several times past 6-7 decades. Always been no. Why? Cause Norway was a country under development after WW2, and saw their independences opportunities quite good as our oil adventure started. If we were to be in the EU, we would have lost so much money and benefits we already have. What we managed to get however was the Schengen deal whom i think is both good and bad. Opens for a lot of smuglers, but then again fastens the industrialization and get a better flow work wise in countries that benefit both companies and private persons. But the interesting thing here is the so called EØS-Deal Norway managed to get. I have no clue how the fuck we got it, but the fact we got it is cool. Its like we are allied with EU, and it feels like we are in EU. We got only advantages and no disadvantages yet. But mark my word when i say yet.
Cause now that Brexit has fulfilled its shit, they will be forced to workout a deal like Norway got. Experts say there is no way they will get a deal like this. And i doubt they will. And i think EU will need to workout a new system. For all parties, the ones in EU and the ones outside. They need to start all over, with the same vision they had after WW2.
Cause there is no way GBR will get a good deal.
I just typed really fucking fast from 0 to a 100 real quick, so dont you fucking hate on my shit cause i havent read through it yet and i wont either. Hope you get the point.
Kudos Norway
-
unfortunately they had no choice when it comes to their second exit ::) :-X
-
Interesting view on things: https://www.facebook.com/DJSDUK/videos/1072659682826740/
-
fuck old ppl
LOL we voted the UK out of the EU and now the new generation has to deal with it while we'll be dead in a few years. Bloody good joke, Margeret! :kappa:
(http://www.reactiongifs.com/lol/excited_golden_girls2.gif)
exactly
remember that the old people started the EU in the first place, and have seen how it became a shithole. leaving is stupid, but the current state of the EU is unacceptable and only profitable for a certain amount of countries within. The EU needs an overhaul, maybe return to how it was BEFORE 2002.
Man, EU is not Runescape, you can not just choose between current and old-school.