Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Wax Golem

Aubrey the Malformed's page

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber. Pathfinder Society Member. 8,714 posts (24,928 including aliases). 2 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 Pathfinder Society character. 15 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 8,714 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
The Exchange

No peeking, please Rarely Accountant 2/Auditor 4/Waster 30

We have our two camping stoves out at the moment. Pretty tricky doing a roast on those, though.

The Exchange

No peeking, please Rarely Accountant 2/Auditor 4/Waster 30

OK, that's a pretty good summation of why you are there. In the gameplay thread I just wanted to make clear, in case I hadn't, that the Blacksand Raiders are not a small organisation. There's quite a lot of them milling about out there, so a frontal assault could be a difficult experience.

Also, as Nenynxxx and Arakan have pointed out, there are a few reasons for being there. Some are more important than others. However, just to clarify, it was the nasty templar who had the kids in the first place who wants them back. He might be able to help you work out what the hell that weird prophecy you received might mean, and where it might happen, as he has astronomical knowledge. The caravan masters in Silver Spring just want you to provide intelligence on the Raiders.

The Exchange

No peeking, please Rarely Accountant 2/Auditor 4/Waster 30

I just favorited Morthak's post...

The Exchange

No peeking, please Rarely Accountant 2/Auditor 4/Waster 30

I'm back but I've got a few issues, so I may not be updating all of the games immediately. Sorry about that, hopefully back to normal soon. I particularly want to apologise to you guys as I left this game dangling even before I went on holiday. I will prioritise getting this game back on track - once I can.

The Exchange

No peeking, please Rarely Accountant 2/Auditor 4/Waster 30

I'm back but I've got a few issues, so I may not be updating all of the games immediately. Sorry about that, hopefully back to normal soon.

The Exchange

No peeking, please Rarely Accountant 2/Auditor 4/Waster 30

I'm back but I've got a few issues, so I may not be updating all of the games immediately. Sorry about that, hopefully back to normal soon.

The Exchange

No peeking, please Rarely Accountant 2/Auditor 4/Waster 30

I'm back but I've got a few issues, so I may not be updating all of the games immediately. Sorry about that, hopefully back to normal soon.

The Exchange

No peeking, please Rarely Accountant 2/Auditor 4/Waster 30

I'm back but I've got a few issues, so I may not be updating all of the games immediately. Sorry about that, hopefully back to normal soon.

The Exchange

No peeking, please Rarely Accountant 2/Auditor 4/Waster 30

Holiday was fine. But we've got back to our newly renovated kitchen to discover that the oven doesn't work - which rather goes to the heart of the matter. We'll get it fixed, but it's a shame the people doing the kitchen didn't, like, notice and now we have to have a few more days/weeks with a kitchen in which you cannot actually cook anything.

The Exchange

No peeking, please Rarely Accountant 2/Auditor 4/Waster 30

I'm around, got a few things to deal with first.

The Exchange

No peeking, please Rarely Accountant 2/Auditor 4/Waster 30

I'm brexiting is Spain. Apparently there are rumours that European police are going to go a bit hardcore on British doing traffic violations, which they might have ignored otherwise, so I'll have to be careful on the roads.

The Exchange

No peeking, please Rarely Accountant 2/Auditor 4/Waster 30

I'll try my best. On both counts.

The Exchange

No peeking, please Rarely Accountant 2/Auditor 4/Waster 30

I have a basic allowance of 25 days, I've bought another 5 days through salary sacrifice, and I've five days carried forwards. So a reasonable amount of holiday this year. Banking tends to offer quite good benefits like holidays and such. Being an arrogant banker is hard work, after all.

The Exchange

No peeking, please Rarely Accountant 2/Auditor 4/Waster 30

I shall be on holiday from Friday for two weeks. I doubt I will have any meaningful internet access during that time.

The Exchange

No peeking, please Rarely Accountant 2/Auditor 4/Waster 30

I shall be on holiday from Friday for two weeks. I doubt I will have any meaningful internet access during that time.

The Exchange

No peeking, please Rarely Accountant 2/Auditor 4/Waster 30

I shall be on holiday from Friday for two weeks. I doubt I will have any meaningful internet access during that time.

The Exchange

No peeking, please Rarely Accountant 2/Auditor 4/Waster 30

I shall be on holiday from Friday for two weeks. I doubt I will have any meaningful internet access during that time.

The Exchange

No peeking, please Rarely Accountant 2/Auditor 4/Waster 30

I shall be on holiday from Friday for two weeks. I doubt I will have any meaningful internet access during that time.

The Exchange

No peeking, please Rarely Accountant 2/Auditor 4/Waster 30

I shall be on holiday from Friday for two weeks. I doubt I will have any meaningful internet access during that time.

The Exchange

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
Norman Osborne wrote:

A certain percentage of young voters will also be unaffected...they will die over the next few years: accidents, illness, etc. Should that percentage be calculated, and that percentage of their votes be discarded?

You say it's offensive and disturbing that mentally incompetent people might be able to vote. I think it's more offensive and disturbing to deny a group of people the right to vote simply because you fear that some small percentage of them are mentally incompetent.

Also, there are mentally incompetent people of ALL ages. Perhaps nobody should be allowed a vote? Maybe the UK should return to being an absolute monarchy.

Maybe you should stop tilting at straw men. This is irrelevant to Brexit.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Aubrey the malformed wrote:
But this referendum clearly displays why we have representative democracy, and why direct democracy is a stupid idea. You don't let someone who is unqualified drive a bus. Why would you allow someone with no understanding of the issues to decide a crucial question that impacts the livelihoods of millions?
Considering that there's rarely any more qualifications to run for office than to vote for it I fail to see the improvement

Yeah, true enough. The problem with referendums is that you aren't forced to make the trade-off of a package for government set out in a manifesto, but instead can pick and choose even if the constituent parts add up to be self-contradictory. Like in California.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
Cat-thulhu wrote:
Aubrey the Malformed wrote:

You clearly don't get the point, and indeed edited out the point I was making and called it crankiness, so I will restate it. On demographic trends, the proportion of the elderly people to tax-paying young is much higher than it was when the current elderly were younger, and it is only set to get worse. So, proportionately, I have to pay more tax to keep them going. In...

The edit was to remove some of MY crankiness nothing to do with your post, poorly worded and placed, so sorry about that.

I also get the point but when you are old you'll be in the same position and the ratio of old to young will be even more disproportionate, but I assume you'll still want to be looked after while those younger than you will be complaining about supporting you, probably for the reason you stated. It's only going to be harder for the generation below yours. And sadly the bit about the elderly being ignored is all too true. Your focussing in on a small proportion of well to do people. Many, many elderly live from pension to pension with just enough to pay the bills and prescriptions, let alone eat.

You also missed the point about the stats. Those same stats could just as easily lay blame at the foot of the ill educated, those who admit to being British, and the middle to lower classes.

Yeah, sorry, and I am cranky. I apologise for my tone. I hear you, but it doesn't really help. If we are going to rely on taxation to help out the elderly with the demographic situation we have, we really need the economy to be going flat out to generate the tax revenues. Instead we have had a vote that could potentially do severe damage. A lot of elderly live in poverty, but a lot live in relative splendour.

As for the ill-educated... Well, I mentioned a few posts above how living standards haven't moved much for them since the financial crisis. Somehow they think that keeping immigrants out will improve that, when it will instead probably make it worse. They may have justifiable gripes but they chose a quick fix that almost certainly won't work.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
Smarnil le couard wrote:

The growing pro-remain petition is nice (3 million now), but is nothing compared to the 17 millions who voted to leave. All it has achieved is to ensure that the british Parliament will hold a debate about the Brexit, which would have happened anyway.

I'a afraid that to derail the Brexit now, your next pro-Leave PM (Boris Johnson ?) would have to renege, admitting that he didn't meant what he said during the campaign (that is, utterly wrecking his political career and taking the bullet for the greater good).

Aubrey, you got him as mayor for years, how likely does it sound ?

I don't live in London, but he was on OK mayor as far as I know. The post is basically quite powerless other than running Transport For London. It's not easy to see what Boris would do. He is not that keen a Brexiteer in that he jumped on the bandwagon quite late and for purely self-promoting reasons - he has written books quite recently praising the EU as a bastion promoting peace in Europe (which is true enough). He says he changed his mind because Cameron's renegotiation didn't go far enough, but basically he saw his chance to make a splash in national politics and put himself in the driving seat to become the next Tory leader. It is even possible he didn't expect or even want to win, but was simply using the campaign as a way of raising his profile.

The fact that Boris seems to have very little principle at all suggests he could renege if it was in his interests to do so. But whether he will or not is another matter. He was talking at one point about a second referendum after the first, but Cameron (not that it matters what he says now) said that wouldn't happen. And if he did renege it might annoy an awful lot of people. I think it will boil down to what the EU and European leaders offer and threaten, and quite how bad the economic news is from here. A second referendum is not without precedent in EU matters.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
meatrace wrote:
minoritarian wrote:
Sissyl wrote:


It is also obvious that demented people should probably not have political influence at all.

It's not even remotely obvious that people with a dementia should not have political influence at all.

There are lots of dementias (~110) and they affect people at different ages, progressive at different rates and affect different aspects of a person's life. Merely having a dementia doesn't make someone somehow incapable of making a decision. You think a 50 year old with frontal lobe dementia affecting their impulse control should have no political influence at all? "demented" isn't a word you hear very often outside of insults and I find the implication that people with a dementia shouldn't be allowed to vote insulting.

I find the idea that mentally incompetent people are allowed to make decisions that affect others offensive. And disturbing.

And beside the point, frankly. The vast, vast majority of those voting to leave were perfectly compos mentis.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
Cat-thulhu wrote:
Aubrey the Malformed wrote:


It's far from ridiculous. We have an ageing population in the UK which consumes a lot of tax revenue to run, what with pensions and the NHS, and they are the largest consumers by far of the welfare state. The young are expected to pay for this, so we are clearly pivotal to the standards of living of the elderly.

Edit: to remove some of the crankiness.

Now I may be tired from working all day but it's a good thing you have no intention of aging, let me know the secret. Or if you do I'm glad to see you'll support yourself and not make any demands on the tax system or NHS.

This sort of thinking is remarkable in this day and age. We see the same in Australia. The elderly get cast aside, monetary benefits reduced, calls for rights to be reduced. All as a penalty for having the audacity to get old. We fight for equal rights for every tiny group we can think of except the elderly it appears. YOur society has the infrastructure, democracy and freedom it enjoys because of the elderly. Most of them have paid taxes throughout their life, just as pivotal to the standard of living many younger people enjoy. You don't see a lot of elderly adding to crime statistics - a huge cost to society.

The same stats on the Brecht also point out that higher educated people voted to stay, so perhaps we should only allow the highly educated to vote? In fact people identifying as British voted to leave! Maybe only those who are foreign should be allowed to vote? The polls also say the lower classes voted to go, why not restrict the ability to vote to the upper classes?

You clearly don't get the point, and indeed edited out the point I was making and called it crankiness, so I will restate it. On demographic trends, the proportion of the elderly people to tax-paying young is much higher than it was when the current elderly were younger, and it is only set to get worse. So, proportionately, I have to pay more tax to keep them going. In general, the amount of tax generated will fall if the economy tanks, so there will be a series of decisions to make if, as is quite likely, Brexit reduces both short term and long term economic output. Do we cut benefits to the elderly (NHS care, pensions) or do we raise taxes on those who are actually working. How high do we raise taxes? At which point does it get unsupportable to squeeze taxes out of the workers to support an every-growing elderly population? Especially as there comes a point when high taxation becomes counterproductive.

In the UK, the elderly are relatively mollycoddled by government spending because they tend to vote more reliably than the young, plus there's more and more of them (relatively). This stuff about the elderly being ignored is total crap - maybe it's true in Australia, but I doubt it, frankly. Many, many pensioners are wealthy, owning property and having pensions the current generation of workers can only dream of. Your facetious comment about me not planning on getting old is far from the truth - but I will have to save up a lot in order to get anything like what may parents and parents-in-law got for just turning up to work.

I don't actually mind a certain degree of monetary transfers between the generations, I accept the need for a state pension and a state health care system. But if those same people are going to vote in a way which potentially would impact negatively on my welfare, while still expecting me to foot the bill for them, I will call foul. There is a similar problem where you have referendums on spending in California - everyone votes for spending increases, but refuses to vote for the taxes to pay for them. Net result: public finances that are a complete mess. Which is why voting on a single issue, where there was an information vacuum, and the issues are complex and nuanced, it a dumb way to run a government.

The Exchange

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
Norman Osborne wrote:
If the question was ridiculous, it was no more so than the opinion that it was a response too.

It's far from ridiculous. We have an ageing population in the UK which consumes a lot of tax revenue to run, what with pensions and the NHS, and they are the largest consumers by far of the welfare state. The young are expected to pay for this, so we are clearly pivotal to the standards of living of the elderly. Yet the polls also split, with the elderly voting to leave and the young voting to stay. So there is a clear split in intentions there between the generations.

And if you then consider that Brexit is expected to cause short term economic damage, and it is quite likely the long term benefits will prove illusory, then that will impact upon economic activity - aka the jobs of the young. So the elderly are sitting there, sucking up tax revenue, while voting to damage the interests of those that actually pay for their relaxed twilight years. As well as being pretty stupid, it's also pretty ungrateful. As well as propping up the welfare state, the young have to pay mortgages, raise children, and go to work. The financial liabilities stay roughly the same, or are even growing, as more and more of the population ages.

So if the economy really is damaged, either taxes will have to go up or benefits cut. This was an issue even before Brexit, but is quite possibly becoming particularly acute now. This vote has brought out into the open inter-generational issues that were bubbling under the surface. My parents voted for Brexit, as did my in-laws. I work in finance, which is heavily reliant on EU regulations. This potentially damages me, damages my family, damages my son's prospects, very directly. So yeah, I'm pissed off. You think that's ridiculous? I don't.

Clearly, elderly morons are entitled to vote. But this referendum clearly displays why we have representative democracy, and why direct democracy is a stupid idea. You don't let someone who is unqualified drive a bus. Why would you allow someone with no understanding of the issues to decide a crucial question that impacts the livelihoods of millions? We have elected representatives for that.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
Norman Osborne wrote:
Rednal wrote:

The vote to leave was mainly by the older generation - that is, the people who won't have to live with the long-term consequences of this. On the other hand, the younger people voted overwhelmingly to stay - and they're the ones who will be impacted the most if the UK actually decides to go through with it.

I admit, it's... kind of hard to see this as anything except the older generation screwing over the younger one. Again. XD; That's a narrow vote, and I don't feel like it's right to completely twist the future against the people who have to live it on a margin that slim.

At what age do you think people should have their right to vote stripped away?

Round about the age you think it's a good idea to leave the EU.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
EltonJ wrote:
Honestly, I like what has happened because I can have more time to prepare. Brexit does, indeed, lead to a Donald Trump (or Gary Johnson) win. However, that could last for four years. I know a lot of people disrespect Donald Trump now, but the UK breaking away from the EU is good. It may present some terrible consequences in the short run, but in the long run it will be good for the UK.

In the long run it MAY be good for the UK. But the good arguments for it to be good largely rested on economic decisions which would be politically impossible. Notions of "sovereignty" don't really cut much ice either. Pooling sovereignty is inevitable in lots of ways - NATO, WTO and so on - as it helps you get things done you could not otherwise do by yourself. So pulling away from a club which will set the rules for your main trading partners isn't all that sensible.

And Trump is disrespected for lots of good reasons. His views on Brexit are only one of those.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
Sissyl wrote:
Aubrey the Malformed wrote:
Shifty wrote:
Sissyl wrote:
The brits are a strong people. It wouldn't surprise me if they fired up the old Commonwealth again, now that communications are far easier. It may just be a good idea too.

We are hoping so. It would be nice for membership of the Commonwealth to regain some actual meaning.

What was the point of being a Commonwealth country if the UK wasn't being one?

Honestly, I wouldn't hold your breath.
No, that would be problematic. But the fact remains - if the UK is not going to be in the EU, it will need other allies. The Commonwealth nations would be an easy way to start up. Or else, of course, the UK could dig a hole for itself and suffer for the rejection from the EU?

Well, the EU won't be our enemy as such. And the economies in the Commonwealth are much smaller that those in Europe. So while it's a nice idea, I don't really see it as making much difference.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
Shifty wrote:
Sissyl wrote:
The brits are a strong people. It wouldn't surprise me if they fired up the old Commonwealth again, now that communications are far easier. It may just be a good idea too.

We are hoping so. It would be nice for membership of the Commonwealth to regain some actual meaning.

What was the point of being a Commonwealth country if the UK wasn't being one?

Honestly, I wouldn't hold your breath.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
Werthead wrote:

So the Leave campaign won by forging an unholy alliance between the hard-right of the Conservative Party and the older, disenfranchised, northern working class citizen who hasn't voted since the Thatcher years, on the basis that the Tories would massively invest in public services and local resources.

In terms of unlikely alliances, this probably isn't quite up there with the Nazi-Soviet Pact but may certainly be in the Sauron-Saruman ballpark.

I think you make it sound more considered and more short-term than it is. Ever since the financial crisis living standards have barely budged. We had a period of quite high inflation which eroded living standards, and for those of less money that really hurts. They wanted someone to blame and they listened to populists in camel coats telling them it was all the fault of immigrants. There was a comment from the BBC saying that in this vote people didn't go along with what was in their economic interests. But they did vote with what they thought were their economic interests - fewer immigrants would equal better wages and public services. The fact it was b%+#~&+s didn't get through. Throw in the oldies who felt that the EU had morphed into something they didn't vote for in 1975 (my parents, amongst others) and you got your majority.

Quote:
There is a slight problem here, namely what happens to those disaffected working class voters when the Tories continue to sell off the NHS, continue (if not double down on) austerity and keep shrinking government and public services. Maybe a resurgent Labour under Corbyn, having survived the new leadership challenge and vanquished the last remaining Blairites, sweeps them up and delivers this country to a socialist utopia in 2020. Or UKIP starts hoovering them up at a rate of knots as part of its potential new raison d'etre, "encouraging" immigrants already here to start going home.

All bets are off, frankly, no one knows what the future might hold. Can't help feeling it won't be good, since none of the options look good. (Resurgent Corbyn - shudder.)

The Exchange

No peeking, please Rarely Accountant 2/Auditor 4/Waster 30

Maybe this will be a wake-up call, when the economy tanks (Moodys has put the UK on negative watch, which means the possibility of a sovereign downgrade and therefore an increased interest bill for the government). Of course, the s~@%-heads who voted for this probably won't make the mental leap and want to blame someone else.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
Nutcase Entertainment wrote:
... instead of "Leave side", it should be "Leave sides"...

There was only one question. Even if Leave was a coalition of xenophobes and ivory tower trade theorists, the fact that Leave couldn't, or wouldn't, even articulate what was actually going to come after a Leave vote again displays the bankruptcy of the whole thing.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
Nutcase Entertainment wrote:
Aubrey the Malformed wrote:
ericthecleric wrote:
Nutcase Entertainment wrote:

You got something wrong, both side used a lot of false factoids and deformed truths, not just the leave side.

What Nutcase said is right. Both sides ran horrible negative campaigns, and it went on too long. It was difficult to find reliable facts. I'm glad it's over.
But the Leave campaign flirted pretty close to demonising foreigners, which is not exactly very nice. Remember that immigration was their big argument, despite the fact that all the stuff about immigrants clogging up the NHS and welfare was basically untrue (actually, it's the old age pensioners, who mostly voted to leave, doing that). The Remain camp pretty much just told us we'd all be f*%#ed if we left. And that may yet come to pass.
That was far from being the sole argument of the Leave side.

No, but it was the one which they really banged on about because it resonated for some reason. UKIP is always most popular where actually there aren't very many immigrants. In UKIPs only Parliamentary seat, the population is overwhelmingly white British. My office in London is stuffed full of immigrants, and most immigrants head for London because that is where the jobs are. Yet London voted to Remain by a significant margin, despite all of the public services supposedly clogged up. It was all rubbish, but the white pensioners chose to believe it. Leave's other "arguments" were about taking control, but never very clear of what exactly we were taking control. We still pool soveTheir argument about £350m per week was bogus and even the actual number is, compared to actual government spending, utterly trivial (the budget of the EU is about 1% of European GDP, compared with the over 40% we currently spend here in the UK). And their economic arguments rested on assumptions that were debatable and politically impossible to achieve (under free trade Port Talbot would go to the wall, but instead Leave blamed EU rules for us not being able to bail it out). The fact that their default response to anyone actually trying to debunk their "arguments" was "Don't listen to the experts" was also pretty dispiriting, and intended to drive away any cogent analysis.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
No peeking, please Rarely Accountant 2/Auditor 4/Waster 30

It's a disaster. I've been working from home today so don't know much about the general vibe but from those I've spoken to, we are not happy. I'm pretty furious, especially as I expect members of my family probably voted to leave without really thinking about its potential impact on me and my family. I'm just disgusted with my fellow countrymen. It's not often two politicians come on the telly and the one whose lights I want to punch out ISN'T the guy from the Scottish Nationalist Party (though the other guy was Boris Johnson's dad and, as far as I can tell, he's as much of a c*nt as his son).

So yeah, I'm not too sure what the future holds now. In a sense, the passporting thing with regards to financial services, which is a bit of EU regulation that underpins a lot of activity in the City where I work, isn't such a bit deal for a company which already has a big presence in Europe. I'd be more concerned if I was working for an American bank, since they might swap a lot of their operations to Europe (and JP Morgan has already said as much). But the City as a whole could go into long term decline. There are a lot of unknowns about this, so it's too early to (1) emigrate or (2) hang myself, but the fact that we have all of this uncertainty is so unnecessary, and it will last for years. And if they screw things up, the country will be a complete mess. So I'm not too happy.

It's interesting in that it leaves politics wide open now. I really could not bring myself to vote for a Conservative party run by Boris Johnson, and I am a dyed in the wool Conservative. I can't imagine too many people in my situation will view them very favourably either. I dunno, I might be moving to Dublin or Edinburgh, since Scottish independence also looks inevitable now.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
ericthecleric wrote:
Nutcase Entertainment wrote:

You got something wrong, both side used a lot of false factoids and deformed truths, not just the leave side.

What Nutcase said is right. Both sides ran horrible negative campaigns, and it went on too long. It was difficult to find reliable facts. I'm glad it's over.

But the Leave campaign flirted pretty close to demonising foreigners, which is not exactly very nice. Remember that immigration was their big argument, despite the fact that all the stuff about immigrants clogging up the NHS and welfare was basically untrue (actually, it's the old age pensioners, who mostly voted to leave, doing that). The Remain camp pretty much just told us we'd all be f&+~ed if we left. And that may yet come to pass.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Nutcase Entertainment wrote:


The "Money of the World" part, the USA would be one hell of a mess without it.
No. Just, no. Actually, being "the money of the world" causes more problems for the USA than it solves, because it means that the USA has less fiscal flexibility than it ordinarily would.

No, that's not correct. Everyone using your currency means you can borrow more cheaply. Which is worth a hell of a lot of money to the US Governnment.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Nutcase Entertainment wrote:


The USA can be a big power because they don't have to worry about their trillions dollards of debts, well, to a degree...
Neither does the EU, or for that matter, did Britain as part of the EU. When you borrow in your own currency, you can pick whatever rate you like to pay it back (it's called "devaluation"). This particular dog won't hunt.

Yeah, the currency thing is a bit more complicated with respect to the euro. The big problem the European countries have is that they can't print money to pay their bills, like an ordinary sovereign nation can in the face of a default in the domestic currency. The ECB controls all of that and is basically forbidden to do it.

The Exchange

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
Insane KillMaster wrote:
TheMountain wrote:
What really bugs me is that the northern counties voted overwhelmingly leave, when a great deal of their funding comes from the EU.
The strings attached to said fundings could be part of the reasons.

No, it wasn't. It was ignorance of the benefits themselves.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
Treppa wrote:

I was shocked to hear that exiting the EU requires that any agreements between the exiting country and the EU be ratified by unanimous agreement of all the remaining EU members.

Yeah, this could take a couple of weeks.

Well, they don't want to make it easy.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
WormysQueue wrote:
Sissyl wrote:
The UK has been a good part of it.
In fact, it has never been a "good" part of it. From the very start, England /Britain was only in it for very selfish reasons especially to sabotage any effort to politically unite a continent nearly destroyed by all its independent nations.

No, we joined because in the 1970s the UK economy was on the ropes and joining a common market seemed a good idea. We tried to join in the 60s but DeGaulle refused to allow us in. And the UK wasn't a wrecker any more than any other country defending its national interests, like the French and their agricultural subsidies and so on.

Quote:
So in fact, the EU would be much better off without Britain if not for the fact that politicians in every country have made a sport out of blaming the EU for all the crap they were responsible for by themselves, and now are wondering why the voters have gotten the impression that the EU is a very dumb idea.

Not necessarily. It unbalances power away from the bloc which might be more business-friendly.

Quote:
Quote:
But it gives rise to some 50-80% of national laws, making it very questionable in democratic terms.
Ironically, what makes it questionable in democratic terms is that the nations weren't willing to let go off their power. Yeah we can vote for a european parliament, but national governments all over Europe made sure that this parliament has nearly no power whatsoever. So the one thing, we as european citizens have any say in has mainly held irrelevant, while our national leaders made one dumb decision after another only to blame the EU for it.

I'm not sure where the 50-80% number comes from - I suspect that is not correct. And the fact that nations retain their sovereignty to negotiate within the EU club, as voted for by their local electorates, doesn't seem problematic to me.

Quote:
I recommend everyone to read Christopher Clarks excellent "The Sleepwalkers: How Europe Went to War in 1914" because all people actually thinking that Brexit was a good idea should be aware that the Sleepwalkers are still ruling.

This I do agree with. Damaging the EU when it has secured peace in Europe for decades, especially when we have a newly assertive Russia on the doorstep and economic dislocation at home, seems daft.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Treppa wrote:
Aubrey the Malformed wrote:
The date of this is currently a hot topic of discussion. The EU are saying "Get on with it" while Leavers are saying "Let's leave it a while, have some informal chit-chat, work out a deal". We'll see. I thought Cameron's leaving speech indicated he was going to declare Article 50 at the upcoming summit next week, but commentators seem to think otherwise.

The EU knows that financial markets hate uncertainty and are liable to be volatile until the exit is a done deal.

It's all about markets.

So you're suggesting that Cameron is trying to hold the EU hostage by prolonging the uncertainty?

That makes sense, in a sick and twisted way, but I suspect it will end up hurting the City as much or even more. Which will make one of his core constituencies VERY unhappy.

No, the victorious side don't want to invoke Article 50 because they know that the negotiations will be a lot harder than they pretended. So they want more time to get a deal. Cameron's views aren't known right now. However, it is possible that the EU will refuse to discuss the matter until they do declare under Article 50. And yes, any delay will be destabilising.

The Exchange

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
The Raven Black wrote:
Rogar Valertis wrote:

Democracy is the "power of the people" (literally), the reason the remain option lost is the elites ruling the EU and GB made it clear they have no notion of the worsening living condition of most of the citizens inhabiting those States.

What happens now remains to be seen, but at least the british people has the chance of deciding for itself. Certainly the Germany led EU won't be able to do with GB what it did with Greece last year (it's basically open economic warfare there, with Greece being sold piece by piece to foreigners, most of them, German).

I think you underestimate the ability of the elite to influence any election, including this referendum.

To believe it a pure unadulterated expression of the will of the people (strangely opposed to the elite BTW, are they not people too ?) is unrealistic IMO

It's also worth pointing out that we didn't get the referendum because the people willed, or even wanted it especially. It was to solve an internal party problem for David Cameron with some of his Conservative backbenchers. Nor were the people ever offered decent information during the campaign, with both sides trying to pull the wool over their eyes. And now we have Brexit, suddenly we are in no hurry to invoke Article 50 after all, which lies entirely within the gift of the government.

That said, I think a referendum is a lousy way to run politics. We have the elites so we can get on with our lives, and vote them out if we don't like them. And a lot of those decrying the elite are populists with some really terrible ideas, and often anti-democratic to boot. In fact, the notion of "the elite" is simply a political tool in itself to manipulate the electorate and undermine their faith in politicians - maybe a good tactic in the short term, but probably the route to disaster in the long term if it leads to populism. The referendum campaign was various bits of the elite calling the other side "the elite". Unedifying and dishonest all round.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Aubrey the Malformed wrote:
Actually, I suspect for much the same reason we hang on to the Falklands: the people want to remain British and it would look really bad politically if we cast them off. The position is a bit of an irrelevance now, we hardly have any Navy left to take advantage of it.
Not much Navy, but a sky full of planes,....

Really? I assume you aren't referring to the RAF, then? The UK has a reasonable sized military by European standards but it's actually pretty small nevertheless, given how pitiful most European forces are, and much smaller than it was a couple of decades ago. It's pretty clear, for example, there is no way we could recapture the Falklands now.

The Exchange

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber

Actually, I suspect for much the same reason we hang on to the Falklands: the people want to remain British and it would look really bad politically if we cast them off. The position is a bit of an irrelevance now, we hardly have any Navy left to take advantage of it.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
RainyDayNinja wrote:
Fingers crossed for "Texit" next.

I didn't know Tunisia was in the EU.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
Mortis Incognito wrote:
Smarnil le couard wrote:


UK and EU have two years (according to the treaties, no more and no less) to nail down a settlement for brexit. A bit short to count on a massive culling of the brexit crowd, isn'it ?

The two years doesn't start until the official notification of intent to leave is given to the EU, so it's likely to be more than that. Not saying it'll be decades, but I wouldn't be expecting us to be leaving on 24th June 2018.

On top of that, if all EU member states agree, the 2 years could be extended.

Personally (and somewhat jokingly), I'm wondering whether Canada would accept the UK as a new province.

The date of this is currently a hot topic of discussion. The EU are saying "Get on with it" while Leavers are saying "Let's leave it a while, have some informal chit-chat, work out a deal". We'll see. I thought Cameron's leaving speech indicated he was going to declare Article 50 at the upcoming summit next week, but commentators seem to think otherwise.

The Exchange

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
Rogar Valertis wrote:

Democracy is the "power of the people" (literally), the reason the remain option lost is the elites ruling the EU and GB made it clear they have no notion of the worsening living condition of most of the citizens inhabiting those States.

What happens now remains to be seen, but at least the british people has the chance of deciding for itself. Certainly the Germany led EU won't be able to do with GB what it did with Greece last year (it's basically open economic warfare there, with Greece being sold piece by piece to foreigners, most of them, German).

A lot of the Leave campaign were the elite too. Boris Johnson is an Old Etonian millionaire, and Nigel Farrage is also a millionaire, having made his money in the City as a money broker. And I don't think for a moment this will address any of the problems that are currently affecting the European working man. Quite the opposite actually, since if it mean lower GDP growth there will be less welfare to go around. And the Leave campaign was totally incoherent on the economic, at one point saying we can engage in free trade and all enjoy lower prices and at the other point saying that the EU stopped us bailing out failing industries with taxpayers money (in case no one noticed, letting failing industries go is actually free trade in action). The British people won't even get to decide what sort of Brexit we will actually get, since that wasn't a question on the ballot paper - that will be a stitch-up in Parliament.

The whole campaign was stupid, didn't address the real issues, and was a victory for bigotry and stupidity. Much like the referendum in Greece, which at least the government there had the good grace to ignore.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber
The Sword wrote:

I am in the UK and very sad about it.

75% of under 25's wanted to remain.
53% of under 50's wanted to remain.

63% of over 65's wanted to leave.

We have basically been pulled out by retirees that have their great pensions and paid for houses while those having to deal with the ramifications got out voted.

And the EU is accused of being undemocratic?

Yup. All of those with nothing much to lose f~~&ed over those with plenty to lose.

The Exchange

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber

Yeah, no offence, I'm a bit f&$@ing fed up with slogans.

1 to 50 of 8,714 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.