Reply to: Breixteers, how is this increasing opportunity?

[Mordac]

But surely you know that the UK taxpayers/government pay a fortune for the unelected monarchy and the head of the monarchy has control over our government, our laws etc.
Sure they might be a massive benefit to the country, but that’s irrelevant, the UK gives these unelected people our money.

She's not even allowed to vote, so she has less control than you or I. She gives Royal Assent to Acts of Parliament, but convention dictates she has to do so, and would even have to sign an Act to abolish the monarchy (and here's one Komrade Korbyn prepared earlier...)

[original PM]

But surely you know that the UK taxpayers/government pay a fortune for the unelected monarchy and the head of the monarchy has control over our government, our laws etc.
Sure they might be a massive benefit to the country, but that’s irrelevant, the UK gives these unelected people our money.

Yes I am aware there is a cost to the Monarchy....

[Mordac]

Just like any civil servant is appointed in the UK so are civil servants appointed in the EU. Why do you have a problem with that?

I don't, I was merely pointing out that the statement "all EU officials are elected" isn't correct. Those that are also MEPs (such as Barnier) are elected to parliament, but not all EU officials are MEPs.

[WTFH]

Having a monarch does seem to be a bit old school however I believe our royal family are actually an asset to the UK.

Others may disagree though...

But surely you know that the UK taxpayers/government pay a fortune for the unelected monarchy and the head of the monarchy has control over our government, our laws etc.
Sure they might be a massive benefit to the country, but that’s irrelevant, the UK gives these unelected people our money.

[original PM]

No it's the Sovereign in the UK's case, which is not even appointed, but inherited that title which is even worse.

But going back to the president of the European Commission. That person is appointed according to procedures to which the democratically elected governments of the UK and every other EU country agreed.
(I agree the process could be more transparent and democratic though)

Like the other 6 monarchies in the EU?

Monarchies in Europe - Wikipedia

Who all seem to do quite well.

Having a monarch does seem to be a bit old school however I believe our royal family are actually an asset to the UK.

Others may disagree though...

Ultimately for me though politicians rarely agree at the best of times - and when they do it is normally for their own self serving purposes - so the less of them in my life the better!

[Eirikur]

Junker is President of the European Commission

Not sure any of the UK civil servants will ever have the tile President of the UK.

No it's the Sovereign in the UK's case, which is not even appointed, but inherited that title which is even worse.

But going back to the president of the European Commission. That person is appointed according to procedures to which the democratically elected governments of the UK and every other EU country agreed.
(I agree the process could be more transparent and democratic though)

[original PM]

Just like any civil servant is appointed in the UK so are civil servants appointed in the EU. Why do you have a problem with that?

Junker is President of the European Commission

Not sure any of the UK civil servants will ever have the tile President of the UK.

[Eirikur]

Elected (some of them*) they may be, but the nomination process is shocking. How else do you explain the "election" of J-CJ? He just happened to be the choice of the largest group of MEPs.

*Barnier wasn't elected, other than as an MEP. He was appointed to his current position. As were most of the other "officials".

Just like any civil servant is appointed in the UK so are civil servants appointed in the EU. Why do you have a problem with that?

[Mordac]

Pray tell, what are the downsides of being in the EU? All we hear is about the 'corrupt, unelected officials' with little substance or facts and mostly falsehoods. All EU officials are elected, based on rules that the UK government was party to creating.

Elected (some of them*) they may be, but the nomination process is shocking. How else do you explain the "election" of J-CJ? He just happened to be the choice of the largest group of MEPs.

*Barnier wasn't elected, other than as an MEP. He was appointed to his current position. As were most of the other "officials".

[Whorty]

UK could remain a top-10 global economy in 2050 - despite Brexit

Let me get this straight, your first point is prominent remainers claim long term (10+ years) things will settle down, then you link to something that refers to 2050. Now, I know 2050 is technically 10+ years, but then it's also 20+ years, and 30+ years. So, not really what you claimed initially then is it?

Nothing in your article to suggest that "Even most prominent Remainers agree" either. It's a PwC report, forecasting 30 years ahead (I didn't think Brexiters believed in forecasts!) and only one person is actually named in the report and nothing is said about his voting during the referendum.

Apart from that, you're spot on soldier boy. I guess this is why you find it easier to attack other people's posts rather than trying to join the actual debate as you have nothing of value to say.

[BlasterBates]

So to summarise, if the UK swallows a really sh*te deal it can prevent a slide that would send it from its current 5th or 6th place to languish somewhere outside the top 10.

The bar for success is very low. The question is will it still be in the G7 in 10 years time. It doesn't look like it.

[Cirrus]

UK could remain a top-10 global economy in 2050 - despite Brexit

I'm begining to see the problem, PosterBhoy. Maybe you are not a liar. Maybe you just were always off sick when they did comprehension at school.

Firstly your point was around 'prominent remainers'. Why do you think PwC represent this group?

Secondly, the figures show a possible scenario of the UK GDP growing relatively more than eg France. What we are talking about is not the relative GDP growth of the UK but rather whether GDP and everything else will be worse than it would have been remaining inside the EU Bloc. It's not absolute figures we are talking about. Comprehension encourages you to weigh all the sentences and not just skim through looking for comforting words. That way you may notice "The UK’s position is sustained by its projected larger working-age share of the population than in most other advanced economies ". So they aren't saying we are going to lose out or not. They're just saying some figures showing our economy remains in the top ten.

So if this is all you have to support your claim, then I can see what the problem is, and you're not really going to correct it, given the desks at your old school are just too small for you to squeeze into now.

[AtW]

It's assuming a union with Narnia.

With free movement of Unicorns?

[Old Greg]

Could.

It's assuming a union with Narnia.

[AtW]

UK could remain a top-10 global economy in 2050 - despite Brexit

Could.