h a l f b a k e r yLike you could do any better.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Come the day, login into YouGuv, choose to be inny or
an outey.
If you choose inny you don't need a visa to go to the
continent, get to keep on with EU science projects
and so on, get duty frees etc.
If you are an outey, you get independence from all
that EU stuff.
Optional for innies
is pay by Euro in the UK (but only
by bank card).
Space crime
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-49457912 law applied on a per individual, rather than per geography, basis [calum, Aug 27 2019]
Wiki: How to Start Your Own Country
https://en.wikipedi...rt_Your_Own_Country How To Start Your Own Country is a six-part BBC Television documentary comedy series aired between August and September 2005. The show was presented by British writer/comedian Danny Wallace and followed his quest to start his own country in his flat in Bow, London. The micronation he created was eventually named "Lovely". [Dub, Oct 03 2019]
IMDB: Passport to Pimlico (1949)
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0041737/ // Residents of a part of London declare independence when they discover an old treaty. This leads to the need for a "Passport to Pimlico". // [Dub, Oct 03 2019]
[link]
|
|
// get independence from all that EU stuff. // |
|
|
... and Calais, Aquitaine and Anjou ? |
|
|
If I were an innie, would I get to keep my human rights, and
other mod. cons? |
|
|
You should just be required to have your belly
button examined at all border crossings. Innies get
EU benefits; outies get Brexit benefits. Elective
conversion surgery is always available for those
unhappy with their existing configuration. |
|
|
//would I get to keep my human rights// - if you're
referring to the rights and obligations you have
arising from the UK's membership of the European
Court of Human Rights (ECHR, established under the
European Convention on Human Rights (also ECHR)),
then the answer is 'yes', whichever side you're on,
because the ECHRs are not part of the European
Union and exist under a separate legislative
framework. So, despite frothing-at-the-mouth Brexit
supporters ranting at these strange foreign human
rights (although the UK was a principal author of the
ECHR) encroaching on their ability to be nasty to
others, Brexit will make no difference in this area. |
|
|
I thought that while in the EU you had heuman
rights. Ha |
|
|
and you Beata believe it. |
|
|
iirc, being a signatory to the EConHR and therefore
subject to jurisdiction of the ECofHR is a
precondition to membership of the EU, so while the
mouth-frothers will be able to continue
m.-f.ing for a while, leaving the EU removes an obstacle
to leaving the ECHRs, allowing them
to dream still of being able to be mean to brown people
without legal repercussions (this is
particularly true of the current prime minister, who made
much show of wanting to leave the
ECHRs, primarily because (a) they made her job harder
and (b) she kept fucking up
compliance). |
|
|
The idea itself is, I feel, just a worked example of the
"what if you could choose what laws
you are required to comply with?" thought experiment /
stoner discourse. The nice thing
about this example is that the EU was not really
concerned with the realms of criminal
activity (at least, not primarily) so adopting a maximally
granular approach to EU
membership doesn't run into mismatches about the right
to get biffed in the beezer. |
|
|
We can take a lead from the US Tech Giants by having for
each and every person in the UK a
file, the primary purpose of which is to record what their
chosen jurisdictional framework is.
This sort of colossal IT project is of course no problem for
the govt. to manage, not least of
all because there is the option of C&Ping the Chinese
Social Credit Score system and sticking
a crown on it. |
|
|
Anyway, the reason for the file is to allow the state to
provide the infrastructure for
consumer- sorry, individual-led jurisdictional compliance
and then make parts of it available
to commercial organisations who are then able to bear
the admin burden of compliance (just
as admin burden of VAT is borne by companies, while (by
and large) the cost is borne by
consumers). For example, the Brexit-Elect will see prices
for products which have WTO
tariffs or bilateral-agreement tariffs attached where as
the Brexit-Preterite will not have to
worry about whether their new kettle has a plug on it or
not. |
|
|
In this model, for the Brexit-Preterite the state acts as a
middle man between the consumer
and the EU. For example, the state will fulfill the terms
of the four freedoms insofar as the
state can, but, when the Brexit-Preterite state-within-a-
state falls into financial ruin, the
state proper will enforce EU-mandated crippling
austerity. As the state has shown itself perfectly capable
of directing austerity so that it harms societal groupings
that were even before austerity less likely to vote for the
Conservative party, I don't doubt that it has the initiative
to be only slightly more targeted about how it metes this
out. Especially if we C&P the Chinese SCS
system. |
|
|
These primarily technical solutions have one critical
added bonus: they allow the side by side
comparison of the Elect and Preterite models and, if
we're willing to take an anti-Calvinist
approach to things, we might allow individuals to make a
(limited) number of switches
between the two groups, until one group reaches say 75%
of the population and, having tried
the both options, this supermajority of better informed
Crown subjects is enough to fix the
UK's position with reference to Brexit. |
|
|
Clever - rather than the traditional top-down means
of setting laws, you're proposing a sort of organic,
bottom-up clustering of emergent jurisdictional
frameworks. I think these will naturally move from a
chaotic soup of many bespoke jurisdictions to just a
few, as people decide to go along with their friends,
bow to commercial pressures ("5% off if you adopt the
John Lewis jurisdiction while in store!"), or are
forced into one by their employers ("You can only
work here if you follow these laws"). |
|
|
This could get messy with families and immigrants
and Gibraltar... |
|
|
I picture a caste system kind of framework growing
by default. |
|
|
Some people will choose a framework with less taxes. How will they be selectively denied the related degree of government services? If you join a framework with 50% lower healthcare taxes does the system automatically put you at a lower priority for health care? What about roads? If you want a framework with less government inspection of eating establishments are your complaints about seeing rats in the kitchen ignored? If your framework offers much smaller education costs will your business be forbidden to hire people from well-funded schools? |
|
|
// If you join a framework with 50% lower healthcare taxes does the system automatically put you at a lower priority for health care? // |
|
|
Yes. It's called "The U.S.A." |
|
|
It's part of Greece (small island in the Aegean, north-east of Crete, one of the Dodecanese), so will remain in the EU (until Greece crashes out of the Euro zone because the Krauts are fed up with picking up the tab). |
|
|
Oh sorry, roads not Rhodes. Pay by use, run by a not-for-profit company independent of central government. |
|
|
// If you want a framework with less government inspection of eating establishments are your complaints about seeing rats in the kitchen ignored? // |
|
|
What, like they are now ? On the plus side, you can take your own .22 rifle and personally address the problem while waiting for your meal. |
|
|
// If your framework offers much smaller education costs will your business be forbidden to hire people from well-funded schools? // |
|
|
No; they pay higher taxes because they had better education, so you have to pay proportionately more for their services. |
|
|
No problem there, once Britain invades and conquers Spain. |
|
|
// to be mean to brown people without legal repercussions (this is particularly true of the current prime minister, // |
|
|
That seems unfair; the current prime minister doesn't display such prejudice, in that she's mean to everyone without fear or favour - not just the heavily suntanned. |
|
|
Can't you guys stick to talking about our politics like you
always do? Brexit, Shmexit |
|
|
Regrettably, the Trump Blocker filter ( NetLingo -
chrome web
store) means I have less than no information about US
politics. |
|
|
Paradoxically, even with the Trump filter on, the
Trump filter page is still visible on the Chrome Store... |
|
|
// How will they be selectively denied the related degree
of government services? If you join a framework with 50%
lower healthcare taxes does the system automatically put
you at a lower priority for health care? What about
roads?// So, not a little part of my commentary was
nibbling around the amazing stupidity of Her Maj's
Government's proposals for a series of *as yet not extant*
technical solutions to the otherwise intractable problem
of enforcing customs checks when you are unable to
impose a hard border between Ireland and Norn Iron). |
|
|
But! if we are willing to subject ourselves to a Xianjiang-
like high tech surveillance state it should be really rather
easy to ensure that: (1) ERDF-funded roads are
accessible to only the Brexit-Preterite (which should not
be a problem as the areas of the UK with ERDF-funded
roads (viz. Scotland) were significantly in favour of
remaining as part of the EU) (2) a lower priority for
healthcare is also immensely doable: you queue here for
the Brexit-Preterite NHS and here, by the bins, for the
US-model Brexit-Elect private health service. 3. The
EU doesn't bother its arse too much with primary and
secondary education (US: K-12, I think) but yes tons of
good research cash is EU-backed and budding PhDs can
choose their status to suit their chances of getting that
funding. (4) I don't think that the EU gives a franco-
germanic fuck about restaurant inspection - to them
capers and rat shit are all the same - because the EU is
concerned with its four fundamental freedoms within its
borders. It is a trading bloc, it has always been a trading
bloc. The social policy stuff is around ensuring that there
a broadly unified approach to controllable issues which
will affect whether people, goods, capital, establishment
can move with the minimum of friction (recognising that
geographic and cultural barriers are a significant issue,
they focus on what can be managed). Restaurant
inspection is what might be termed a devolved issue. |
|
|
// its four fundamental freedoms within its borders. // |
|
|
Freedom for the french to have their own way on everything. |
|
|
Freedom for the Germans to sit back and quietly analyse their two previous failures (the Schlieffen plan and Fall Gelb) so that they can eventually go for the "Third Time Lucky" option (Hint: don't fight a European land war on two fronts). |
|
|
Freedom for politicians and bureaucrats to eat big dinners and travel everywhere First Class at everyone else's expense. |
|
|
Freedom for the spanish to put the entire Atlantic ocean through a fine-mesh net, extract all the marine life down to diatom size, and then sell the resulting slurry as "paella". |
|
|
^ Yes, but what about the bad points? |
|
|
Belgium will continue to exist. |
|
|
//Choose your own apres-Brexit status//
Ah, the great illusion! Regardless of whether you are an inny or an outey, you will still be governed by the government. Faceless bureaucrats & populist politicians will still control your lives & demand that you either give them a good chunk of your wealth every year or be sent to prison. Choice of governments is no choice at all. So there! With knobs on! :) |
|
|
Hey! I'm a bureaucrat and I'm not faceless! |
|
|
// //would I get to keep my human rights// - if you're referring to the rights and obligations you have arising from the UK's membership of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR, established under the European Convention on Human Rights (also ECHR)), then the answer is 'yes', whichever side you're on, because the ECHRs are not part of the European Union and exist under a separate legislative framework. So, despite frothing-at-the-mouth Brexit supporters ranting at these strange foreign human rights (although the UK was a principal author of the ECHR) encroaching on their ability to be nasty to others, Brexit will make no difference in this area.// |
|
|
As an addenendum to what calum said, I have a referendum communication - a pamphlet addressed and delivered to me. It's called:
"NOT SURE WHICH WAY TO VOTE ON 23 JUNE?" |
|
|
On the back page there's a set of quotes, including one from Sir Richard DearLove, former Chief of MI6:
"Brexit would bring two potentially important security gains: the ability to dump the European Convention on Human Rights ... and, more importantly, greater control over immigration from the European Union." |
|
|
So there are several points which could be made about that, but I'll restrict myself to two: |
|
|
1) That this guys career was in politics and spying rather than porn disproves nominative determinism to my satisfaction.
2) He may be an m.f.-er, but he's an m.f-er with significant influence in the department of being nasty to others. |
|
|
You mean he's also worked in HR? |
|
|
Just because someone is or has been involved in HR doesn't mean that they're automatically a petty, vicious, friendless misanthropic anally-retentive xenophobic psychopath with delusions of mediocrity. |
|
|
Then again, a three metre long quadrupedal mammal covered in orange and black striped fur and with huge teeth and long sharp claws might not be a tiger; but the statistical evidence suggests that it probably is. The only way to be sure is to see if it tries to kill you. That will narrow the error bars quite a lot. |
|
|
Further evidence that NASA has multifarious benefits: the
recent commission of the first Space Crime (see link) has
revealed that there are developed world governments who
are willing to countenance and implement a protocol for the
application of law on a per individual basis. Our dream here
can become a reality! |
|
|
I am interested in how the proposal put forward in this idea would be enacted in the case of environmental law. For example, thanks to the EU, British beaches are, for the most part, no longer covered in raw sewage. The only solution possible that ensures that, post-Brexit, 'remainers' continue to enjoy the benefits of EU membership in this way without conferring those same benefits on 'leavers' is to retain the existing environmental laws that keep our beaches clean, but at the same time have beaches patrolled by wardens who fling faeces in the direction of these leavers. |
|
|
// British beaches are, for the most part, no longer covered in raw sewage. // |
|
|
There are worse things than raw sewage; for example, illegal immigrants keep showing up on the south coast. |
|
|
Steady on, [8th]; that's the sort of remark that gives bigots a bad
name: you're not going to assimilate many people with *that*
sort of attitude. |
|
|
Sadly, there seems to be a great deal of irrational and ill-considered prejudice against bigots. What's worse, there seems to be no hesitation in voicing these ideas loudly and in public, which is quite frankly pretty disgusting. Other groups are protected from discrimination by laws and customs, but no-one seems to give a damn about bigots. Shameful, we call it. It's high time something was done. |
|
|
hippo's shit-in-the-kisser approach to the consistently
granular application of the Brexit-elect / preterite split
has many benefits, not least that it will create jobs, not
just for jobby wheechers themselves but also to ensure
that a quality British product is hurled into the pusses of
the beachgoing Brexit-elect. Yes, farms full of free range
gammon-fed Tories, chinos heaped round their ankles,
straining to eject onto the Lincolnshire turf hard black
pellets of keech, British, blue passport-having keech,
which will
be scooped up by British farm labourers, fed into the
British supply chain and, ultimately, chucked in the
British faces of those
Britishers who want this. |
|
|
The other option is a geographically based self sorting
approach with slurry blasted indiscriminately all over
beaches in Brexit-voting constituencies, with the Brexit
elect presumably all to happy to schlep across the country
for the opportunity to squelch shite between their toes,
waving flies away while
slurping on the strawberry mivvy that they got for three rat
pelts and a furtive tug at the ice cream man's penis. A
grand day out. |
|
|
The latest good news is that parliament may be suspended. |
|
|
We consider this excellent. Brexit or no Brexit, there should be sufficient supplies of chairs and rope to suspend all current and prospective MPs from lamp posts in the highways and byways of Westminster. |
|
|
Perhaps some could be suspended around the Tower of London, so that the ravens can peck at their eyeballs. That would have the additional benefit of being interesting to tourists, who are always eager to partake of fine old English traditions. Placing the heads of traitors on pikes on Tower Green is well overdue for a revival. |
|
|
//parliament may be suspended.// |
|
|
I think this is more face-value than reported. I'll bet the hot
air inside has finally built to levels allowing significant
buoyancy. |
|
|
Comes with a small houses of parliament, with
an off switch. |
|
|
Disappointed this is not Schrödinger's Brexit |
|
|
<Starts charging main weapons systems so as to be ready if [tc] fails to correct the mis-spelling of "Schrödinger" within the grace period allowed/> |
|
|
The mistake was in ever having the referendum, it seems,
and that's surely on Cameron. Nothing like this should
ever have been contemplated without a significantly
larger than 50 percent base of support. After all, even if
things were going that way, they could have waited for a
much larger majority in Parliament to attempt it. |
|
|
On the other hand, what's really at stake here, and surely
in the States, is does the nation state even matter.
Should it even be a construct. Significant percentages
of us seem oddly for that in some ways (e.g. no borders)
while oddly against that (god forbid Facebook should have
its own currency). |
|
|
The [UK] will do fine either way, in the short to medium term. |
|
|
// If you want to solve international problems without resorting to violence // |
|
|
But what if you like violence and see it as a rapid and expedient solution ? |
|
|
depends on your definition of democratic. The Senate and
Electoral College (and even states govts. themselves) are
widely viewed as un-democratic, but they are helping to
preserve the union by preventing tyrannies of majorities. |
|
|
For the EU to have a long term chance it needs a lot more
revenue sharing from the rich states. In this climate that is
certainly not going to happen. |
|
|
if there's one thing that unites all people it is that other
people have to do their fucken job :) |
|
|
// I don't like throwing whole families into poverty // |
|
|
You should try to get invited on one of [MaxwellBuchanan]'s Winter Wanderings. When it snows, he orders out the coach-and-six and tours a small portion of his property portfolio. When he finds any residents who are behind with their rent, the men-at-arms following behind turf the occupants out into the road; their possessions, if any, are loaded onto carts in lieu of rent and interest payments. |
|
|
He particularly enjoys the process if the tenants are widows with children; he spends hours in front of a full-length mirror in his top hat and tailcoat, practicing his MUHWHAHAHAHAs .... |
|
|
Boris loses majority, kind people in white coats
and large butterfly nets are helping him look for
it |
|
|
Hopefully there will be an election. There are several possibilities, all of them wretchedly bad for the established parties. Corbyn might be handed the Poison Chalice; Boris might get a thumping majority; best would be another hung parliament with the Brexit party holding the balance of power. |
|
|
Remember how well the Brexit party did at the Euro elections ? |
|
|
" I see dead people ... Walking around like regular people. They don't see each other. They only see what they want to see. They don't know they're dead." |
|
|
If anyone's interested, we're running a special deal this week on canned foods and shotguns ... |
|
|
The problem is, now that they've prevented Brexit (which
they have), they instead have a large ungovernable population
who have been told that their votes do not matter. This is
far, far worse than any no-deal Brexit. Nobody is going to win
out of this. |
|
|
I vote going back to the normal British politics,
with some mp droning on about subclause 15b
in a fisheries act... |
|
|
//UK politics should never, ever be this interesting//
Indeed - this is the most depressing outcome of the whole Brexit omnishambles, that people are interested in, and following every labyrinthine twist and turn of, politics. They are doing this not out of an academic interest in the process or out of admiration for the noble personalities involved, but because they have to be, to see what kind of shit-smeared wool is being pulled over their eyes, to see what self-serving lies and spineless changes of direction politicians are making, to see what new divisions and hatred are being brewed up, and to see what new chaos the country is being plunged into. |
|
|
There are precedents - the events of 1639-1641, which were followed by what Simon Scharma eloquently described as " ... a breakdown of deference of catastrophic proportions." |
|
|
This is a typical Black Swan. It's pretty much the end of a 300 year old system, and in a few years, possibly only months, the whole "landscape" will be changed beyond recognition. |
|
|
//after we're free of the poison, we can enjoy the benefits
of a new economic golden age, nationalise the railways,
build loads of new houses, fund public services - enjoy all
the benefits of a revitalised and reinvigorated economy. But
we need to sort out the damaging toxicity first.// |
|
|
when you're done, are you available for a few minor Middle
Eastern skirmishes that need solving? |
|
|
And who will trust the result ? |
|
|
Thankfully, the credibility of the majority of governmental institutions has been damaged beyond repair, to the point where they will soon be unable to function at all; they're pretty much crippled now. Facts, facts, facts. Policy must be fact-based and be able to demonstrate an academically rigorous methodology, and be externally reviewed and validated. There must be no room for opinions, beliefs or ideology. |
|
|
// a few minor Middle Eastern skirmishes that need solving? // |
|
|
Very quick and easy to solve, by means of a few well-placed MIRVs. Simply vapourize Jerusalem and Mecca. That neatly removes many irresolvable sources of contention. |
|
|
The Vatican is more problematic, but a couple of Davy Crocket sized tac-nukes should do the job. Care will be needed not to damage any of the really historic stuff in the vicinity. |
|
|
Well done. You have recognized the new world order, and - more importantly - how it operates. What's more, the traditional institutions are uniquely vulnerable to that class of attack and they have (nor can they have) any effective defence against it because of they way they have evolved; the environment for which they were suited has been destroyed. |
|
|
// the whole working of government needs to be moved to working like this. // |
|
|
It does; indeed, it will. That means the end for politics and politicians, of course, but nobody will mourn their passing. |
|
|
A public enquiry can establish "the facts", but in a bigger sense it's too late. There is no way back. In the same way that tanks, fluoroposphonyl chemical weapons and 3D printing cannot be "un-invented", it is not now possible to return to the status ad quem, no more than it is possible to go back to crop rotation under the three-field system or regular stagecoach services. |
|
|
The world as you knew it has gone. Adapt or die. |
|
|
If you do find a way to cram the large glowing mushroom cloud back into the nice shiny little plutonium sphere you had a few microseconds ago, we'd be fascinated to know how you do it. |
|
|
To sum up: "We are the Borg. Resistance is Futile. Your will be Assimilated. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own.Freedom is irrelevant, self determination is irrelevant. You must comply. Your life as you know it is over. " |
|
|
We now return you to your regular programming ... |
|
|
The real question is whether there is anyone prepared to pick up a sword* or an axe and decapitate the designated victims. |
|
|
Thankfully, the answer to that is also undoubtedly "yes" If you put up a sign at the main gate of the Tower saying "WANTED: Executioner to cut the heads off politicians. No experience necessary. £35,000 p.a." the queue would start at the portcullis and end somewhere around Putney bridge. |
|
|
After all, £35,000 is only about £2900 a month; quite a lot of people would cheerfully pay that to get a chance to trim bits off some vermin. |
|
|
*The sword is reserved for royalty; traitors get the axe, so get out there with your hatchet and practice on some firewood. It's all in the backswing. |
|
|
I have a confession to make: I am one of those people who has
made money from Brexit. No, I did not vote for Brexit, nor fund
Brexit, nor surreptitiously organize nor encourage Brexit, but I did
see Brexit coming, and made financial dispositions accordingly. |
|
|
This was possible because the roots of Brexit are much deeper
than any scheme by evil plutocrats - though, of course, evil
plutocrats have been involved. And, no, I'm not just talking about
the GFC; it goes further back than that. |
|
|
A clue can be found in the phrase "swivel-eyed loon" (or "swivel",
for short), which is the most telling of the epithets used by
Remainers against Leavers. A related clue can be found in the
epithet "gammon". Some people have said that "gammon" is a
racist slur on white people, but that's not quite true. To be
gammon it is necessary, but not sufficient, to be white; to be
gammon you must also lose your cool: the resulting distinctive
pink flush is what makes someone gammon. That cool/uncool
distinction is the clue. |
|
|
Just have everyone in the country fucking revote on
Brexit already. |
|
|
They're working on that, [Ray], they're working on it. |
|
|
Have you tried hocking Dutch tulips? |
|
|
//a cool/uncool-driven event and how that can be turned into
financial gain// |
|
|
"Indirectly" is the answer. That is, the gain came from
anticipating the outcome of the vote, and the anticipation came
from an awareness of a previously unacknowledged "iceberg" of
grievance, on the part of the uncool, against the cool. It was an
"iceberg" in the sense that it was mostly out of sight. |
|
|
Declare HB a Nation State, issue passports and claim dual citizenship?
Passport to Pimlico, anyone? Jutta as monarch, Danny Wallace as foreign secretary, etc... |
|
|
Oooo ! Oooo ! <Frantic arm-waving/> Can we have the "Defence" portfolio ? |
|
|
[8th of 7], naturally... and a separate (bigger budget) for offence, too |
|
|
Hey, I just realised that if we crash out, we don't
have to do the Eurovision song
contest. No more GB....nil points |
|
|
You've never "had" to do it ... it's like doing the Three Peaks challenge for charity, the pointless* suffering is an important and inherent part. |
|
|
The difference is, with the 3 peaks challenge, the pointless suffering is restricted to the participants |
|
| |