BrExit?

[harper lee]

^^Položaj im jednostavno više nije isti, a to je i dalje makar evropska sila sa nuklearnim arsenalom. Očekuješ da će sad da se zabavljaju sami sobom i grickaju kokice, da im ne pada na pamet da projektuju moć?

 

Ja rekoh već, Bler je 2007. naručio dva nosača aviona, poprilično velika, jedan je skoro gotov. To im nije padalo na pamet od 1970-i neke, sve do njega.

 

Ma jok, prosto ne ocekujem nikakve bitne promene po tom pitanju. Te price o tome kako ce sad da koriste svaku priliku da miniraju Uniju podrzavajuci separatisticke projekte po kontinentu su samo refleks onoga kako mi shvatamo politiku na Balkanu i savrseno su bez nekog racionalnog osnova.

[Dr Arslanagić]

[Tribun_Populi]

Ma jok, prosto ne ocekujem nikakve bitne promene po tom pitanju. Te price o tome kako ce sad da koriste svaku priliku da miniraju Uniju podrzavajuci separatisticke projekte po kontinentu su samo refleks onoga kako mi shvatamo politiku na Balkanu i savrseno su bez nekog racionalnog osnova.

Racionalan osnov itekako postoji, od ekonomije preko međunarodnog značaja i spoljnopolitičkog položaja do bezbednosnog okvira. Da će hteti u to nemam nimalo sumnje, neke stvari su jednostavno svuda iste, da li će moći e to je drugo pitanje koje zavisi i od druge strane.

[gospa buba]

ima li neko da u ovom trenutku knjizi finansijsku korist, dok traje ovo oce-nece kenjkanje? palo mi na pamet

[yolo]

ima li neko da u ovom trenutku knjizi finansijsku korist, dok traje ovo oce-nece kenjkanje? palo mi na pamet

 

 

kako nema, onolika amerika

[Dr Arslanagić]

ima li neko da u ovom trenutku knjizi finansijsku korist, dok traje ovo oce-nece kenjkanje? palo mi na pamet

 

trenutno burzovni špekulanti poput Soroša

[Dr Arslanagić]

[urkozamanje]

Mene recimo najvise interesuje koliko je UK kocio prijem balkanskih drzavica, i da li ovo uopste, a ako da kako utice na sanse da se mi umuljamo.

 

I EU i UK ce preziveti, bice posledica ali sumnjam da ce se EU raspasti - to baziram na ostroj retorici iz brisela i izgleda mi pokusaju da odvrate nekog sledeceg od slicnih genijalnih ideja. Vecina vas je mnogo bolje upoznata sa detaljima i prilikama al moj utisak je da je UK bio rog u vreci i konstantno forsirao neku posebnost, te mislim da je dobro da odu. Sto se mene tice, jedan igrac manje koji nesto ocekuje odavde.

[Prospero]

^^ Naravno da je #10 morao da ima plan, oni su na vlasti, makar još za kratko.

 

Mene zanima kako će ići trgovina večeras u Aziji i kako će funta sutra proći. Ako bude nestabilnosti možda će odlazak u Brisel i saopštavanje da se Britanija poziva na Čl.50 biti stabilizujuči faktor koji otklanja neizvesnost koju su uneli blentavi Brexitovci sa ovim "e, ajd videćemo do kraja godine šta ćemo".

Edited June 26, 2016 by Prospero

[Dr Arslanagić]

Mene recimo najvise interesuje koliko je UK kocio prijem balkanskih drzavica, i da li ovo uopste, a ako da kako utice na sanse da se mi umuljamo.

 

I EU i UK ce preziveti, bice posledica ali sumnjam da ce se EU raspasti - to baziram na ostroj retorici iz brisela i izgleda mi pokusaju da odvrate nekog sledeceg od slicnih genijalnih ideja. Vecina vas je mnogo bolje upoznata sa detaljima i prilikama al moj utisak je da je UK bio rog u vreci i konstantno forsirao neku posebnost, te mislim da je dobro da odu. Sto se mene tice, jedan igrac manje koji nesto ocekuje odavde.

 

UK nije kočila prijem jer je njima u suštini odgovaralo razvodnjavanje EU. Sa druge strane, nama se generalno nisu bavila, za nas su zaduženi Nemci.

[yolo]

Mene recimo najvise interesuje koliko je UK kocio prijem balkanskih drzavica, i da li ovo uopste, a ako da kako utice na sanse da se mi umuljamo.

 

 

zavisi na koje mislis, bili su jedan od glavnih pushera za bracu blgare sve u cilju kapitalizacije na jeftino kupljenom real estateu po raznim morima i planinama tamo

[Lord Protector]

Juče sam se video sa jednim prijateljem, Englezom koji živi u Bg. Čovek je konzervativac i dosta obrazovan. Glavni argument anti-imigrantske kampanje jeste taj da su pridošlice snizile cenu radne snage, što je verovatno pogodilo malo šire, a ne samo neke zanate. Britanija je u poslednjih 3 godine primila oko 900.000 imigranata.

 

Međutim, glavni momenat prilikom glasanja jeste upravo ta distanca koja postoji između elite u gradovima i običnog naroda u provinciji i manjim mestima i radnika i manje obrazovanih slojeva. Čak i nakon kampanje se održava prezir prema tim ljudima. Oni imaju svoje stavove koji možda baš nisu najbolje argumentovani, ali isto tako imaju i distancu prema eliti. Za elitu iz gradova i tu ekipu oko gardiana i indipendenta oni imaju izraz - "luvvies". Takvi Englezi su prilično arogantni i spremni su da uteraju svakome ko se postavi sa visine (što se u ovom slučaju i desilo). EU je skup nekih birokrata koji za njih nemaju nikakav legitimitet.

 

Dalje, tabloidni milje je tamo dosta rasprostranjen (što je ovde već primećeno). Sun ima tiraž od nekih 12 miliona, a dosta je čitan i Dejli ekpres (blizak UKIPu). Pomenuo mi je prijatelj i da je tamo najgledaniji neki sitkom koji se prikazuje još od 1967. godine i koji je apsolutno đubre.

 

Kada sam ga pitao u vezi ove peticije za ponavljanje referenduma on je rekao da to nema šanse da prođe, uz neki lakonski odgovor  - "to su potpisivali neki studenti iz Londona". Biće, naravno, debate oko toga.

 

Oko seljenja finansijskih usluga iz Londona on smatra da se to neće odigrati tako brzo i u nekom većem obimu, jer je London mnogo dugo jak finansijski centar i tu je sedište nekih važnih međunarodnih arbitraža za privredu.

 

Za Škote smatra da sada razumljivo dižu buku, ali kada bi došlo do glasanja odlučili bi da ostanu u UK.  

 

Ovde ima jedna kontradikcija koju bih voleo da se razjasni. Ako je deo konzervativne i izolacionističke elite u gradovima glasao isto kao siromašniji deo populacije u provinciji i na selu onda se ne može govoriti o njihovom sukobu, sukobu urbanog i ruralnog, bogatog i siromašnog, već o vertikalnoj podeljenosti celokupnog britanskog društva. Nešto drugo je u pitanju. Da nije sukob tradicionalnog i modernog, strah i premor od promena i integracija, čista inercija dela populacije? 

Edited June 26, 2016 by slow

[Dr Arslanagić]

^^ Naravno da je #10 morao da ima plan, oni su na vlasti, makar još za kratko.

 

 

 

 

[Prospero]

In this Brexit vote, the poor turned on an elite who ignored them
Ian Jack

The neglected suddenly discovered they could use their EU referendum vote to get back at those who had never listened to their grievances


Shipbuilders in Sunderland in the 1980s.

Photograph: Sally and Richard Greenhill / Al/Alamy

Saturday 25 June 2016 10.55 BST
Last modified on Sunday 26 June 2016 09.23 BST

Just as the pound was reaching its peak, Iain Duncan Smith said: “Turnout in the council estates is very high.” It was about quarter past ten. When he added a few minutes later that he’d been in politics for 24 years and couldn’t remember seeing an equivalent council-estate turnout before, David Dimbleby wondered about its significance: was it good news for the Brexit campaign? Duncan Smith said piously that he couldn’t possibly say, but we knew that he thought it was. By midnight, the pound had begun its fall.

My wife and I grew up on council estates – small, well-gardened ones, a hundred miles from each other across the border of Scotland and England. Almost everyone we knew lived similarly. People of our parents’ generation thought of public housing as a blessing, compared to the shabby and cramped homes they had lived in before. “They talk about council estates as though they’re slums,” my wife said as we watched the coverage. Or native reservations, I thought. Earlier that day on our London high street, a canvasser for remain told me how they divided the work: the Greens got the tube stations, Lib Dems did the shoppers, Labour went “round the estates”.

And, outside Scotland and London, they were mostly ignored. “A large constituency of working-class voters feel that not only has the economy left them behind, but so has the culture,” the American political philosopher Michael Sandel said in a recent interview. “The sources of their dignity, the dignity of labour, have been eroded and mocked by … globalisation, the rise of finance, the attention that is lavished by parties across the political spectrum on economic and financial elites, [and] the technocratic emphasis of the established political parties.” A lot of the energy animating Brexit, said Sandel, had been “born of this failure of elites”.

Sandel refers to a failure common to the western world. But when did the elites begin to fail Britain in particular? An economic historian might point to a period in the late 19th century when Germany overtook Britain in chemical research and technical education and, together with America, began to replace it as the world’s supreme industrial nation. But that was an unconscious failure; active betrayal has come within living memory. As a journalist working in the 1960s and 1970s, I grew used to the story of the factory closure, but only in the 1980s did these apparently random events accumulate to become known by a word, deindustrialisation, that implied a process governments either couldn’t stop, chose not to stop, or took steps to encourage.

 

The effects across large parts of Britain were spectacular. The big industrial cities had stored up enough capital in terms of public institutions and professional jobs

to survive and sometimes prosper as regional capitals. But their hinterlands – the settlements strung along smoky valleys and perched on the oily river’s edge – began to look as abandoned as goldrush towns. Coatbridge, Consett, Hartlepool, Merthyr, Sunderland, Burnley, Greenock, Accrington: unless a senior football team played or a murder took place, they dropped from the national consciousness.

 

The depth of their oblivion was exemplified when, in a referendum debate on Sky TV, Michael Gove spoke of how his father’s fish business in Aberdeen had been “destroyed by the European Union”, which had “hollowed out” communities across Britain. In fact, a report in the Guardian showed that the senior Gove had sold his business rather than closed it, and that factors other than the EU were then shrinking Aberdeen’s fishing industry, including over-fishing.

 

What nobody remarked on was the absurdity of Gove calling the EU a job destroyer, when far heavier destruction was inflicted by British government policy during those years. When Mrs Thatcher came to office in 1979, manufacturing accounted for almost 30% of Britain’s national income and employed 6.8 million people; by 2010, it accounted for 11% and employed 2.5 million. And, unlike Mr Gove, a welder who was thrown out of work by a closing Sunderland shipyard had no business to sell.
 
In no other major economy was industrial collapse so quick. For a time, well-meaning journalists reported the catastrophe, and then gradually the sight of empty towns and shuttered shops became normalised or forgotten.

 

It seemed there was nothing to be done. At one time, the country’s prosperity had been underpinned by the spinning, weaving, stitching, hammering, banging, welding and smelting that went on in the manufacturing towns; much of the country’s former character was also owed to them – non-conformist chapels, brass bands, giant vegetable championships, self-improvement, association football. Surely nothing as significant to the nation’s economy, culture or politics would ever emerge from them again? And then it did: grievance. Actually, more than that: the sudden discovery that in certain and perhaps unrepeatable circumstances, the poor could use their grievance about all kinds of things to change at least one.

 

It first became apparent in the Scottish referendum of 2014. Only four local voting areas out of 32 returned a majority for independence and all of them bore the scars of vanished industries. The SNP had broken through years of eroding Labour tradition to capture the loyalty of people in the big housing schemes, for whom the leap in the dark of constitutional change offered promise rather than threat (after all, what else had worked?). By the time of last year’s general election, thousands of underprivileged local authority tenants felt themselves for the first time to be part of a political movement. I noticed the paradox after Nicola Sturgeon addressed an anti-Trident rally in Glasgow, and wrote: “Only now, with the west of Scotland nearly expunged as an economic force, does the political will of its people keep the rest of the country awake.”

 

On Thursday, much of northern England went to vote in a similar mood. Immigration, actual or potential, mattered too. There may also have been Spitfire enthusiasts. But betrayal, grievance, dispossession: these were surely what counted for most. I feel sorrow that the British story should have such an unexpected end – murdered by the poor and neglected English who were already inside the keep.

[Ayatollah]

od pre par dana imam utiska da je ovo jedna od ozbiljnijih zabuna u vezi sa EU, i da je EU potrebno da poradi i na svom marketingu

 

bio sam na nekom workshopu o novoj direktivi EU o information privacy koja stupa na snagu 25.5.18.

na prvi pogled, zlo i naopako sta tu sve EU hoce

1. direktiva je obavezujuca za sve clanice i stupa 25.5.18. na snagu. tacka. nema diskusije.

2. do tada, sve clanice moraju da urede svoje zakone u skladu sa njom, a stari zakoni gube vaznost

3. evropski sud (European Court of Justice) je najvisa instanca koja odlucuje o parnicama 

 

sve mirise na ono klasicno: zla EU, vodjena od par elitista namece sirotim malim zemljama svoja pravila

 

ali kada se malo bolje pogleda

1. ovo je direktiva a ne zakon. svaka zemlja ima pravo da definise svoj zakon. postoji odredjen broja obaveznih odredbi koje sluze da se ovaj zakon uniformise na nivou EU (sto je neophodno), ali ostaje i sloboda clanicama da ga dopune svojim lokalnim pravilima 

2. direktiva je relativno fleksibilna, i zato ce postojati telo ispod EU Court of Justice, koje ce da koordinise nacionalne zakone i da pomaze u njihovoj implementaciji.

i upravo tu se dolazi do demokratije u praksi: ovo telo ce biti sastavljeno od po 1 predstavnika svake EU clanice, tako da male clanice imaju proporcionalno veci uticaj na praksu tih zakona nego one "zle i velike". 

3. evropski sud ce se oslanjati na to medju-telo kada donosi svoje odluke, dakle, sve clanice imaju aktivan uticaj na definiciju i sprovodjenje zakona u praksi

 

edit: opravio uredbu u direktivu. fala @tribun za ispravku

 

 

To je direktiva, ne uredba (regulation). Uredbe se primenjuju neposredno, kao savezni zakon.

 

Nije direktiva, nego uredba -    REGULATION (EU) 2016/679 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation)  . 

 

I jeste zlo i naopako, pogledajte samo sankcije :

 

The following sanctions can be imposed:

• a warning in writing in cases of first and non-intentional non-compliance
• regular periodic data protection audits
• a fine up to 10,000,000 EUR or up to 2% of the annual worldwide turnover of the preceding financial year in case of an enterprise, whichever is greater (Article 83, Paragraph 4 ^[14]))
• a fine up to 20,000,000 EUR, or in the case of an undertaking, up to 4% of the total worldwide annual turnover of the preceding financial year, whichever is higher (Article 83, Paragraph 5 & 6 ^[15])

 

Kazne su kao kod zaštite konkurencije, mogu biti u stotinama miliona eura. Baš ohrabrujuće za sve koji manipulišu velikim bazama podataka.