Category Archives: European Union.

THE BEADY EYE ASKS. ARE THE ENGLISH PEOPLE BEING HOODWINKED .

12 Tuesday Jul 2016

Posted by in England EU Referendum IN or Out., European Union., Modern Day Democracy., Unanswered Questions.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS. ARE THE ENGLISH PEOPLE BEING HOODWINKED .

Tags

,

( A quick thought)

THE FIRST QUESTION IS.Afficher l'image d'origine

HOW CAN A NON ELECTED PRIME MINISTER RATIFY A DEAL TO LEAVE THE EUROPEAN UNION.

She can negotiate the deal which has to be accepted by the House of commons and the 27 remaining EU member states.theresa-may.jpg

When the government of the UK invokes Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. This is the significant “red button”. Once the Article 50 process is commenced then Brexit does become a matter of law, and quite an urgent one.

It would appear this process is (and is intended to be) irreversible and irrevocable once it starts.

But invoking Article 50 is a legally distinct step from the referendum result — it is not an obligation.

If she does not have a mandate from the people of the Uk by way of a General Election she is incapable of signing any agreement.

There is only one solution.

Before the 2011 Fixed Term Parliament Act (FTPA) the Prime Minister could simply “call an election”.

This was effectively the PM exercising the royal prerogative: no parliamentary vote was needed, it was the PM’s decision.

This power was transferred to the House of Commons under the FTPA, which was introduced by the 2010 Coalition government.

On paper it is no longer the Prime Minister’s decision. This is not true.

There are two ways under the FTPA that an election can be called ahead of schedule.

The first is if two-thirds of MPs vote to hold an election. This is a very high bar and would in practice require both Labour and Conservative support.

The second is if there is a no confidence vote in the government of the day. After such a vote other parties are given 14 days to form another government. If none can be formed, a new election is held.

A majority government could, by a simple vote, declare “no confidence” in itself.

Since no other party has a majority, after 14 days an election would be set.

One of the reasons England put forward to leave the EU was that it was run by unelected officials.

May’s policies will improve the lives of UKers until it doesn’t, because every policy contains the seeds of its own sunset;

If she wants to lead a country she would be well advised to hold;

A general election, combined with a re run of the in or out of the European Union with all sixteen years eligible to vote, with the introduce of true Democracy by adopting Proportional Representation.    

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASKS. IS THERE NOW ANY POINT TO THE COMMONWEALTH.

07 Thursday Jul 2016

Posted by in England EU Referendum IN or Out., European Union., Politics., The Future, The world to day.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS. IS THERE NOW ANY POINT TO THE COMMONWEALTH.

Tags

,

 

(TWO MINUTE READ)

The commonwealth has all but being dead for the last ten years.Afficher l'image d'origine

Now that England has vote to leave the European Union perhaps it might come to life or should the Commonwealth, a transnational institution, which pre-dates the United Nations, call it a day and withdraw from the international scene?

It is now the time and it is politically correct to debate Britain’s role in the Commonwealth.Afficher l'image d'origine

No longer can the United Kingdom claim the sole paternity for success stories in the Commonwealth.

The European Union is on a much higher level of importance than the Commonwealth or even the United Nations.

Membership of the Commonwealth is a historic fact. Like your parents, you do not get to choose them. Most countries did not actively choose to become members of the Commonwealth. Instead, membership was seen as almost a diplomatic obligation.

On the other hand, joining the European Union equates to marriage. It is a choice about your future and not a statement about your past.

Central to the enhanced value of the European Union are its shared values, common rules and their direct economic benefits. Countries do not become Members because of their history, but because they show commitment and resilience in achieving the convergence which would see them qualify for the benefits of freedom of movement of goods, services, capital and people.

Adjustment and restructuring are painful and come at a cost which is not only economic but also social and political. It takes years and is not completed upon membership. Instead, the process is ongoing.

There are countries that are geographically and historically European, but until now do not qualify to become members because they do not have the democratic and political commitment to deliver the necessary reforms. Part of these reforms have to do with sharing or even ceding responsibilities to supra-national institutions. That takes a lot of courage, and sometimes something more than that.

This is supplemented by the fact that the various institutions have the power to decide. Decisions are not on statements of intent, but rather actions that affect the everyday life of people from Copenhagen to Valletta, from Lisbon to Warsaw.

Back to the Commonwealth.

Very few know much about it.

Most Jamaicans think that Barack Obama is the head of the Commonwealth rather than Queen Elizabeth.

Those it have any purpose other than a club as commonwealth values have never being precisely defined.

It was formed partly by India to stay friends with their British colonial rulers on Independence in 1949.

Every two-year the heads of Governments of the 53 countries that make up the Commonwealth meet for a pow-wow.

It now could be mortally wounded if India and some of its larger countries walk out because of the recent Brixit Vote.

It might be a network of disparate people, bound by an imperial history that seems, even among former subjects people’s, to inspire nostalgia as well as resentment.

The only thing holding it together is Queen Elizabeth, who is approaching her nineties.

It would not surprise me over the coming years to see Australia and Canada replace the Queen as their head of state.

I  personally cannot contemplate the idea of being a colony or of having a foreigner as a Head of State.

If the Commonwealth is to survive it should be about commitment rather than history.

It should be about the future rather than the past.

Perhaps now is the time for England to commence disbanding the Commonwealth as it is today and regrouping, setting out updated guidelines and Charter of Values to which participants must strictly abide.

Whether or not one opts for such a model, the idea of further opening up Commonwealth membership to other countries near and far, and also allowing for consensual withdrawals from the organisation without acrimony, should be duly examined.

Staring at a decaying organisation and hoping that its fortunes might suddenly turn around is delusional.

It can opt to remain as it is and sink in total irrelevance within the next decade or so, or have the courage to make changes, by starting to tackle them at least in piecemeal fashion.

Having history as our sole bond is clearly not enough in today’s world.

In order to be relevant, the Commonwealth should be about people rather than diplomats. It should be about economic growth rather than bureaucracy. It should be about the future rather than the past.

All comments appreciated.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASKS SHOULD THE EUROPEAN UNION ACCEPT THE RESULT OF THE ENGLISH REFERENDUM.

03 Sunday Jul 2016

Posted by in England EU Referendum IN or Out., European Union., Modern Day Democracy., Unanswered Questions.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS SHOULD THE EUROPEAN UNION ACCEPT THE RESULT OF THE ENGLISH REFERENDUM.

Tags

,

 

( Important three minute read)

The Pandora Box is open.Afficher l'image d'origine

It is damaging politically for the status of the EU – and its liberal values – and, thus, for the future prosperity and security of Europe as a whole.

It is harmful for the economy of the rest of the EU.

The UK voted to leave the EU by a four per cent margin. 

In short the UK choose to leave the EU, has left it between a rock and a hard place.

SHOULD THE EU ACCEPT THE OUT VOTE OR DEMAND A RE RUN.

Amid rumbling aftershocks from last Thursday’s political earthquake, there is still no sign of the UK actually leaving the EU.

Could it be that Brexit will never happen?

Although the vote is not legally binding and parliament would be within its rights to ignore it, to do so would be political suicide or political reincarnation.

At this moment there is no way of knowing whether there is going to be Civil unrest or a general election fought on the basis of one party campaigning to take the UK back into Europe. 

The reality is that on the Uk side it is now impossible to negotiate and none of the options available to the UK outside the EU, are attractive. 

Why?

Because None of the available options could satisfy at the same time the UK’s political wishes and its economic interests.  

There is no clear picture on who might step forward to lead the Conservatives – and the country.

The Labour Party is tearing itself apart, with more than a dozen shadow cabinet members resigning in an attempt to force leader Jeremy Corbyn to resign.

Leading Leave campaigners suggested single market access is on the table, which could require compromise on free movement laws.

Investment banks are reportedly already putting in train plans to move thousands of City jobs overseas.

The Institute of Directors has warned around a quarter of its members may begin a hiring freeze until the economic effects of Brexit become clear.

It is quite obvious to any outsider from the resulting fall out that the people of England did not vote on the Referendum core question.

They voted against inequality, fear of immigrants eroding their ability to access jobs, wages, housing, and the health services and now have a duty to the rest of Europe to go back and vote again.

As fears of a post-Brexit recession in the UK and beyond wiped $2trn (£1.5trn) from global stock values in the worst trading day since the credit crunch in 2007. The pound touched a 30-year low against the dollar and the FTSE 100 slumped 3.2 per cent.

Can the EU wait?  Yes. But not for Long.

We all know that the World we live in is facing complex problems that require a combined effort to resolve.

Given the “extraordinary complexity” of the tasks there is no need to immediately trigger the UK’s formal exit process from the EU.

On the plus side it allows the EU to look at itself and learn the lessons that it’s the people who count not the single market.

The bloc has lurched from one crisis to the next, promising time and again to heed the growing mistrust of its 500 million citizens, only to return to the business of internal squabbling as another emergency emerges on the continent.

Business as usual’ is no longer an option.

Its Reform or die! But exactly what that reform would look like is an open question.

Euroskeptic parties are gaining influence across the bloc, taking advantage of the E.U.’s perceived failures in dealing with the euro zone crisis and the arrival of more than a million people seeking sanctuary from war and poverty last year.

The Eurosceptics are the ones most on the ball in terms of putting forward their vision of Europe, and the E.U. institutions have to come up with something convincing to rebut that.

The E.U.’s management structures are complicated, and there is not one single person who can lead the push to define a narrative.

E.U. countries will pursue much more British-like policies in which they look for concrete benefits from European integration and not for a quasi-religious or quasi-ideological movement towards the construction of Europe.

The 27 remaining member states have very different histories and cultures, and range from the socially liberal Scandinavian nations to the more religious and conservative South and East. Denmark, for example, legalised same-sex unions in 1989, but Malta only allowed its citizens to divorce in 2011.

These gulfs became apparent during the refugee crisis, when Hungary and Slovakia claimed the influx of Muslim refugees would threaten their culture. The divide between the former Soviet nations and the rest of Europe, meanwhile, often overshadows negotiations of the E.U.’s response to Russian aggression.

Without a shared vision there is the risk of narrowing the E.U’s focus to regional challenges, which needs to be resisted.

If the Union is not to follow in the footsteps of England its combined wealth must be spread evenly. This can not be achieved with an Euro that does not reflect the GDP of the whole of European Union.

If the Euro is to remain it must have a financial vehicle to allow investment in it.

Euro Bonds.

If the Union is to reform it must balance it books, scrap moving its Parliament from one city to another, open proper channels to migrants,

Can the divided, sprawling economic bloc come up with a vision to unite its fractious member states?

Only time can tell if Britain’s vote ends up being a wake-up call, or a death knell.

If England wants to win like Wales ( In the European Cup) they have to be on the pitch.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASKS. ENGLAND. WHO DO YOU THINK YOU ARE ?

28 Tuesday Jun 2016

Posted by in England EU Referendum IN or Out., European Union., Politics., Unanswered Questions., World Politics

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS. ENGLAND. WHO DO YOU THINK YOU ARE ?

Tags

(Six minute Read)

Up to now the continued sharing of genetic materials has maintained all of humankind as a single species.

As if you could not noticed this is changing with results that are going to be both good and bad.

The result of UK Referendum poses some deep question other than those connected to the Single Market.

The question of Identity?

What a great shame that England with all its smartphones has not recognize this.

The technology changes taking place in the World is eroding individuality identity which can only be protected by acting in the common good of all.Afficher l'image d'origine

How we are seen and how we see others affects various domains of our lives and the lives of others; from the types of jobs we have, the amount of money we make, the kind of friends we make, the places we live, the foods we eat, the schools we go to, etc…

The entire social structure we inhabit is affected by at least one social construction, race.

Gone are the days of Imperialism, or Isolation.  

Unfortunately from  the very beginning we get ideas of who will succeed and who won’t by the racial categories we belong to.

Race is used as an indicator of difference, there is no denying that.

In the case of immigration it is used to index a group of people who have ties to some geographic location and specific phenotypic features.

However there is nothing absolute or real about social constructions in the same way as there is something absolute and real about rocks, rivers, mountains, and in general the objects examined by physics.

If race is defined by the dominant group in society “politically, economically, sociocultural, and historically”, and this definition holds up due to collective agreement, racism is very much alive and well within the structure of our society.

A mountain will exist regardless of people thinking, agreeing or accepting that it does exist. Unlike a mountain, the existence of race requires that people collectively agree and accept that it does exist.

Also there is nothing biologically real about race. It is conceptually unstable but exists in real life.

Furthermore there is nothing that we have identified as race that exists apart from our collective agreement, acceptance, and imposition of its existence.

Additionally, race does not identify differences in culture and is always loosely connected to biology.

Race is a marker of status that includes or excludes one from broader social constructs and enables or disables certain powers.

White people are often blind to racism and do not see the privileges they have due to their skin color. Many individuals may claim they are not racist while tacitly accept the dominant racist ideology by way of reaping the benefits offered to them.

The dominant group in society imposed the boundaries of group membership by defining race in terms of biology.

A large portion of the English vote to leave the European Union can be attributed to the fear of losing hegemonic control which was spread through the white population due to control of Immigration.

Race is an indicator but an indicator of what kind of difference.

There are no biological differences between different “races”.

Let us summarize what we have said about what race is so far. First, race is a social construct contingent on collective acceptance, agreement, and imposition. Second, race has always been defined by the dominant group in society. Third, race indicates differences in status. The status indicated by which race you are, either includes or excludes one from broader social constructs, and disables or enables certain powers.

People are learning to deal with race and other races simply because they have to. And in all honesty, races are redefining what their race can do achieve, or not achieve.

The question we have to ask is whether those differences are so great that it explains every disparity we see in society.

It would then not be that easy to eradicate by removing the “racial lens” because this lens is not just over our eyes, but is a part of the very foundations of society.

So, abandoning the notion of race altogether may not be possible, but perhaps becoming aware of race and understanding it will get us a little closer to seeing how it does not apply, thus abandoning the current negative view associated with race differences.

We have no clue on how to embrace our “differences”

Why would a majority group may feel the necessity to accept minority group’s culture ? Do they need to ? Not really. Why?

We cannot simply get rid of the notion of race. Rather, a different understanding of race should be developed. This is the biggest challenge to the European Union. How to accommodate the indelible identity of its members.

Is a “Jewish race.”

Not only is that patently ridiculous (just as a notion of a Catholic race or a Muslim or Buddhist “race” would be) — they are also supporting and promoting a tool of their oppression.

One can only hope that we can learn to handle group differences in humans as intelligently and humanely.

The human race has no unified goal or plan.

Our shortsighted dependence on fossil fuels has brought great wealth to the countries that exploit them, but the overall effect is damaging to humanity as a whole.

One-Third Of The Human Race Has To Die For Civilization To Be Sustainable.

The goals of individual states and nations are such that conflicts inevitably arise with other states and nations and as a result we have wars.

This world is in the throes of a cock measuring contest bloody and rapey till a clear winner suffocates on unbreathable air.

Should the European Union accept the recent UK Remain or Leave Referendum Results?

Not on your nanny.Afficher l'image d'origine

There is too much at stake.

An Organisation that has peace at its heart. Its founding aspiration, (even if it is in need massive reform) to allow a vote that was misinformed to adversely affect (even it is driven by single Market) such a noble and worthwhile CAUSE.

The European Union must reform and work to build vibrant and tolerant democracies whose governments are accountable and open to the participation of all people.

The European Union must make its own workings more transparent to its citizens and more connected with their national politics.

The European Parliament election must be taken that seriously, it is too easy for people use their vote as a protest, voting against their national government and sometimes for anti-establishment parties.

Member states need to stop blaming Brussels for everything. They go to Brussels knowing that they have to make decisions on hard issues, but they don’t want to take the political costs themselves.

There is not adequate democracy in the EU.

Correcting this perception and encouraging citizens to engage with the EU is one of the big challenges facing the Union in the future.

It should pass a law to abolish most of the regulations that exist—a huge simplification of the approach.

By the end of this year there will be a Capital Markets Union and the Digital Single Market. These are two elements that can make European companies more competitive and bring more financial resources to startups.

It should issue euro bonds to finance the migrant crisis.

It should issue euro bonds for growth—euro bonds targeted for human capital, infrastructure, and research and development. These euro bonds can be a European issuance of debt up to five percent of European GDP, which means 700 billion euros that you can inject into the European economy and show that European institutions are doing something concrete to create jobs.

European leaders should decide to increase the European budget from the current one percent of GDP to three percent of GDP.

It should scrap the physical movement of Parliament establish a permanent home.

The EU has to recognize that it has many issues that it needs to face.

There is much dissatisfaction in many countries with policies coming out of Brussels and with the level of transparency with which Brussels operates.

One way or the other, the EU has to gain the confidence of the populace.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

THE BEADY EYE ASKS; WHAT EFFECT WILL THE ENGLISH REFERENDUM HAVE ON THE EURO.

19 Sunday Jun 2016

Posted by in England EU Referendum IN or Out., European Union., Unanswered Questions.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS; WHAT EFFECT WILL THE ENGLISH REFERENDUM HAVE ON THE EURO.

Tags

, ,

A quick read.

While there is plenty of discussion and fear mongering on the pros and cons there is little mention of the main driving force behind the European Union.Afficher l'image d'origine

The Euro.

The euro has proved to be exactly the job-destroying, recession-creating, undemocratic monster the doubters always warned it would be.

Unless the EU can construct a political governance system similar to that of a federal state it will be very difficult for the euro to survive never mind to overtake the dollar as the world’s dominant currency or, eventually, to maintain its status as the leading candidate to replace the dollar, although it could still be the dominant regional European currency.

Were the EU to approve a European Federal constitution, the euro would have a chance of replacing the dollar as the global currency in this century.

Meanwhile, the euro will continue to increase its global share of foreign currency reserves, financial and trade transactions and even exchange rate pegs and baskets in the coming years, but only as the second-best global currency.

Without the Euro there would be no European Union Market.

With the Euro the club members are locked to the strong economies whether they like it or not thus unable to reflect the state of their own economies making it unworkable in the long run.

In a few days the British will have their Referendum Stay or Leave.Afficher l'image d'origine

If they leave will they destroyed the euro on departure.

Indeed, there are possible upsides to the euro’s fall. When a currency declines, imports typically become more expensive and exports become cheaper, lowering the trade deficit and creating jobs. It should make European offerings — be they German automobiles, Italian leather, French wine or even Greek vacations — more affordable, eventually helping the recovery.

If they stay should they not be subject to the same rules that govern the current members.

Another words should the EU demand that Sterling make the transition from the pound to the euro.

I am no financial wizard.

The likelihood of this ever happening is highly unlikely. Especially now that the euro is donning the cloak of supercharged monetarism, which is almost total in the face of grinding austerity, a double-dip recession that has already lasted 18 months and a jobless rate of 12.2% and rising in the Euro Zone.

This is not the received wisdom on the left.

When the crash came in 2007 it was a spectacular one.

The financial markets imploded, the banks stopped lending and cheap credit dried up. The housing market collapsed, unemployment rose, tax receipts shrivelled and the government’s budget deficit went through the roof. Speculation that the UK might leave the euro, as it had left the European exchange rate mechanism in 1992, meant investors demanded a high premium for holding UK government debt.

So is it time to create Spanish Euros, Irish Euros, Germany Euros, and in the long term English Euros all with their own exchange rate set against the GDP of the combined Members and forget about Federalism returning all member states to as they were before the introduction of the Euro.

There is no deep attachment in Britain to Europe as a political identity. Far from it.

However the market turbulence that will be caused by Britain’s exit may prove terminal for the euro and the break up of the Union.

Recently the UK even after Quantitative Easing (Printing Cash) on a massive scale had to accept an IMF loan the biggest the IMF had ever organised. It came with severe conditions,  including deep cuts in welfare and pensions and wage reductions across the public sector.

Deprived of the safety valve of currency depreciation, Britain had no choice but to do what Spain, Greece, Ireland and Portugal were doing and drive down domestic costs to make the economy more competitive. Speculation that the UK might leave the euro, as it had left the European exchange rate mechanism in 1992, meant investors demanded a high premium for holding UK government debt. Benchmark bond yields rose, first to 5%, then to 6%. When they hit 7%, Blair had no choice but to ask for help from the troika – the International Monetary Fund, the ECB and the EU.

Unlike in Spain, Greece, Ireland and Portugal, however, the buildup to the general election of 2010 promised the forthcoming Referendum.

Without this promise I believe Britain would have and would now be leaving the EU altogether.

So far only three currencies – have been able to become leading or dominant international currencies in the world’s history. Those that have done so tend to become monopolistic due to the centripetal forces derived from the existence of economies of scale, economies of scope and network externalities in their use.

The euro’s share in the world’s financial markets would receive a major boost if the UK were to adopt it, given London’s position as one of the world’s two leading financial markets, both in euros and in US dollars.

Furthermore, the UK has the EU’s second-largest GDP after Germany. In any case, the Euro Area (EA) is slowly expanding with the possibility of new EU members and other potential candidates joining in the future. At present, this is not the case with the US dollar.

The EU and the EA are only unions of independent nations and not a federal state, it will be extremely difficult to overtake the US dollar and maintain a dominant international role while the governance of the EU and EA remains unchanged.

Although in every country the currency is used by its citizens because it has the full guarantee of the State that issues it, in the international markets this guarantee is not a sufficient condition to make it of preferred use.

So the question is should the Uk be required to join the Euro irrelevant  of its own conditions to do so if it vote to remain.

Stage one would be the transition from the pound to the euro.

The most important part of this process, to fix the right level for the pound to join at, joining the euro at the wrong rate would penalise British manufacturers, while those already in the single currency were concerned that too cheap a rate for sterling entry would hand an added competitive advantage to the UK’s strong financial services sector.

The key to the Euro success will be to develop a wider export base, which means going beyond the euro zone itself.Afficher l'image d'origine

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

 

 

The Beady Eye looks at the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP),

03 Tuesday May 2016

Posted by in Capitalism, European Union., The USA., TTIP. Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership., Unanswered Questions., Where's the Global Outrage.

≈ Comments Off on The Beady Eye looks at the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP),

Tags

, , , ,

 

When you look at the News on your TV you hear little or nothing about one of the biggest Trade deals between the USA and The European Union. Afficher l'image d'origine

TTIP is about a huge transfer of power from people to big business.

You would think that when you elect people to office they would represent you as a citizen and not negotiate deals that have far reaching implications for the environment and the lives of more than 800 million citizens in the EU and US.

Whether you care about environmental issues, animal welfare, labour rights or internet privacy, you should be concerned.

This deal has being going on behind closed doors for months and months (The 13th round of TTIP negotiations in New York finished this April.) and only thanks to Greenpeace Netherlands have some have some of the classified documents represent more than two-thirds of the overall TTIP text come to light.

Greenpeace identified four main issues of concern:

  • Long standing environmental protection is dropped

The “General Exceptions” rule, enshrined in the GATT agreement of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), is absent from the text. This nearly 70-year-old rule allows nations to restrict trade “to protect human, animal and plant life or health“, or for “the conservation of exhaustible natural resources”

  • No place for climate protection in TTIP

If the goals of the Paris Summit to keep temperatures increase under 1.5 degrees are to be met, trade should not be excluded from CO2 emissions reduction specifications. But nothing about climate protection can be found in the obtained texts.

  • Precautionary principle is forgotten

The US wants the EU to replace the EU’s hazard approach with ‘risk management’, disregarding the precautionary principle, [3] which is enshrined in the EU Treaty but is never mentioned in the consolidated text.

  • Open door for corporate lobbying

The leaked documents suggest that both parties consider giving corporations much wider access and participation in decision-making.

“The effects of TTIP would be initially subtle but ultimately devastating. It would lead to European laws being judged on their consequences for trade and investment – disregarding environmental protection and public health concerns.”

The negotiations about the free trade treaty TTIP take place behind closed doors. The documents about the meetings are not public. That creates mistrust. Nobody knows which positions are talked about in what way. Are citizens losing against corporate interests? Does the lobby industry undermine our democracy? What does the US and what do the European states really want to accomplish?

At the center of public concern stands the investor-state dispute settlement mechanism (ISDS). ISDS allows foreign investors to bring a claim against the government of their host State if TTIP investment protection standards are breached, for example in the event of discriminatory treatment or direct and indirect expropriation.

The EU and most of the free world is in a state of profound uncomfortable quagmire due to Capitalism Greed.

God forbid we allow or agree to a trade deal that puts profit before people.

One must note that previous attempts to establish such a mechanism have failed and that currently there seems to be little appetite for such a mechanism internationally.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S GOVERNMENTS ARE FAILING US.

18 Monday Apr 2016

Posted by in Capitalism, Climate Change., European Union., Humanity., Modern Day Democracy., Paris Climate Change Conference 2015, Sustaniability, The Future, The world to day., Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Organisations., World Politics

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S GOVERNMENTS ARE FAILING US.

Tags

, , , , , , ,

WHY?

Because they no longer guarantee life and the pursuit of happiness.

I am not talking about you can’t please all the people all of the time.Afficher l'image d'origine

I am talking about when they come together in the United Nations an out of date organisation with no secure means of funding other than begging. Only when signatory nations are prepared to follow suit with firm domestic policies is a UN aspiration somewhat effective. This never happens on global issues as they are afraid of paying the political price.

On something as fundamental as changing the source of energy which is going to cost trillions. Only governments coming together will there be any effect.  They are supposed to be a trustee of the natural resources that citizens depend on for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

In modern society, of course, much of the complexity in our lives is placed there by governments, supposedly acting to “help” us avoid failure or to “protect” us from failure.

Instead they are eroding our liberties by collecting reams of information from your digital footprint. Our societies where you’re free to be whatever you want, feels less and less so each year.

They are selling climate dispensations, flogging off natural resources and revenue earning industries to sovereign wealth funds for short gain profits.

Some failures were obviously. They are failing to adequately address global warming.  It seems to me that Politicians seem to think that the Marketplace will take care of it.

More visible recently were the bailing out of  high-profile banking institutions which are still considered by the government to be too big to fail without threatening the long-term well-being of consumers and the broader economy.

They have created confusing missions that are not be communicated and embraced, and are were easily undermined by rank corruption and unethical conduct, or are beyond careful monitoring through performance measurement and management. They don’t  ‘know’ enough to enable them to make effective decisions about the best way to allocate scarce resources with the top appointees unqualified to lead.

The days are gone when many economists believe in the efficient market hypothesis, which assumes that the market will always contain more information than any individual or government.

The implication is that market prices and market movements should be free from interference because markets cannot be improved upon by individuals or governments. However we all know that the invisible hand of the market place will not bring about the changes necessary.

Which brings us back to the United nations. An organisation so infiltrated by lobbying groups that it is danger onto itself.

The world is in a mess due to greed, and democracy as we know it is under attack from unbridled consumerism and Social Media. We have to accept the reality that markets are not motivated by the priority of care. Nor is it the United nations.

Why don’t we the voters demand better representation?

We must demand that the United Nations pass  binding people resolution placing a World Aid Commission on all High Frequency Trading, on all Sovereign Wealth Funds Acquisitions , on all Foreign exchange transaction over $20,000 on all other form of Capitalist Activities that function for profit for profit’s sake.( see previous posts)

This is the only way we can take care of our world make Greed pay for it.Afficher l'image d'origine

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

THE BEADY EYE ASKS JUST WHAT DO WE THINK WE ARE DOING BY RETURNING MEN,WOMEN AND CHILDREN HOW ARE DESPERATE.

05 Tuesday Apr 2016

Posted by in European Union., The Refugees, Where's the Global Outrage.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS JUST WHAT DO WE THINK WE ARE DOING BY RETURNING MEN,WOMEN AND CHILDREN HOW ARE DESPERATE.

Tags

,

 

( A five to Six minute read)

While acknowledging that the current immigration/ refugee problems facing Europe are difficult in the extreme to manage they have being created for the most part by us through european colonization, the plunder for natural resources, and interference, which have resulted in our current day wars.Afficher l'image d'origine

It is not possible to address all the reasons but the western elite that currently rules the world has 3 majors intellectuals influences:

Machiavelli (How to rule over people with cynicism and deception), Hegel (using the Hegelian dialectic of history they consider the western civilization as the end of history) and Darwin (the Survival belongs to the fittest, therefore the white race should stay at the top and rule over other races).

I strongly believe we are the same humanity, and like the plant and flowers, colored differently by location and conditions to survive and thrive.Afficher l'image d'origine

Young people aspire to emulate the most successful models in their society, and now the only visible and tangible model available is the rich subaltern model.

Anyone who wants to understand the intellectual principles that are shaping our current world, should deeply understand the above 3 authors and their influence on the western elite.

“If you want to control the people, separate the people and you can rule them. Divide them and you can conquer them.”

That is just what the European is now about. Bartering in Humans who are destitute. It is the process of dehumanization. It is cynical but it is for the profit!

Dignity is not something Europe cared about.

Magazines photos showing it at its worst now fill the mind of billions of people around the world, and unfortunately those people can’t help but think about Europe only through those images. (In the same time, those medias won’t show the photo of a dead American or English soldier, because it’s shocking and doesn’t respect human dignity)

It must be said that most of these refugees have very little idea of the world they are living in, specially the forces and trends that are shaping it.

The worst consequence of this “free publicity” is the way it has deeply impacted the refugees self-perception and self-image.

All we are doing is creating more enemies for the future.

For any society to prosper it should have a endogenous system of identifying, training and coaching its future leaders. Some countries do it through their military services, some do it through elite schools, and some others do it through informal coaching and assistance organizations or secret societies.Solomon

The “Poverty porn” of the NGOs, the humanitarian organizations, and Western medias is the problem number one because it sabotages self-image, weakens, sell-confidence and resolve, and contributed hugely to the hate and racism we now all face all over the world.

International AID is now doing more harm than good.

It has become the main tool used by foreign governments and organizations to corrupt the elite, and get them to behave so irrationally toward their own populations and the basic interest of their countries. You end up with a species with incompatible types, where one has to triumph over the other or risk extinction.

Take Africa for instance; What is the problem?

The problem is that you can’t develop a country or continent where the majority of people who have the potential to become leaders are raised to be “good subalterns” to be successful.Colonial-Africa

Aside corruption and the criminality, International Aid is the root of the 5 Stars colonization disease that cripple the African elite which dislike the responsibility and the self-sacrifice that comes with being in control of a nation destiny. As far as they enjoyed the status offered by their positions, they never liked the responsibilities demanded by the jobs, therefore they use international aid programs as substitute to their responsibilities.

Elites are elites, and they don’t like someone else to tell them what to do, or to think, elites are not influenced, they pretend to be, but serve their own interests, or deeper convictions, they are not ‘genuinely’ influenced by thinkers. 

So many charity dinner against starvation where people eat like 4, that’s disgusting.

If Africa needs any aid, the most urgent one is to get rid of the 40 billions corruption industry (called International Aid) that shackles its youth and elite, cultivates and maintains the beggar mentality.

How would you develop any country when the dream of  the majority  of its youth and elite is not entrepreneurship, innovation, education and self-sufficiency, but the dream to have a job with a humanitarian organization or to get their project financed by some International aid Agency or proxy.

They are creating new realities like “People from the North” compared to “people from the South” or “people from the West”. They invent new divisions with creative imagination, like the Belgians falsely created the “Tutsi” and “Hutu” tribes in Rwanda which ultimately lead to the genocide in 1994.

The western medias seems to follow an agenda of further dividing African nations and populations with their constant framing of Africa through fight between tribes, religions, geography, etc.

This must stop before African could unite to fight their way out.

The influence of western medias in Africa is very negative, and could be considered as part of Africa problems.Ennemi-within

With today’s cheap and world-wide media platforms on the internet, we are projecting world issues, but the patterns are shaped by a power grabbing philosophies, the us vs them, the one up one down.

We all need to wake up around the world black, white, yellow, brown and start talking at the levels of people, communities, not just among those who rule over us cause they have different agendas.

Charles Darwin makes this point very clear –“At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races.

China is using a new form of economic subjugation.

What is important is a deep understanding of where we are and owning our own problems and solutions and find a solutions among ourselves. The only way to unlearn lies is to learn the truth.Posted @ QUOTEZ.CO

If we can’t solve our problems in our surrounding, the other people coming from other places won’t as well.

We better know better!

It’s unfortunate that the world is unable to prosper harmoniously.

“Can all people in the world live the way the developed countries are living ? ” The answer will be No. There is no enough resources for that.

However it is necessary to put things in perspective there are enough resources to Grant temporary Asylum to those that have risked all..  We need to tap into our Possibilities! Create enemies or friends. The world has closed its eyes.

The UN refugee agency have made an appeal for international aid to help with

the influx of people. This what we hear all to often.

We must replace our out of date World Organisations with a new World Aid Organisation.( see previous Posts)

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S SHAME ON US ALL THAT CALL OURSELF EUROPEANS.

04 Monday Apr 2016

Posted by in European Union., Humanity., Politics., The Refugees, The world to day., Unanswered Questions., What Needs to change in the World, Where's the Global Outrage., World Organisations.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE SAY’S SHAME ON US ALL THAT CALL OURSELF EUROPEANS.

Tags

,

More than a million migrants and refugees crossed into Europe in 2015, sparking a crisis as countries struggled to cope with the influx, and creating division in the EU over how best to deal with resettling people.

Under the terms of the EU’s deportation deal 202 people from Greece to Turkey have to-day being forcibly returned to Turkey.

On the island of Lesbos, which lies just across the Aegean Sea from Dikili, the 136 deportees boarded two Turkey-bound boats in what some witnesses described as a “sedate state”. On Chios, a Greek island farther to the south, violence briefly erupted as police attempted to transfer selected deportees to a third ferry.

The calmness of proceedings belied the horror of what they represented.

“This is the bargaining and bartering of human bodies,”

Only two of the 202 deportees were Syrian. The rests were mostly Pakistanis, and so could have been deported back to Turkey under pre-existing international agreements, or Afghans, who the Greek government claimed had elected to return to Greece of their own accord.

“It is absolutely mind-boggling that neither the media nor human rights organisations had access to the detention facilities to monitor the asylum procedures,” said a Human Rights Watch spokesman.

The first day of deportations has been met with affirmative statements by credible international organisations, including the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), who confirmed that all procedures were regular and rights of deportees were observed.

Even as the expulsions were under way, a rubber dinghy with about 40 men, women and children arrived from the shores of Turkey, and on the other side of the Aegean dozens of others were arrested trying to follow in their wake.

Turks are now putting up blue tarp to stop the prying eyes of the press.

The conflict in Syria continues to be by far the biggest driver of migration. But the ongoing violence in Afghanistan and Iraq, abuses in Eritrea, as well as poverty in Kosovo, are also leading people to look for new lives elsewhere.

Europe needs to be reminded that Deportation from Europe has a dark history.

Without genuine transparency over the enacting of the EU-Turkey deal, pictures alone won’t be enough. Amid this crisis, children are the most vulnerable of all. Many are travelling with their families, while many others are on their own. Every one of them is in need of protection and entitled to the rights guaranteed under the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

 This is an appalling deal. 

We that is Europe is responsible in more ways that one for the Crises. If we were less concerned and not driven by fear we would have set up proper immigration enter channels and now of this would now be necessary.
Our world organisation like UNICEF can only stand by and appeal for funds.
There are still millions caught in situations of conflict, displacement, poverty and underdevelopment – the main causes of the crisis
“It’s what happens when the media is not looking that will matter most.”

Map of asylum claims in Europe in 2015
Tensions in the EU have been rising because of the disproportionate burden faced by some countries, particularly the countries where the majority of migrants have been arriving: Greece, Italy and Hungary.

In September, EU ministers voted by a majority to relocate 160,000 refugees EU-wide, but for now the plan will only apply to those who are in Italy and Greece.

Another 54,000 were to be moved from Hungary, but the Hungarian government rejected this plan and will instead receive more migrants from Italy and Greece as part of the relocation scheme.

The UK has opted out of any plans for a quota system but, according to Home Office figures, 1,000 Syrian refugees were resettled under the Vulnerable Persons Relocation scheme in 2015. Prime Minister David Cameron has said the UK will accept up to 20,000 refugees from Syria over the next five years.

Let me ask you. 

What would you do to escape ISIS and the Taliban?

Even if we have taken in the odd million.

Shame on us all. That we can’t offer at least temporary sanctuary.  

“The journey is difficult but we have no choice,” We have to endure.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

THE BEADY EYE ASKS : WILL ENGLAND IN THE FORTHCOMING REFERENDUM ON IN OR OUT OF THE EU SHOOT ITSELF IN THE FOOT

06 Saturday Feb 2016

Posted by in England EU Referendum IN or Out., European Union.

≈ Comments Off on THE BEADY EYE ASKS : WILL ENGLAND IN THE FORTHCOMING REFERENDUM ON IN OR OUT OF THE EU SHOOT ITSELF IN THE FOOT

Tags

,

 

We all know that there is going to be untold verbal and written diarrhea before the forthcoming Uk Referendum on the question of England staying or leaving the EU.

The debate has gone on so far as if there is a clear vision for what a “leave” vote might mean, which is total hogwash as there is no clear vision of what an EU exit would mean.

The outcome is highly uncertain as there are many unknowns including the timing of the vote and the outcome of the renegotiation.

The last time London broke away from Europe it was because of a fight with Rome. Henry VIII wanted to marry Anne Boleyn so broke off relations with the Pope, who opposed it.Afficher l'image d'origine

There is one thing for sure it will be a long and protracted process.

Quantifying the precise effects of leaving the EU is difficult but here are a few indisputable hard facts whether the vote goes one way or the other.

If there is a vote to exit the UK government has two years to negotiate the terms of withdrawal under Article 50 of the EU Treaty.

So if the referendum is in 2017 it will not be till 2019 that the UK formally exits the EU, but this is not the end of the process.

The UK must pursue a number of third-party negotiations to replace treaties that no longer apply, such as FTAs.

               David Cameron passes an exit signAs with any divorce, no-one              can be sure whether it will                  be amicable or hostile.

 

An exit would mean recasting not only future trade relations with the remaining members of the EU, but also those with the rest of the world, many of which are the result of the EU negotiating as a bloc.

Regulatory divergence would increase over time, affecting trade volumes and reducing the attractiveness of the UK for investment.

The EU is currently negotiating a major new FTA with the United States (the TTIP) – as well as an ‘economic partnership agreement’ (EPA) with Japan. If the UK leaves the EU, it will not benefit from these and other free trade agreements negotiated by the EU in future.

Non-EU members like Norway and Switzerland pay to be part of the European single market.

So retaining access to the single market means accepting all the rules decided by ‘Brussels’ and voted on by full members of the EU.

Those countries, like Norway, Switzerland and Iceland, who want the market access, but stop short of seeking full membership, just have to accept whatever the EU decides.

A British exit from the EU would diminish rather than enhance the country’s standing and influence.

Reduced integration with EU countries is likely to cost the UK economy far more than is gained from lower contributions to the EU budget, the value of pound will fall worldwide.

The EU is seen as a major power in the world.

To say that Britain would somehow regain a unique and resonant voice in world affairs once it breaks away from a collective European identity is somewhat naive.

On the other hand the lost of the Uk to the EU would diminish its power standing in the world as a military power.

Britain’s exit would have far-reaching political ramifications for the rest of Europe. The ‘proof of concept’ of leaving the EU could liberate disintegrative, centrifugal forces elsewhere. Member states most exposed to Brexit are the Netherlands, Ireland and Cyprus. Each has very strong trade, investment and financial links with the UK and in the cases of the Netherlands and Ireland are closely aligned in policy terms.

The economic consequences for the UK from leaving the EU are complex.

However both the break with the EU and the uncertainty associated with it would be bad for business and damaging to the UK economy.

Being part of the EU does not restrict UK companies’ ability to trade with the rest of the world.

Beyond all the simple choice of ‘stay or leave’ there is a broader question that has, hitherto, been curiously neglected.

This is what not being a member of the EU would really mean: what, in short, is the most likely alternative to EU membership?

What is the reason after 43-year membership in the European Union the question is:  Why is the Uk is holding a referendum.

Is it because the population was never given an opportunity to say Yes or No.

Or is it because David Cameron won the 2015 general election on a pledge to hold an in-out vote on the UK’s membership of the European Union no later than the end of 2017.

Is it because the English Political phych is still stuck in its history of Empire.

Is U.K. ‘now holding a Gun’ to EU.

Should the EU be allowing Britain to set the terms of the future direction of the EU.

Britain’s relationship with the EU, troubled by decades of anxiety over waning national power, the euro area’s threat to London’s financial clout, subsidies to French farmers and, more recently, mass migration which is spiraling out of control.

Is it to secure a better deal for Britain’s relationship with the EU? while it has refused to go along with more integrationist policies like the single currency and the removal of border checks. Abolishing the U.K.’s obligation to “ever closer union.

Is it because it wants to limit access to welfare payments for non-British EU citizens in the U.K.

That has proved most contentious with governments in countries such as Poland and Hungary. They have sent thousands of people to set up home in the U.K. and say the move would make their countrymen and women second-class citizens in a club where everyone is supposed to be equal.Afficher l'image d'origine

The vital question is whether the U.K. will continue to have access to the single market.

There is little point howling from a distance.

In my opinion the European Union will not be shaped by England or for that matter any of its existing members. Current world events will shape its future.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨