FRANCEXIT! Wonderful Marine Le Pen: "If I'm elected, we'll hold vote on leaving EU"

[anotherlife]

The EU, with the departure of England and Wales, will integrate further and become what was it was supposed to be, an analog of the U.S. with EU states having independent motor vehicle licensing and registration, local taxes, local welfare and unemployment compensation systems and local health care systems. People will be able to freely travel within the EU and take up residence anywhere in the EU as long as the person has EU citizenship.

This would be nice, but state administrations use their national languages as weapons against people who want to move there from another state. Only the EU Lisbon treaty was able to address this problem, and even that has failed so far.

Not at all, wealthy retired Germans with homes on Elba and Romanian workers doing work Italians no longer want to do (both EU citizens) do just fine in Italy.

But they all must learn Italian to do that, the Italians will not learn German or Romanian for them. Such problem didn't exist before ww1. Even nobility learned the language of their foreign peasants. And then we didn't even count yet the new nationalistic hatred that is tied to administrative languages and generated by nation states.

 

[anotherlife]

What's funny is that the EU could keep the whole bloc together if they dropped free movement of people.

That and the Muslims acting like animals are the only things breaking up their bloc.

Actually, you don’t even need to scrap the free movement per se. What you actually should do is separate free movement from the right to work, settle, and get benefits.

The EU preconditions all life with administration, so all the settling and work and benefits are inseparable from the movement of people principle. If we halt those though, then what will you do with people who for example want to buy a house at the other side of their town and move there but that street is across a country border?

First of all I want to say that it is pointless to scrap the free movement completely. There should be a free travel area for tourist visits inside the EU. If you want to stay for say 90 days in a certain country, you should be free in doing so. If you want to stay longer or live there permanently or get a job, you should get a visa. If you buy a property in the EU country, you will be able to get a long-term visa which allows you to live here, but without a right to get a job.

The property buying idea in your post is more advanced than what many of the EU members have even today, for example if you are German and want to buy a house in the Czech Republic then you are not allowed to do that, but if you are Slovakian then you are.

For the job thing, this is very tricky, because half of the EU countries have only pretend job markets, and the few that have real ones, have it only in one city or two. For example the only real job market in France is Paris and nothing in Spain. So if the Spanis would now suddenly need a work visa to work in France, then Spain would destabilize.

because they followed the EU model and created the nations wealth from niche markets, in Spain it was Tourism which is seasonal. In France it was farming which is again seasonal, making for runs of poverty with smaller runs of wealth

Shutting down borders and locking people in does nothing about the movement of money. If it is cheaper to import stuff than making it at home than everyone at home will be jobless, mobile or not. This has already brought down the Soviet Union and that one had really shut borders. So borders can't work. When technology moves money across them, people also must be able to move across them.

 

[xband]

The EU is soon to fall with the Euro soon after the fall from grace. Thanks for good news from France. Somebody has to draw the line.

 

[anotherlife]

What's funny is that the EU could keep the whole bloc together if they dropped free movement of people.

That and the Muslims acting like animals are the only things breaking up their bloc.

Actually, you don’t even need to scrap the free movement per se. What you actually should do is separate free movement from the right to work, settle, and get benefits.

The EU preconditions all life with administration, so all the settling and work and benefits are inseparable from the movement of people principle. If we halt those though, then what will you do with people who for example want to buy a house at the other side of their town and move there but that street is across a country border?

First of all I want to say that it is pointless to scrap the free movement completely. There should be a free travel area for tourist visits inside the EU. If you want to stay for say 90 days in a certain country, you should be free in doing so. If you want to stay longer or live there permanently or get a job, you should get a visa. If you buy a property in the EU country, you will be able to get a long-term visa which allows you to live here, but without a right to get a job.

The property buying idea in your post is more advanced than what many of the EU members have even today, for example if you are German and want to buy a house in the Czech Republic then you are not allowed to do that, but if you are Slovakian then you are.

For the job thing, this is very tricky, because half of the EU countries have only pretend job markets, and the few that have real ones, have it only in one city or two. For example the only real job market in France is Paris and nothing in Spain. So if the Spanis would now suddenly need a work visa to work in France, then Spain would destabilize.

I have some doubts that the Germans are not allowed to do so. Are you sure? I know that the Czech Rep, especially Karlovy Vary, was very popular among the Russians to buy a property (among those who wanted to buy a property abroad, of course). I don’t think that Germans have worse conditions than Russians.

First of all, every country should think of its own citizens in the first turn. Also, every country should have a right to sign deals with other countries about work permits concerning their citizens or about visa-free jobs or something like that. My point is that every EU member state should have a right to conduct its own policy about immigration, residency, and other similar things.

So what do you do when half of your own land is taken by another country? This is relevant to Carlovy Vary too. The Czech laws prohibit German ownership but permit Russian ownership, or other Slavonic ownership. Discriminative, yes. This is because Carlovy Vary (Karlsburg?) was a German town, and the Russians financed that the Czechs deport all Germans out of it - 60 years ago. The European Union if not only an economic deal needs to address such things as its primary mission. This means, that the evil of nation states must be confronted head on, and only the EU can stand up against nation states at this time. Even in the UK, the Welsh would not have language rights now, had it not been for Britain's EU membership.

 

[anotherlife]

The EU is soon to fall with the Euro soon after the fall from grace. Thanks for good news from France. Somebody has to draw the line.

The only way to normalize Europe is to start killing them like they like to, such as in the 100 year war. France is a good start point for this, the king of England has experience in it, why don't we read history?

 

[xband]

Actually, you don’t even need to scrap the free movement per se. What you actually should do is separate free movement from the right to work, settle, and get benefits.

The EU preconditions all life with administration, so all the settling and work and benefits are inseparable from the movement of people principle. If we halt those though, then what will you do with people who for example want to buy a house at the other side of their town and move there but that street is across a country border?

First of all I want to say that it is pointless to scrap the free movement completely. There should be a free travel area for tourist visits inside the EU. If you want to stay for say 90 days in a certain country, you should be free in doing so. If you want to stay longer or live there permanently or get a job, you should get a visa. If you buy a property in the EU country, you will be able to get a long-term visa which allows you to live here, but without a right to get a job.

The property buying idea in your post is more advanced than what many of the EU members have even today, for example if you are German and want to buy a house in the Czech Republic then you are not allowed to do that, but if you are Slovakian then you are.

For the job thing, this is very tricky, because half of the EU countries have only pretend job markets, and the few that have real ones, have it only in one city or two. For example the only real job market in France is Paris and nothing in Spain. So if the Spanis would now suddenly need a work visa to work in France, then Spain would destabilize.

I have some doubts that the Germans are not allowed to do so. Are you sure? I know that the Czech Rep, especially Karlovy Vary, was very popular among the Russians to buy a property (among those who wanted to buy a property abroad, of course). I don’t think that Germans have worse conditions than Russians.

First of all, every country should think of its own citizens in the first turn. Also, every country should have a right to sign deals with other countries about work permits concerning their citizens or about visa-free jobs or something like that. My point is that every EU member state should have a right to conduct its own policy about immigration, residency, and other similar things.

So what do you do when half of your own land is taken by another country? This is relevant to Carlovy Vary too. The Czech laws prohibit German ownership but permit Russian ownership, or other Slavonic ownership. Discriminative, yes. This is because Carlovy Vary (Karlsburg?) was a German town, and the Russians financed that the Czechs deport all Germans out of it - 60 years ago. The European Union if not only an economic deal needs to address such things as its primary mission. This means, that the evil of nation states must be confronted head on, and only the EU can stand up against nation states at this time. Even in the UK, the Welsh would not have language rights now, had it not been for Britain's EU membership.

I once worked with a guy from Croatia who hated Serbians and Napoleon who he called tyrants.

 

[anotherlife]

The EU preconditions all life with administration, so all the settling and work and benefits are inseparable from the movement of people principle. If we halt those though, then what will you do with people who for example want to buy a house at the other side of their town and move there but that street is across a country border?

First of all I want to say that it is pointless to scrap the free movement completely. There should be a free travel area for tourist visits inside the EU. If you want to stay for say 90 days in a certain country, you should be free in doing so. If you want to stay longer or live there permanently or get a job, you should get a visa. If you buy a property in the EU country, you will be able to get a long-term visa which allows you to live here, but without a right to get a job.

The property buying idea in your post is more advanced than what many of the EU members have even today, for example if you are German and want to buy a house in the Czech Republic then you are not allowed to do that, but if you are Slovakian then you are.

For the job thing, this is very tricky, because half of the EU countries have only pretend job markets, and the few that have real ones, have it only in one city or two. For example the only real job market in France is Paris and nothing in Spain. So if the Spanis would now suddenly need a work visa to work in France, then Spain would destabilize.

I have some doubts that the Germans are not allowed to do so. Are you sure? I know that the Czech Rep, especially Karlovy Vary, was very popular among the Russians to buy a property (among those who wanted to buy a property abroad, of course). I don’t think that Germans have worse conditions than Russians.

First of all, every country should think of its own citizens in the first turn. Also, every country should have a right to sign deals with other countries about work permits concerning their citizens or about visa-free jobs or something like that. My point is that every EU member state should have a right to conduct its own policy about immigration, residency, and other similar things.

So what do you do when half of your own land is taken by another country? This is relevant to Carlovy Vary too. The Czech laws prohibit German ownership but permit Russian ownership, or other Slavonic ownership. Discriminative, yes. This is because Carlovy Vary (Karlsburg?) was a German town, and the Russians financed that the Czechs deport all Germans out of it - 60 years ago. The European Union if not only an economic deal needs to address such things as its primary mission. This means, that the evil of nation states must be confronted head on, and only the EU can stand up against nation states at this time. Even in the UK, the Welsh would not have language rights now, had it not been for Britain's EU membership.

I once worked with a guy from Croatia who hated Serbians and Napoleon who he called tyrants.

Exactly. Thank you. This is what happens when powers invent nation states and national administrations, with national languages. More hate is coming for Europeans soon, and the Muslims will not even be important any more.

 

[xband]

First of all I want to say that it is pointless to scrap the free movement completely. There should be a free travel area for tourist visits inside the EU. If you want to stay for say 90 days in a certain country, you should be free in doing so. If you want to stay longer or live there permanently or get a job, you should get a visa. If you buy a property in the EU country, you will be able to get a long-term visa which allows you to live here, but without a right to get a job.

The property buying idea in your post is more advanced than what many of the EU members have even today, for example if you are German and want to buy a house in the Czech Republic then you are not allowed to do that, but if you are Slovakian then you are.

For the job thing, this is very tricky, because half of the EU countries have only pretend job markets, and the few that have real ones, have it only in one city or two. For example the only real job market in France is Paris and nothing in Spain. So if the Spanis would now suddenly need a work visa to work in France, then Spain would destabilize.

I have some doubts that the Germans are not allowed to do so. Are you sure? I know that the Czech Rep, especially Karlovy Vary, was very popular among the Russians to buy a property (among those who wanted to buy a property abroad, of course). I don’t think that Germans have worse conditions than Russians.

First of all, every country should think of its own citizens in the first turn. Also, every country should have a right to sign deals with other countries about work permits concerning their citizens or about visa-free jobs or something like that. My point is that every EU member state should have a right to conduct its own policy about immigration, residency, and other similar things.

So what do you do when half of your own land is taken by another country? This is relevant to Carlovy Vary too. The Czech laws prohibit German ownership but permit Russian ownership, or other Slavonic ownership. Discriminative, yes. This is because Carlovy Vary (Karlsburg?) was a German town, and the Russians financed that the Czechs deport all Germans out of it - 60 years ago. The European Union if not only an economic deal needs to address such things as its primary mission. This means, that the evil of nation states must be confronted head on, and only the EU can stand up against nation states at this time. Even in the UK, the Welsh would not have language rights now, had it not been for Britain's EU membership.

I once worked with a guy from Croatia who hated Serbians and Napoleon who he called tyrants.

Exactly. Thank you. This is what happens when powers invent nation states and national administrations, with national languages. More hate is coming for Europeans soon, and the Muslims will not even be important any more.

Bring back the Monroe Doctrine.

 

[Phoenall]

Actually, you don’t even need to scrap the free movement per se. What you actually should do is separate free movement from the right to work, settle, and get benefits.

The EU preconditions all life with administration, so all the settling and work and benefits are inseparable from the movement of people principle. If we halt those though, then what will you do with people who for example want to buy a house at the other side of their town and move there but that street is across a country border?

First of all I want to say that it is pointless to scrap the free movement completely. There should be a free travel area for tourist visits inside the EU. If you want to stay for say 90 days in a certain country, you should be free in doing so. If you want to stay longer or live there permanently or get a job, you should get a visa. If you buy a property in the EU country, you will be able to get a long-term visa which allows you to live here, but without a right to get a job.

The property buying idea in your post is more advanced than what many of the EU members have even today, for example if you are German and want to buy a house in the Czech Republic then you are not allowed to do that, but if you are Slovakian then you are.

For the job thing, this is very tricky, because half of the EU countries have only pretend job markets, and the few that have real ones, have it only in one city or two. For example the only real job market in France is Paris and nothing in Spain. So if the Spanis would now suddenly need a work visa to work in France, then Spain would destabilize.

because they followed the EU model and created the nations wealth from niche markets, in Spain it was Tourism which is seasonal. In France it was farming which is again seasonal, making for runs of poverty with smaller runs of wealth

Shutting down borders and locking people in does nothing about the movement of money. If it is cheaper to import stuff than making it at home than everyone at home will be jobless, mobile or not. This has already brought down the Soviet Union and that one had really shut borders. So borders can't work. When technology moves money across them, people also must be able to move across them.

Russia took it too far and had the workers making millions of unmatched parts just so production was up. As in one factory made bolts and found that the could make 1 million a shift if they were all 50mm long by 5mm diameter. Another factory made nuts and found they could make 1 million as long as they were 1/4 whitworth. This meant that production was as high as it could go but nothing was ever produced. It was only after the breakup of the Soviet republic and borders were put in place that the production of goods started to rise, and they were exported to other nations. The USSR had open borders if you could afford to travel, and that is what the EU was being modeled on, the neo marxist dream that was a proven failure. So we need border controls to halt the free movement of criminals and terrorists, and if they want to work outside of their own country then they can apply for citizenship

 

[Phoenall]

Actually, you don’t even need to scrap the free movement per se. What you actually should do is separate free movement from the right to work, settle, and get benefits.

The EU preconditions all life with administration, so all the settling and work and benefits are inseparable from the movement of people principle. If we halt those though, then what will you do with people who for example want to buy a house at the other side of their town and move there but that street is across a country border?

First of all I want to say that it is pointless to scrap the free movement completely. There should be a free travel area for tourist visits inside the EU. If you want to stay for say 90 days in a certain country, you should be free in doing so. If you want to stay longer or live there permanently or get a job, you should get a visa. If you buy a property in the EU country, you will be able to get a long-term visa which allows you to live here, but without a right to get a job.

The property buying idea in your post is more advanced than what many of the EU members have even today, for example if you are German and want to buy a house in the Czech Republic then you are not allowed to do that, but if you are Slovakian then you are.

For the job thing, this is very tricky, because half of the EU countries have only pretend job markets, and the few that have real ones, have it only in one city or two. For example the only real job market in France is Paris and nothing in Spain. So if the Spanis would now suddenly need a work visa to work in France, then Spain would destabilize.

I have some doubts that the Germans are not allowed to do so. Are you sure? I know that the Czech Rep, especially Karlovy Vary, was very popular among the Russians to buy a property (among those who wanted to buy a property abroad, of course). I don’t think that Germans have worse conditions than Russians.

First of all, every country should think of its own citizens in the first turn. Also, every country should have a right to sign deals with other countries about work permits concerning their citizens or about visa-free jobs or something like that. My point is that every EU member state should have a right to conduct its own policy about immigration, residency, and other similar things.

So what do you do when half of your own land is taken by another country? This is relevant to Carlovy Vary too. The Czech laws prohibit German ownership but permit Russian ownership, or other Slavonic ownership. Discriminative, yes. This is because Carlovy Vary (Karlsburg?) was a German town, and the Russians financed that the Czechs deport all Germans out of it - 60 years ago. The European Union if not only an economic deal needs to address such things as its primary mission. This means, that the evil of nation states must be confronted head on, and only the EU can stand up against nation states at this time. Even in the UK, the Welsh would not have language rights now, had it not been for Britain's EU membership.

Why should that happen, the borders are already there and worked fine until the neo marxists took control of the EU just a few short years ago. As for the Welsh language it was in use and being taught before we even joined the EU. Or I should say the Common Market, which is the primary mission of the European Union until neo marxism raised its ugly head

 

[Phoenall]

The EU is soon to fall with the Euro soon after the fall from grace. Thanks for good news from France. Somebody has to draw the line.

The only way to normalize Europe is to start killing them like they like to, such as in the 100 year war. France is a good start point for this, the king of England has experience in it, why don't we read history?

You mean start another set of communist civil wars cleansing the lands of anyone that does not follow Marx or Lenin ?

So will you be held up for the deaths of 100's of millions of "untermensch" starting with the Jews of course

 

[anotherlife]

The property buying idea in your post is more advanced than what many of the EU members have even today, for example if you are German and want to buy a house in the Czech Republic then you are not allowed to do that, but if you are Slovakian then you are.

For the job thing, this is very tricky, because half of the EU countries have only pretend job markets, and the few that have real ones, have it only in one city or two. For example the only real job market in France is Paris and nothing in Spain. So if the Spanis would now suddenly need a work visa to work in France, then Spain would destabilize.

I have some doubts that the Germans are not allowed to do so. Are you sure? I know that the Czech Rep, especially Karlovy Vary, was very popular among the Russians to buy a property (among those who wanted to buy a property abroad, of course). I don’t think that Germans have worse conditions than Russians.

First of all, every country should think of its own citizens in the first turn. Also, every country should have a right to sign deals with other countries about work permits concerning their citizens or about visa-free jobs or something like that. My point is that every EU member state should have a right to conduct its own policy about immigration, residency, and other similar things.

So what do you do when half of your own land is taken by another country? This is relevant to Carlovy Vary too. The Czech laws prohibit German ownership but permit Russian ownership, or other Slavonic ownership. Discriminative, yes. This is because Carlovy Vary (Karlsburg?) was a German town, and the Russians financed that the Czechs deport all Germans out of it - 60 years ago. The European Union if not only an economic deal needs to address such things as its primary mission. This means, that the evil of nation states must be confronted head on, and only the EU can stand up against nation states at this time. Even in the UK, the Welsh would not have language rights now, had it not been for Britain's EU membership.

I once worked with a guy from Croatia who hated Serbians and Napoleon who he called tyrants.

Exactly. Thank you. This is what happens when powers invent nation states and national administrations, with national languages. More hate is coming for Europeans soon, and the Muslims will not even be important any more.

Bring back the Monroe Doctrine.

This very interesting. The biggest violation against the Monroe Doctrine was when the US was maneuvered into ww1-2 by something as stupid as the Lusithania and a Mexican telegram. That proved that America has been managed by the enemies of Monroe ever since.

 

[Phoenall]

First of all I want to say that it is pointless to scrap the free movement completely. There should be a free travel area for tourist visits inside the EU. If you want to stay for say 90 days in a certain country, you should be free in doing so. If you want to stay longer or live there permanently or get a job, you should get a visa. If you buy a property in the EU country, you will be able to get a long-term visa which allows you to live here, but without a right to get a job.

The property buying idea in your post is more advanced than what many of the EU members have even today, for example if you are German and want to buy a house in the Czech Republic then you are not allowed to do that, but if you are Slovakian then you are.

For the job thing, this is very tricky, because half of the EU countries have only pretend job markets, and the few that have real ones, have it only in one city or two. For example the only real job market in France is Paris and nothing in Spain. So if the Spanis would now suddenly need a work visa to work in France, then Spain would destabilize.

I have some doubts that the Germans are not allowed to do so. Are you sure? I know that the Czech Rep, especially Karlovy Vary, was very popular among the Russians to buy a property (among those who wanted to buy a property abroad, of course). I don’t think that Germans have worse conditions than Russians.

First of all, every country should think of its own citizens in the first turn. Also, every country should have a right to sign deals with other countries about work permits concerning their citizens or about visa-free jobs or something like that. My point is that every EU member state should have a right to conduct its own policy about immigration, residency, and other similar things.

So what do you do when half of your own land is taken by another country? This is relevant to Carlovy Vary too. The Czech laws prohibit German ownership but permit Russian ownership, or other Slavonic ownership. Discriminative, yes. This is because Carlovy Vary (Karlsburg?) was a German town, and the Russians financed that the Czechs deport all Germans out of it - 60 years ago. The European Union if not only an economic deal needs to address such things as its primary mission. This means, that the evil of nation states must be confronted head on, and only the EU can stand up against nation states at this time. Even in the UK, the Welsh would not have language rights now, had it not been for Britain's EU membership.

I once worked with a guy from Croatia who hated Serbians and Napoleon who he called tyrants.

Exactly. Thank you. This is what happens when powers invent nation states and national administrations, with national languages. More hate is coming for Europeans soon, and the Muslims will not even be important any more.

And it all derives from neo marxism the scourge of mankind

 

[anotherlife]

The EU preconditions all life with administration, so all the settling and work and benefits are inseparable from the movement of people principle. If we halt those though, then what will you do with people who for example want to buy a house at the other side of their town and move there but that street is across a country border?

First of all I want to say that it is pointless to scrap the free movement completely. There should be a free travel area for tourist visits inside the EU. If you want to stay for say 90 days in a certain country, you should be free in doing so. If you want to stay longer or live there permanently or get a job, you should get a visa. If you buy a property in the EU country, you will be able to get a long-term visa which allows you to live here, but without a right to get a job.

The property buying idea in your post is more advanced than what many of the EU members have even today, for example if you are German and want to buy a house in the Czech Republic then you are not allowed to do that, but if you are Slovakian then you are.

For the job thing, this is very tricky, because half of the EU countries have only pretend job markets, and the few that have real ones, have it only in one city or two. For example the only real job market in France is Paris and nothing in Spain. So if the Spanis would now suddenly need a work visa to work in France, then Spain would destabilize.

because they followed the EU model and created the nations wealth from niche markets, in Spain it was Tourism which is seasonal. In France it was farming which is again seasonal, making for runs of poverty with smaller runs of wealth

Shutting down borders and locking people in does nothing about the movement of money. If it is cheaper to import stuff than making it at home than everyone at home will be jobless, mobile or not. This has already brought down the Soviet Union and that one had really shut borders. So borders can't work. When technology moves money across them, people also must be able to move across them.

Russia took it too far and had the workers making millions of unmatched parts just so production was up. As in one factory made bolts and found that the could make 1 million a shift if they were all 50mm long by 5mm diameter. Another factory made nuts and found they could make 1 million as long as they were 1/4 whitworth. This meant that production was as high as it could go but nothing was ever produced. It was only after the breakup of the Soviet republic and borders were put in place that the production of goods started to rise, and they were exported to other nations. The USSR had open borders if you could afford to travel, and that is what the EU was being modeled on, the neo marxist dream that was a proven failure. So we need border controls to halt the free movement of criminals and terrorists, and if they want to work outside of their own country then they can apply for citizenship

The USSR certainly didn't have open borders. The Polish of Lemberg for example didn't get a passport to visit their cousins in Poland. I know the propaganda better than you, so you can't fool me, bplus I know the facts too, because I have many east European friends. Hehehe. Apart from this, the Soviet Union had internal district based visa processes for travel, and no such thing as a temporary address. So if you lived in like Minsk and went to college in Moscow, it was like changing your entire identity and you needed an internal visa to go home. Bravo. This is certainly not what Europe needs, especially not on a nation state basis. This is what border controls and citizenships do.

 

[anotherlife]

The EU preconditions all life with administration, so all the settling and work and benefits are inseparable from the movement of people principle. If we halt those though, then what will you do with people who for example want to buy a house at the other side of their town and move there but that street is across a country border?

First of all I want to say that it is pointless to scrap the free movement completely. There should be a free travel area for tourist visits inside the EU. If you want to stay for say 90 days in a certain country, you should be free in doing so. If you want to stay longer or live there permanently or get a job, you should get a visa. If you buy a property in the EU country, you will be able to get a long-term visa which allows you to live here, but without a right to get a job.

The property buying idea in your post is more advanced than what many of the EU members have even today, for example if you are German and want to buy a house in the Czech Republic then you are not allowed to do that, but if you are Slovakian then you are.

For the job thing, this is very tricky, because half of the EU countries have only pretend job markets, and the few that have real ones, have it only in one city or two. For example the only real job market in France is Paris and nothing in Spain. So if the Spanis would now suddenly need a work visa to work in France, then Spain would destabilize.

I have some doubts that the Germans are not allowed to do so. Are you sure? I know that the Czech Rep, especially Karlovy Vary, was very popular among the Russians to buy a property (among those who wanted to buy a property abroad, of course). I don’t think that Germans have worse conditions than Russians.

First of all, every country should think of its own citizens in the first turn. Also, every country should have a right to sign deals with other countries about work permits concerning their citizens or about visa-free jobs or something like that. My point is that every EU member state should have a right to conduct its own policy about immigration, residency, and other similar things.

So what do you do when half of your own land is taken by another country? This is relevant to Carlovy Vary too. The Czech laws prohibit German ownership but permit Russian ownership, or other Slavonic ownership. Discriminative, yes. This is because Carlovy Vary (Karlsburg?) was a German town, and the Russians financed that the Czechs deport all Germans out of it - 60 years ago. The European Union if not only an economic deal needs to address such things as its primary mission. This means, that the evil of nation states must be confronted head on, and only the EU can stand up against nation states at this time. Even in the UK, the Welsh would not have language rights now, had it not been for Britain's EU membership.

Why should that happen, the borders are already there and worked fine until the neo marxists took control of the EU just a few short years ago. As for the Welsh language it was in use and being taught before we even joined the EU. Or I should say the Common Market, which is the primary mission of the European Union until neo marxism raised its ugly head

No. No European border worked ever since ww1. This is why they were created. To rob people. This is too why there is now more of them than ever before in history. The communist only capitalize on this design, and use it to their enjoyment of their bloodthirsty urges.

 

[anotherlife]

The EU is soon to fall with the Euro soon after the fall from grace. Thanks for good news from France. Somebody has to draw the line.

The only way to normalize Europe is to start killing them like they like to, such as in the 100 year war. France is a good start point for this, the king of England has experience in it, why don't we read history?

You mean start another set of communist civil wars cleansing the lands of anyone that does not follow Marx or Lenin ?

So will you be held up for the deaths of 100's of millions of "untermensch" starting with the Jews of course

It is the ww1-2 entente and its successors that have designed this situation and maintain it to this day. Start with them then. Only the European Union With its open borders can stand up against them.

 

[anotherlife]

The property buying idea in your post is more advanced than what many of the EU members have even today, for example if you are German and want to buy a house in the Czech Republic then you are not allowed to do that, but if you are Slovakian then you are.

For the job thing, this is very tricky, because half of the EU countries have only pretend job markets, and the few that have real ones, have it only in one city or two. For example the only real job market in France is Paris and nothing in Spain. So if the Spanis would now suddenly need a work visa to work in France, then Spain would destabilize.

I have some doubts that the Germans are not allowed to do so. Are you sure? I know that the Czech Rep, especially Karlovy Vary, was very popular among the Russians to buy a property (among those who wanted to buy a property abroad, of course). I don’t think that Germans have worse conditions than Russians.

First of all, every country should think of its own citizens in the first turn. Also, every country should have a right to sign deals with other countries about work permits concerning their citizens or about visa-free jobs or something like that. My point is that every EU member state should have a right to conduct its own policy about immigration, residency, and other similar things.

So what do you do when half of your own land is taken by another country? This is relevant to Carlovy Vary too. The Czech laws prohibit German ownership but permit Russian ownership, or other Slavonic ownership. Discriminative, yes. This is because Carlovy Vary (Karlsburg?) was a German town, and the Russians financed that the Czechs deport all Germans out of it - 60 years ago. The European Union if not only an economic deal needs to address such things as its primary mission. This means, that the evil of nation states must be confronted head on, and only the EU can stand up against nation states at this time. Even in the UK, the Welsh would not have language rights now, had it not been for Britain's EU membership.

I once worked with a guy from Croatia who hated Serbians and Napoleon who he called tyrants.

Exactly. Thank you. This is what happens when powers invent nation states and national administrations, with national languages. More hate is coming for Europeans soon, and the Muslims will not even be important any more.

And it all derives from neo marxism the scourge of mankind

And neo Marxism, like 20th century Marxism, derives from ultra nationalistic interest, which derives from criminals that discovered how to use banking to write laws and start wars to pocket all assets, all money's, all people. Very clever.

 

[ESay]

Actually, you don’t even need to scrap the free movement per se. What you actually should do is separate free movement from the right to work, settle, and get benefits.

The EU preconditions all life with administration, so all the settling and work and benefits are inseparable from the movement of people principle. If we halt those though, then what will you do with people who for example want to buy a house at the other side of their town and move there but that street is across a country border?

First of all I want to say that it is pointless to scrap the free movement completely. There should be a free travel area for tourist visits inside the EU. If you want to stay for say 90 days in a certain country, you should be free in doing so. If you want to stay longer or live there permanently or get a job, you should get a visa. If you buy a property in the EU country, you will be able to get a long-term visa which allows you to live here, but without a right to get a job.

The property buying idea in your post is more advanced than what many of the EU members have even today, for example if you are German and want to buy a house in the Czech Republic then you are not allowed to do that, but if you are Slovakian then you are.

For the job thing, this is very tricky, because half of the EU countries have only pretend job markets, and the few that have real ones, have it only in one city or two. For example the only real job market in France is Paris and nothing in Spain. So if the Spanis would now suddenly need a work visa to work in France, then Spain would destabilize.

I have some doubts that the Germans are not allowed to do so. Are you sure? I know that the Czech Rep, especially Karlovy Vary, was very popular among the Russians to buy a property (among those who wanted to buy a property abroad, of course). I don’t think that Germans have worse conditions than Russians.

First of all, every country should think of its own citizens in the first turn. Also, every country should have a right to sign deals with other countries about work permits concerning their citizens or about visa-free jobs or something like that. My point is that every EU member state should have a right to conduct its own policy about immigration, residency, and other similar things.

So what do you do when half of your own land is taken by another country? This is relevant to Carlovy Vary too. The Czech laws prohibit German ownership but permit Russian ownership, or other Slavonic ownership. Discriminative, yes. This is because Carlovy Vary (Karlsburg?) was a German town, and the Russians financed that the Czechs deport all Germans out of it - 60 years ago. The European Union if not only an economic deal needs to address such things as its primary mission. This means, that the evil of nation states must be confronted head on, and only the EU can stand up against nation states at this time. Even in the UK, the Welsh would not have language rights now, had it not been for Britain's EU membership.

Why should it be taken by another country? If a citizen of Germany buys a property in say France it doesn’t automatically means that this property gets to be owned by the German state. It is hilarious.

Also, there may be certain restrictions put in place concerning the size of property, the amount of properties a foreigner may own, and so on. But then again, it should be up to a certain country to impose such rules rather than up to Brussels; if the government decides to forbid selling land to foreigners then it is up to it to do so.


Our main differences with you lie on the perception of what the role of the EU should be. For me it is primarily a common market with preserving national governments’ right to decide the bulk of their internal and external affairs on their own. For you, as I can understand, the EU is a federation without internal borders and with a federal body which will have primacy over national bodies. I don’t think that this super-federation will succeed in a long run. All multinational big states are doomed to failure, as history has shown not once.

 

[ESay]

Apart from this, the Soviet Union had internal district based visa processes for travel, and no such thing as a temporary address. So if you lived in like Minsk and went to college in Moscow, it was like changing your entire identity and you needed an internal visa to go home.

Where did you get it from? It isn’t true.

 

[anotherlife]

The EU preconditions all life with administration, so all the settling and work and benefits are inseparable from the movement of people principle. If we halt those though, then what will you do with people who for example want to buy a house at the other side of their town and move there but that street is across a country border?

First of all I want to say that it is pointless to scrap the free movement completely. There should be a free travel area for tourist visits inside the EU. If you want to stay for say 90 days in a certain country, you should be free in doing so. If you want to stay longer or live there permanently or get a job, you should get a visa. If you buy a property in the EU country, you will be able to get a long-term visa which allows you to live here, but without a right to get a job.

The property buying idea in your post is more advanced than what many of the EU members have even today, for example if you are German and want to buy a house in the Czech Republic then you are not allowed to do that, but if you are Slovakian then you are.

For the job thing, this is very tricky, because half of the EU countries have only pretend job markets, and the few that have real ones, have it only in one city or two. For example the only real job market in France is Paris and nothing in Spain. So if the Spanis would now suddenly need a work visa to work in France, then Spain would destabilize.

I have some doubts that the Germans are not allowed to do so. Are you sure? I know that the Czech Rep, especially Karlovy Vary, was very popular among the Russians to buy a property (among those who wanted to buy a property abroad, of course). I don’t think that Germans have worse conditions than Russians.

First of all, every country should think of its own citizens in the first turn. Also, every country should have a right to sign deals with other countries about work permits concerning their citizens or about visa-free jobs or something like that. My point is that every EU member state should have a right to conduct its own policy about immigration, residency, and other similar things.

So what do you do when half of your own land is taken by another country? This is relevant to Carlovy Vary too. The Czech laws prohibit German ownership but permit Russian ownership, or other Slavonic ownership. Discriminative, yes. This is because Carlovy Vary (Karlsburg?) was a German town, and the Russians financed that the Czechs deport all Germans out of it - 60 years ago. The European Union if not only an economic deal needs to address such things as its primary mission. This means, that the evil of nation states must be confronted head on, and only the EU can stand up against nation states at this time. Even in the UK, the Welsh would not have language rights now, had it not been for Britain's EU membership.

Why should it be taken by another country? If a citizen of Germany buys a property in say France it doesn’t automatically means that this property gets to be owned by the German state. It is hilarious.

Also, there may be certain restrictions put in place concerning the size of property, the amount of properties a foreigner may own, and so on. But then again, it should be up to a certain country to impose such rules rather than up to Brussels; if the government decides to forbid selling land to foreigners then it is up to it to do so.


Our main differences with you lie on the perception of what the role of the EU should be. For me it is primarily a common market with preserving national governments’ right to decide the bulk of their internal and external affairs on their own. For you, as I can understand, the EU is a federation without internal borders and with a federal body which will have primacy over national bodies. I don’t think that this super-federation will succeed in a long run. All multinational big states are doomed to failure, as history has shown not once.

So how will people get back their stolen land then?

Asking national governments to legislate land deals is like asking the Maffia to conduct a high street revitalization program and a restaurant management deal.

What other checks and balances can you design then other than a US stile overbearing federation?

And even if it fails like Yugoslavia, at least it resets the land theft border cycle, like Yugoslavia did. (Although Yugoslavia failed to reset the theft against the stolen Hungarian and Italian lands.)