Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Poll

IF YOU COULD VOTE TO LEAVE OR REMAIN WITHIN THE EUROPEAN UNION AS A SUBJECT OF HRH (PBUH) WITH PERMANENT RESIDENCE IN THE UK OR CITIZENSHIP ABROAD, HOW WOULD YOU VOTE?

FUCK YES LET'S LEAVE GET HYPE YEY
Casual yes, let's leave and get independence done with
Meh, probably just scribble all over my vote ballot to spite tryhards
Casual no, let's remain and get integration done with
FUCK NO LET'S REMAIN GET CALM YEY

Pages: 1 ... 25 26 [27] 28 29 ... 107

Author Topic: Breeki British Brexit thread  (Read 146498 times)

Sheb

  • Bay Watcher
  • You Are An Avatar
    • View Profile

Covenant: LW keeps bringing us the Dutch trawler that get UK fishing right. I'm also 90% sure his whole thing is BS, I'm currently reading that nature paper he linked to see if I'm right.
Logged

Quote from: Paul-Henry Spaak
Europe consists only of small countries, some of which know it and some of which don’t yet.

Loud Whispers

  • Bay Watcher
  • They said we have to aim higher, so we dug deeper.
    • View Profile
    • I APPLAUD YOU SIRRAH

Covenant: LW keeps bringing us the Dutch trawler that get UK fishing right. I'm also 90% sure his whole thing is BS, I'm currently reading that nature paper he linked to see if I'm right.
Pardon? Why is no one reading my post. The EU opened all of our waters to European trawlers, and assigned British fishermen their own quota - this is the British quota. Of that quota, the Dutch took a share of the British quota, which does not change the fact that the rest of Europe all have access to the UK's fishing waters through quotas granted to them by the EU.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Bolded in red is where the Dutch are brought up. Everything else you and mainiac seem keen on ignoring, having not addressed them at all - which suggests to me you only bothered reading the first two sentences. You say you're 90% sure I'm BS but you haven't even been able to state what my points are correctly, let alone begin to address them - please actually try, it is a waste of energy if we cannot communicate sincerely

I read the goddamn post.  Did you?  ::)
Stop blaming Europe for the British government.
Mainiac, if you would read the post, you would be able to see there are two worlds - one before quotas, one after. The quotas are imposed by the EU in 1972, which collapses the British fishing industry because it stops British fishermen from fishing in British waters whilst opening them up to the entirety of Europe's fishing fleet. I don't know how you could miss that unless you ignored the entire post, or else glazed over it, so I sincerely ask that you read the post before accusing me of something I spent a long time explaining.

You don't seem very well-informed about the topic, Mainiac (not intended as an insult, but you've said 'This sounds like x' three times now). Maybe you should look into the issue in detail yourself before starting another argument, particularly if we're gonna start throwing needlessly inflammatory rhetoric at each other like 'nationalistic denouncement of foreigners', christ.
It's like the bickering from the gun control thread has eluded LW's lax border controls and sadly enriched the Brexit thread. Shoulda built a wall.
Heh, this is good advice. I don't mind sarcasm, or bickering and such if people are actually reading what the other says - it just seems particularly irksome when three people in a row voice the exact same concern after I've already gone over it. Then when I've gone over it, voice the same concern again. And probably do it again :P

It really should not be such an arduous proposition to ask one to read their post before addressing the post, for if you are not addressing what I say, who are you talking to?

mainiac

  • Bay Watcher
  • Na vazeal kwah-kai
    • View Profile

Mainiac, if you would read the post, you would be able to see there are two worlds - one before quotas, one after.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc  There was a fishing collapse that part is true.  It's the rest that's a load of shit.  You take something that did happen and you ascribe it without a shred of proof to the EU.  You even blame the EU for the policies of the British government that the EU doesn't dictate.

LW, I think you REALLY need to stop reading the daily mail.
Logged
Ancient Babylonian god of RAEG
--------------
[CAN_INTERNET]
[PREFSTRING:google]
"Don't tell me what you value. Show me your budget and I will tell you what you value"
« Last Edit: February 10, 1988, 03:27:23 pm by UR MOM »
mainiac is always a little sarcastic, at least.

Loud Whispers

  • Bay Watcher
  • They said we have to aim higher, so we dug deeper.
    • View Profile
    • I APPLAUD YOU SIRRAH

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc  There was a fishing collapse that part is true.  It's the rest that's a load of shit.  You take something that did happen and you ascribe it without a shred of proof to the EU.
Can you actually read the post instead of ignoring it and calling me an idiot.

You even blame the EU for the policies of the British government that the EU doesn't dictate.
I didn't, can you actually read the post instead of ignoring it and calling me an idiot.

LW, I think you REALLY need to stop reading the daily mail.
Are you done mocking me? Neat, now address my argument.

mainiac

  • Bay Watcher
  • Na vazeal kwah-kai
    • View Profile

Neat, now address my argument.

YOU HAVEN'T MADE AN ARGUMENT

You have said that something bad happens.  That's all very sad.  The thing is you haven't shown why the EU is to blame.  You are just full of shit, blaming it on the EU because it's something tangentially related to them.  Fishing populations are declining worldwide due to overfishing and habitat destruction.  You are resorting to simple, nationalistic kneejerk ignorance to blame this on international organizations.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2016, 12:13:48 pm by mainiac »
Logged
Ancient Babylonian god of RAEG
--------------
[CAN_INTERNET]
[PREFSTRING:google]
"Don't tell me what you value. Show me your budget and I will tell you what you value"
« Last Edit: February 10, 1988, 03:27:23 pm by UR MOM »
mainiac is always a little sarcastic, at least.

Sheb

  • Bay Watcher
  • You Are An Avatar
    • View Profile

Thanks LW, that paper was actually a nice read. Totally disprove your point, but a nice read nonetheless. I can make a longer point if anyone here is interested, but the paper is quite readable and not too long.

First of all let's look at LW's graph: The first one shows catches, the second the amount of "fishing power" of the British fleet. What do we see (Note that it talks of the British Fleet, not the British water : by the 1960's a lot of that fish was coming from the Antartic or West Africa)? That up to the 1980's, the amount of fish caught held steady, while the fishing power increased tremendously. That's textbook overfishing: as the number of fish decrease, fishermen invest in more and bigger boats, which manage to hide the collapse of the stock for a while.

A nice graph showing the ration of the two is also on the paper LW linked.


Notice the collapse in productivity starting in 1960, over a decade before the UK joined the EU. The relative stabilization in 1983 is when the EU set quotas.

So yeah, the collapse of the fisheries doesn't have much to do with Europe.

Oh, and just a quote:

Quote
The Common Fisheries Policy was not responsible for this collapse, although under its auspices most stocks have continued to decline. Our findings emphasize the need for urgent action to eliminate overexploitation of European fisheries and rebuild fish stocks to much higher levels of abundance than those that prevail today.

Oh, and they have that to say regarding discards:

Quote
One complication with using LPUP data as an index of fish availability to the fleet is the problem of discarding, that is, fish caught but not landed. Although the Common Fisheries Policy has been extensively criticized for requirements to discard overquota species, the issue of discarding commercial and bycatch species has been a concern since trawling began17, 18, 19.

Because of a lack of quantitative information, we were unable to incorporate discard estimates into the data set. However, because most of the collapse pre-dates the Common Fisheries Policy, any subsequent increases in discarding would have little effect on the overall picture. For example, if an arbitrary increase in discard rate of 50% is included within landings since 1983 to account for regulatory discards, the overall decline of LPUP into England and Wales since 1889 would still be greater than 91%.


Tl;dr:

LW linked to a really nice Nature paper, which shows that the EU isn't responsible for the UK crashing its fisheries before joining, although they could have done more to rebuild the stock since.

Logged

Quote from: Paul-Henry Spaak
Europe consists only of small countries, some of which know it and some of which don’t yet.

mainiac

  • Bay Watcher
  • Na vazeal kwah-kai
    • View Profile

Yeoman work, there Sheb.
Logged
Ancient Babylonian god of RAEG
--------------
[CAN_INTERNET]
[PREFSTRING:google]
"Don't tell me what you value. Show me your budget and I will tell you what you value"
« Last Edit: February 10, 1988, 03:27:23 pm by UR MOM »
mainiac is always a little sarcastic, at least.

Sheb

  • Bay Watcher
  • You Are An Avatar
    • View Profile

He, I just realized that mainiac copy-pasted part of the relevant wikipedia article (that needed a citation). Anyway, the talk page of that wikipedia article do confirm that the UK only claimed a 12 nm zone before joining the EU.
Logged

Quote from: Paul-Henry Spaak
Europe consists only of small countries, some of which know it and some of which don’t yet.

SirQuiamus

  • Bay Watcher
  • Keine Experimente!
    • View Profile

Covenant: LW keeps bringing us the Dutch trawler that get UK fishing right. I'm also 90% sure his whole thing is BS, I'm currently reading that nature paper he linked to see if I'm right.
Pardon? Why is no one reading my post. The EU opened all of our waters to European trawlers, and assigned British fishermen their own quota - this is the British quota. Of that quota, the Dutch took a share of the British quota, which does not change the fact that the rest of Europe all have access to the UK's fishing waters through quotas granted to them by the EU.
No, "the Dutch" did not take a share of the British quota – your government took a share of the quota and gave it to a Dutch factory ship which is registered in the UK and is not technically a foreign ship despite landing all her catch in the Netherlands (which leaves the local UK fishermen without a sprat). You may argue that the national EU quotas are wrong, and then you would indeed have a problem with the EU, but distributing the national quotas is entirely up to your own government.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Logged

mainiac

  • Bay Watcher
  • Na vazeal kwah-kai
    • View Profile

He, I just realized that mainiac copy-pasted part of the relevant wikipedia article (that needed a citation). Anyway, the talk page of that wikipedia article do confirm that the UK only claimed a 12 nm zone before joining the EU.

Me?  What post are you referring to?
Logged
Ancient Babylonian god of RAEG
--------------
[CAN_INTERNET]
[PREFSTRING:google]
"Don't tell me what you value. Show me your budget and I will tell you what you value"
« Last Edit: February 10, 1988, 03:27:23 pm by UR MOM »
mainiac is always a little sarcastic, at least.

Sheb

  • Bay Watcher
  • You Are An Avatar
    • View Profile

Sorry, I meant LW. Rough day here. He just quoted verbatim the Common Fishery Policy wiki page.



Seems familiar?
Logged

Quote from: Paul-Henry Spaak
Europe consists only of small countries, some of which know it and some of which don’t yet.

mainiac

  • Bay Watcher
  • Na vazeal kwah-kai
    • View Profile

So at the end of the day it seems that what we have is:

1) An unsourced an claim on wikipedia that has a factually incorrect premise
2) A daily mail article that has been cited around the web

Is that about the sum of it?  (gee, does that make is sound like I dont know what I'm talking about?  ;))
Logged
Ancient Babylonian god of RAEG
--------------
[CAN_INTERNET]
[PREFSTRING:google]
"Don't tell me what you value. Show me your budget and I will tell you what you value"
« Last Edit: February 10, 1988, 03:27:23 pm by UR MOM »
mainiac is always a little sarcastic, at least.

Loud Whispers

  • Bay Watcher
  • They said we have to aim higher, so we dug deeper.
    • View Profile
    • I APPLAUD YOU SIRRAH

YOU HAVEN'T MADE AN ARGUMENT

You have said that something bad happens.  That's all very sad.  The thing is you haven't shown why the EU is to blame.  You are just full of shit, blaming it on the EU because it's something tangentially related to them.  Fishing populations are declining worldwide due to overfishing and habitat destruction.  You are resorting to simple, nationalistic kneejerk ignorance to blame this on international organizations.
I'm only going to ask you to calm down once.

If you are in a state to reason, what do the bolded points mean to you?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I'm making a better reply for you Sheb

Loud Whispers

  • Bay Watcher
  • They said we have to aim higher, so we dug deeper.
    • View Profile
    • I APPLAUD YOU SIRRAH

Thanks LW, that paper was actually a nice read. Totally disprove your point, but a nice read nonetheless.
No worries, I am happy that you are being very constructive

I can make a longer point if anyone here is interested, but the paper is quite readable and not too long.
First of all let's look at LW's graph: The first one shows catches, the second the amount of "fishing power" of the British fleet. What do we see (Note that it talks of the British Fleet, not the British water : by the 1960's a lot of that fish was coming from the Antartic or West Africa)? That up to the 1980's, the amount of fish caught held steady, while the fishing power increased tremendously. That's textbook overfishing: as the number of fish decrease, fishermen invest in more and bigger boats, which manage to hide the collapse of the stock for a while.
A nice graph showing the ration of the two is also on the paper LW linked.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Notice the collapse in productivity starting in 1960, over a decade before the UK joined the EU. The relative stabilization in 1983 is when the EU set quotas.
Yes, and in 72 Britain's waters are opened to Europe by the EU.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
This leads to a total collapse of landings to the UK, killing the fishing industry.

So yeah, the collapse of the fisheries doesn't have much to do with Europe.
Oh, and just a quote:
Quote
The Common Fisheries Policy was not responsible for this collapse, although under its auspices most stocks have continued to decline. Our findings emphasize the need for urgent action to eliminate overexploitation of European fisheries and rebuild fish stocks to much higher levels of abundance than those that prevail today.
Collapse of fish stocks. I don't doubt under the Tories we would have collapsed our own stocks in time, but under the Commons we have lost our stocks and our industry, and on threat of leaving European fishermen are tempted to ream even more.

Oh, and they have that to say regarding discards:
Quote
One complication with using LPUP data as an index of fish availability to the fleet is the problem of discarding, that is, fish caught but not landed. Although the Common Fisheries Policy has been extensively criticized for requirements to discard overquota species, the issue of discarding commercial and bycatch species has been a concern since trawling began17, 18, 19.

Because of a lack of quantitative information, we were unable to incorporate discard estimates into the data set. However, because most of the collapse pre-dates the Common Fisheries Policy, any subsequent increases in discarding would have little effect on the overall picture. For example, if an arbitrary increase in discard rate of 50% is included within landings since 1983 to account for regulatory discards, the overall decline of LPUP into England and Wales since 1889 would still be greater than 91%.
"Stable" is not synonymous with collapse.
Quote
Scottish Conservative MEP Struan Stevenson commented: "It is simply not sustainable to pursue a management policy that forced Europe's fishermen to dump up to 1m tonnes of perfectly healthy fish back into the sea, dead, annually, when 80% of EU fish stocks are either over-exploited or under threat of imminent collapse."

LW linked to a really nice Nature paper, which shows that the EU isn't responsible for the UK crashing its fisheries before joining, although they could have done more to rebuild the stock since.
That's not what the Nature paper said, nor the BBC article, nor the Telegraph, nor the Guardian, nor the Commentator.

From my Nature paper:
Quote
Before 1988, we assumed that landings by vessels registered to England and Wales were landed into England and Wales rather than to other countries. This is backed by sources that indicate that, throughout most of the twentieth century, the amount of bottom-living species that landed into other countries was insignificant, and that English and Welsh boats largely served the home market14, 19. However, the introduction of the Common Fisheries Policy in 1983 altered markets, and a significant amount of fish caught by UK vessels began to be landed into other countries.
Fishing industry =/= Stocks, I actually would prefer to preserve both, fish are one of the few things I talk about in these types of threads with passion.

72, EU opens up our waters to the entirety of Europe, at the same time that the number of fish reaching the UK collapses. Their discard policy results in 1mtonnes annual wastage, and quotas force British fishermen to not fish their own waters whilst Europeans do. They are then given financial incentive to scrap their boats.

How does the EU have nothing to do with this?
« Last Edit: June 21, 2016, 12:58:58 pm by Loud Whispers »
Logged

SirQuiamus

  • Bay Watcher
  • Keine Experimente!
    • View Profile

I think everyone's being perfectly calm here (at least I am, because this is not exactly a life-and-death issue), but I have to ask you again, LW – no offense, I'm not trying to push your buttons – whether you understand the implications of the bolded and enlarged points in my post:

Covenant: LW keeps bringing us the Dutch trawler that get UK fishing right. I'm also 90% sure his whole thing is BS, I'm currently reading that nature paper he linked to see if I'm right.
Pardon? Why is no one reading my post. The EU opened all of our waters to European trawlers, and assigned British fishermen their own quota - this is the British quota. Of that quota, the Dutch took a share of the British quota, which does not change the fact that the rest of Europe all have access to the UK's fishing waters through quotas granted to them by the EU.
No, "the Dutch" did not take a share of the British quota – your government took a share of the quota and gave it to a Dutch factory ship which is registered in the UK and is not technically a foreign ship despite landing all her catch in the Netherlands (which leaves the local UK fishermen without a sprat). You may argue that the national EU quotas are wrong, and then you would indeed have a problem with the EU, but distributing the national quota is entirely up to your own government.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
The EU does not decide who gets a share of your national quota – your government does that.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 25 26 [27] 28 29 ... 107