Upload
Login or register

Shramin

Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Gender: male
Age: 27
Date Signed Up:10/13/2010
Last Login:7/01/2016
Location:MSN
FunnyJunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#1892
Highest Content Rank:#7366
Highest Comment Rank:#1836
Content Thumbs: 41 total,  49 ,  8
Comment Thumbs: 8205 total,  9679 ,  1474
Content Level Progress: 62.71% (37/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 97% (97/100)
Level 270 Comments: Ninja Pirate → Level 271 Comments: Ninja Pirate
Subscribers:0
Content Views:4585
Times Content Favorited:2 times
Total Comments Made:3428
FJ Points:5457
Norwegian and all that

  • Views: 588
    Thumbs Up 1 Thumbs Down 2 Total: -1
    Comments: 0
    Favorites: 0
    Uploaded: 11/15/14
    Dodgeball. Dodgeball.
  • Views: 3988
    Thumbs Up 48 Thumbs Down 6 Total: +42
    Comments: 3
    Favorites: 2
    Uploaded: 04/17/14
    Buckets Buckets

latest user's comments

#64 - and yet people are impressed with the Finnish during the Winte…  [+] (1 new reply) 06/30/2016 on Fun fact +2
User avatar
#115 - liero (06/30/2016) [-]
wonder if the swedish officers came up with the idea of the kind of psychological warfare the finnish did towards the ruskies.

they raised frozen russians upright, skinned dead bodies and hung their skins on trees, faked cannibalism and spread stories of monsters in the finnish forests.

russians were fucking terrified of the finns
#13 - Family computer? 06/28/2016 on Cuck Powers +4
#202 - That it will, and if they can fix the economically weak countr…  [+] (1 new reply) 06/27/2016 on This guy destroys all of... 0
User avatar
#203 - kinginthenorth (06/27/2016) [-]
They are fixing it, but it takes time. Hell, even the migrants funneling money back to their country helps because it brings money into the other country's economy. While the host country gets to enjoy cheap labour.

The EU has changed before when there was a call for changes, so it will likely change again.

It was certainly a wake up call, but there's better ways to get changes going. But the UK is willing to tank a hit, apparently, so i suppose it's a way.
#199 - Being in the EU is not a requirement for it, otherwise Norway …  [+] (3 new replies) 06/27/2016 on This guy destroys all of... 0
User avatar
#200 - kinginthenorth (06/27/2016) [-]
Norway is also part of the Schengen agreement, has to implement all the EU legislation and has absolutely no say in changing or accepting them. Not having the legislation was also a huge point of the Leave point, so if they want to keep that point, they cant have an agreement like Norway.

A lot of people are calling for changes in the EU now. The common man doesnt directly feel the benefits of the EU, despite the EU improving a lot of aspects, like average wealth and food quality. It's subtle improvements, really.

They're moving towards being a big country, but that takes a while to even out all the countries. Things like getting a centralized army is the first step to it becoming an actual United States of Europe. With the UK out of the way, it'll be a lot easier to do that though.
User avatar
#202 - Shramin (06/27/2016) [-]
That it will, and if they can fix the economically weak countries economy structure it will look positive again.

Calling for changes to the EU is not recent, I remember well the controversy of the 1994 changes. Still affecting policy and thought on the union to this day.

as far as I am concerned the UK needed to separate and force changes, the countries in the UK now need to separate from the UK, to avoid clashing unions. then a reform back into the EU when there are 4 different countries that can be handled as necessary, rather than trying to apply 1 solution to 4 countries that have different problems.
User avatar
#203 - kinginthenorth (06/27/2016) [-]
They are fixing it, but it takes time. Hell, even the migrants funneling money back to their country helps because it brings money into the other country's economy. While the host country gets to enjoy cheap labour.

The EU has changed before when there was a call for changes, so it will likely change again.

It was certainly a wake up call, but there's better ways to get changes going. But the UK is willing to tank a hit, apparently, so i suppose it's a way.
#181 - That is fair, the problem is we have one man saying "that…  [+] (5 new replies) 06/27/2016 on This guy destroys all of... 0
User avatar
#184 - kinginthenorth (06/27/2016) [-]
A lot of people didnt see a lot of things coming, judging by a few articles about people already regretting their votes which honestly kind of annoys me. They're voting for a huge decision, yet it seemed like they didn't bother to spend even 10 minutes doing proper research on the subject. It's like they didnt take the vote seriously at all. . It's what struck me as peculiar about this vote. There was a lot of information available, yet both sides twisted that information for their own purposes and people didnt bother to be sceptical about it all. Like the entire bus slogan, most people probably assumed it meant 350 million going to the NHS because it didnt mention that the money might go elsewhere.
Honestly it's kind of dirty of political parties to misrepresent information to suit their own needs. Not everyone can see through it all and it tricks people who might otherwise not vote for them. Seems to happen a lot these days though. Hindsight is 20/20, but hindsight wont change the results. Unless there's a second vote.

It would, but that 9 billion might now go to certain deals or supporting businesses that the EU was previously supporting. If there's even a 9 billion left. The UK saved a huge deal of money on being part of the single market. Something they'll most likely not be a part of anymore, since being in the EU is kind of a requirement for that.
Then again, it's all speculation. The process isnt bound to start anyday soon, if the EU doesnt force it to start. If it ends up sorta the same, good for the UK. But the bigger chance is that it's going to end up worse than the deal they previously had.
Fun fact: it's a belgian that's going to negotiate on the EU's part. Belgians generally go for win-win agreements, so the UK might be relatively safe.
User avatar
#199 - Shramin (06/27/2016) [-]
Being in the EU is not a requirement for it, otherwise Norway would not be a part of the market. Uk will likely be safe as you said, as much as the UK needs trade agreements, the EU doesn't want to lose a trade partner just because.

Trade is covered by EEA and European movement is covered by the Schrengen agreement.

Maybe there will be some learning from this, though I suspect we will see more changes around the world instead and likely more riots as well.

I am hoping for 2 outcomes of this situation, either that this causes more countries to consider how the EU operates and forcing change by leaving and starting a new union, or that the EU will start changing its rules and flex some muscles to have countries change their economic structure instead of constantly trying to pay off bills using the larger economic countries money.

Either way the concept of the EU cannot exist if the countries in it do not work together to improve their weakest aspect to the standards of the countries who have them as strong aspects. That or make it one big country.
User avatar
#200 - kinginthenorth (06/27/2016) [-]
Norway is also part of the Schengen agreement, has to implement all the EU legislation and has absolutely no say in changing or accepting them. Not having the legislation was also a huge point of the Leave point, so if they want to keep that point, they cant have an agreement like Norway.

A lot of people are calling for changes in the EU now. The common man doesnt directly feel the benefits of the EU, despite the EU improving a lot of aspects, like average wealth and food quality. It's subtle improvements, really.

They're moving towards being a big country, but that takes a while to even out all the countries. Things like getting a centralized army is the first step to it becoming an actual United States of Europe. With the UK out of the way, it'll be a lot easier to do that though.
User avatar
#202 - Shramin (06/27/2016) [-]
That it will, and if they can fix the economically weak countries economy structure it will look positive again.

Calling for changes to the EU is not recent, I remember well the controversy of the 1994 changes. Still affecting policy and thought on the union to this day.

as far as I am concerned the UK needed to separate and force changes, the countries in the UK now need to separate from the UK, to avoid clashing unions. then a reform back into the EU when there are 4 different countries that can be handled as necessary, rather than trying to apply 1 solution to 4 countries that have different problems.
User avatar
#203 - kinginthenorth (06/27/2016) [-]
They are fixing it, but it takes time. Hell, even the migrants funneling money back to their country helps because it brings money into the other country's economy. While the host country gets to enjoy cheap labour.

The EU has changed before when there was a call for changes, so it will likely change again.

It was certainly a wake up call, but there's better ways to get changes going. But the UK is willing to tank a hit, apparently, so i suppose it's a way.
#164 - so if I promise you 5 million dollars, and admin says "He…  [+] (7 new replies) 06/27/2016 on This guy destroys all of... 0
#167 - kinginthenorth (06/27/2016) [-]
If you were running a campaign and said "I'm paying this guy €5 a week, but if you vote for me, i can use that €5 for you guys instead!", but then it turns out you're actually paying €4 and getting €2 back from him and you're not really going to use €5 for us, i'd be pretty upset.

9 billion is peanuts on a government budget, especially on a year basis. How can they not get the 4 billion back? Just because it isn't going through the government doesn't mean it's not coming back to the UK.

It's hard to guess just how much money it would free up. It would mostly depend on how the trade deals end up. And i doubt they'll be as favorable as they were.
User avatar
#181 - Shramin (06/27/2016) [-]
That is fair, the problem is we have one man saying "that should not have been promised" not actual evidence that the money offered will not be pushed that way. We can assume, and likely it will be correct, but in that assumption should people not have seen that coming?

9 Billion is peanuts compared to overall expenditure, but as extra funding it certainly helps if you need to focus a particular department for a while.

You are right, it is all speculation at this point, and who knows what agreements will show up in the future as well as how the EEA will be followed up.
User avatar
#184 - kinginthenorth (06/27/2016) [-]
A lot of people didnt see a lot of things coming, judging by a few articles about people already regretting their votes which honestly kind of annoys me. They're voting for a huge decision, yet it seemed like they didn't bother to spend even 10 minutes doing proper research on the subject. It's like they didnt take the vote seriously at all. . It's what struck me as peculiar about this vote. There was a lot of information available, yet both sides twisted that information for their own purposes and people didnt bother to be sceptical about it all. Like the entire bus slogan, most people probably assumed it meant 350 million going to the NHS because it didnt mention that the money might go elsewhere.
Honestly it's kind of dirty of political parties to misrepresent information to suit their own needs. Not everyone can see through it all and it tricks people who might otherwise not vote for them. Seems to happen a lot these days though. Hindsight is 20/20, but hindsight wont change the results. Unless there's a second vote.

It would, but that 9 billion might now go to certain deals or supporting businesses that the EU was previously supporting. If there's even a 9 billion left. The UK saved a huge deal of money on being part of the single market. Something they'll most likely not be a part of anymore, since being in the EU is kind of a requirement for that.
Then again, it's all speculation. The process isnt bound to start anyday soon, if the EU doesnt force it to start. If it ends up sorta the same, good for the UK. But the bigger chance is that it's going to end up worse than the deal they previously had.
Fun fact: it's a belgian that's going to negotiate on the EU's part. Belgians generally go for win-win agreements, so the UK might be relatively safe.
User avatar
#199 - Shramin (06/27/2016) [-]
Being in the EU is not a requirement for it, otherwise Norway would not be a part of the market. Uk will likely be safe as you said, as much as the UK needs trade agreements, the EU doesn't want to lose a trade partner just because.

Trade is covered by EEA and European movement is covered by the Schrengen agreement.

Maybe there will be some learning from this, though I suspect we will see more changes around the world instead and likely more riots as well.

I am hoping for 2 outcomes of this situation, either that this causes more countries to consider how the EU operates and forcing change by leaving and starting a new union, or that the EU will start changing its rules and flex some muscles to have countries change their economic structure instead of constantly trying to pay off bills using the larger economic countries money.

Either way the concept of the EU cannot exist if the countries in it do not work together to improve their weakest aspect to the standards of the countries who have them as strong aspects. That or make it one big country.
User avatar
#200 - kinginthenorth (06/27/2016) [-]
Norway is also part of the Schengen agreement, has to implement all the EU legislation and has absolutely no say in changing or accepting them. Not having the legislation was also a huge point of the Leave point, so if they want to keep that point, they cant have an agreement like Norway.

A lot of people are calling for changes in the EU now. The common man doesnt directly feel the benefits of the EU, despite the EU improving a lot of aspects, like average wealth and food quality. It's subtle improvements, really.

They're moving towards being a big country, but that takes a while to even out all the countries. Things like getting a centralized army is the first step to it becoming an actual United States of Europe. With the UK out of the way, it'll be a lot easier to do that though.
User avatar
#202 - Shramin (06/27/2016) [-]
That it will, and if they can fix the economically weak countries economy structure it will look positive again.

Calling for changes to the EU is not recent, I remember well the controversy of the 1994 changes. Still affecting policy and thought on the union to this day.

as far as I am concerned the UK needed to separate and force changes, the countries in the UK now need to separate from the UK, to avoid clashing unions. then a reform back into the EU when there are 4 different countries that can be handled as necessary, rather than trying to apply 1 solution to 4 countries that have different problems.
User avatar
#203 - kinginthenorth (06/27/2016) [-]
They are fixing it, but it takes time. Hell, even the migrants funneling money back to their country helps because it brings money into the other country's economy. While the host country gets to enjoy cheap labour.

The EU has changed before when there was a call for changes, so it will likely change again.

It was certainly a wake up call, but there's better ways to get changes going. But the UK is willing to tank a hit, apparently, so i suppose it's a way.
#160 - He also wasn't the one to promise it, and his point that the m…  [+] (9 new replies) 06/27/2016 on This guy destroys all of... +1
User avatar
#163 - kinginthenorth (06/27/2016) [-]
Just because he went "Wasn't me!" after the votes were counted, doesnt change the fact that it was a huge point of the Leave campaign. Also didn't mention that it's not even sending £350 million to the EU, instead it's just under £250 million a week. And even that number is leaving out the amount of money people actually get back from the EU through direct grants. fullfact.org/europe/our-eu-membership-fee-55-million/
User avatar
#164 - Shramin (06/27/2016) [-]
so if I promise you 5 million dollars, and admin says "He shouldn't promise that" admin has now proven me wrong?

Also, 9 BILLION fucking pounds, and people are saying "yeah but we don't get the 4 billion back from paying them 13 billion a year".

I get the issue, but like I said, that is still money for the government to spend on national improvements.
#167 - kinginthenorth (06/27/2016) [-]
If you were running a campaign and said "I'm paying this guy €5 a week, but if you vote for me, i can use that €5 for you guys instead!", but then it turns out you're actually paying €4 and getting €2 back from him and you're not really going to use €5 for us, i'd be pretty upset.

9 billion is peanuts on a government budget, especially on a year basis. How can they not get the 4 billion back? Just because it isn't going through the government doesn't mean it's not coming back to the UK.

It's hard to guess just how much money it would free up. It would mostly depend on how the trade deals end up. And i doubt they'll be as favorable as they were.
User avatar
#181 - Shramin (06/27/2016) [-]
That is fair, the problem is we have one man saying "that should not have been promised" not actual evidence that the money offered will not be pushed that way. We can assume, and likely it will be correct, but in that assumption should people not have seen that coming?

9 Billion is peanuts compared to overall expenditure, but as extra funding it certainly helps if you need to focus a particular department for a while.

You are right, it is all speculation at this point, and who knows what agreements will show up in the future as well as how the EEA will be followed up.
User avatar
#184 - kinginthenorth (06/27/2016) [-]
A lot of people didnt see a lot of things coming, judging by a few articles about people already regretting their votes which honestly kind of annoys me. They're voting for a huge decision, yet it seemed like they didn't bother to spend even 10 minutes doing proper research on the subject. It's like they didnt take the vote seriously at all. . It's what struck me as peculiar about this vote. There was a lot of information available, yet both sides twisted that information for their own purposes and people didnt bother to be sceptical about it all. Like the entire bus slogan, most people probably assumed it meant 350 million going to the NHS because it didnt mention that the money might go elsewhere.
Honestly it's kind of dirty of political parties to misrepresent information to suit their own needs. Not everyone can see through it all and it tricks people who might otherwise not vote for them. Seems to happen a lot these days though. Hindsight is 20/20, but hindsight wont change the results. Unless there's a second vote.

It would, but that 9 billion might now go to certain deals or supporting businesses that the EU was previously supporting. If there's even a 9 billion left. The UK saved a huge deal of money on being part of the single market. Something they'll most likely not be a part of anymore, since being in the EU is kind of a requirement for that.
Then again, it's all speculation. The process isnt bound to start anyday soon, if the EU doesnt force it to start. If it ends up sorta the same, good for the UK. But the bigger chance is that it's going to end up worse than the deal they previously had.
Fun fact: it's a belgian that's going to negotiate on the EU's part. Belgians generally go for win-win agreements, so the UK might be relatively safe.
User avatar
#199 - Shramin (06/27/2016) [-]
Being in the EU is not a requirement for it, otherwise Norway would not be a part of the market. Uk will likely be safe as you said, as much as the UK needs trade agreements, the EU doesn't want to lose a trade partner just because.

Trade is covered by EEA and European movement is covered by the Schrengen agreement.

Maybe there will be some learning from this, though I suspect we will see more changes around the world instead and likely more riots as well.

I am hoping for 2 outcomes of this situation, either that this causes more countries to consider how the EU operates and forcing change by leaving and starting a new union, or that the EU will start changing its rules and flex some muscles to have countries change their economic structure instead of constantly trying to pay off bills using the larger economic countries money.

Either way the concept of the EU cannot exist if the countries in it do not work together to improve their weakest aspect to the standards of the countries who have them as strong aspects. That or make it one big country.
User avatar
#200 - kinginthenorth (06/27/2016) [-]
Norway is also part of the Schengen agreement, has to implement all the EU legislation and has absolutely no say in changing or accepting them. Not having the legislation was also a huge point of the Leave point, so if they want to keep that point, they cant have an agreement like Norway.

A lot of people are calling for changes in the EU now. The common man doesnt directly feel the benefits of the EU, despite the EU improving a lot of aspects, like average wealth and food quality. It's subtle improvements, really.

They're moving towards being a big country, but that takes a while to even out all the countries. Things like getting a centralized army is the first step to it becoming an actual United States of Europe. With the UK out of the way, it'll be a lot easier to do that though.
User avatar
#202 - Shramin (06/27/2016) [-]
That it will, and if they can fix the economically weak countries economy structure it will look positive again.

Calling for changes to the EU is not recent, I remember well the controversy of the 1994 changes. Still affecting policy and thought on the union to this day.

as far as I am concerned the UK needed to separate and force changes, the countries in the UK now need to separate from the UK, to avoid clashing unions. then a reform back into the EU when there are 4 different countries that can be handled as necessary, rather than trying to apply 1 solution to 4 countries that have different problems.
User avatar
#203 - kinginthenorth (06/27/2016) [-]
They are fixing it, but it takes time. Hell, even the migrants funneling money back to their country helps because it brings money into the other country's economy. While the host country gets to enjoy cheap labour.

The EU has changed before when there was a call for changes, so it will likely change again.

It was certainly a wake up call, but there's better ways to get changes going. But the UK is willing to tank a hit, apparently, so i suppose it's a way.
#159 - "so are the states under the United States. They don't se… 06/27/2016 on This guy destroys all of... -1
#47 - European Economic Area. 06/26/2016 on brit doesn't want to die a... 0
#10 - EEA  [+] (2 new replies) 06/25/2016 on brit doesn't want to die a... 0
User avatar
#21 - battletechmech (06/26/2016) [-]
I still don't know what the EEA is, can u fill me in brochomsky?
User avatar
#47 - Shramin (06/26/2016) [-]
European Economic Area.