***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 39 *****
==============================================================
Continuing debate
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 12 Oct 16 at 01:26
|
Just to redirect this thread (yawn)...
For the past month, in our quite wide experience, all the French want to talk about if they can corner a Brit is Brexit. We are now beginning even to avoid our neighbours!
For example, the other day I was at the printing museum where I am a volunteer tour guide (Moulindugot.com) and I was grilled from all directions. Yesterday we were out walking in a village in the middle of nowhere when we happened across and started chatting to a French couple around our age and we were grilled yet again. There seems to be (a) genuine concern about what a post-Brexit EU might be like and (b) concern that the Front Nationale will gain a lot of support in next year's presidential election by playing the 'Frexit' card.
May we live in interesting times...
|
|
We are seeing the same thing down in the SoF (34) - the french wish to talk about it. The Brits are mad, but stoic in acceptance and horrified by the lack intellect that remains in little britain.
Last edited by: sherlock47 on Fri 29 Jul 16 at 10:50
|
|
The locals didn't mention it in Turkey. They probably had other things on their mind, and I have no intention of bringing the subject up next month.
|
|
I'm off to France soon, it'll be interesting to see if they are so keen to speak about it then.
|
>>May we live in interesting times<<
That is actually a curse [not many people know this]
(*_*)
|
Rightly or wrongly, with all the uncertainty surrounding Brexit reflecting in world markets, I put all my replacement car funds into four equities. As of today, since I purchased on Brexit Friday, the fund is up 22%. Had I foreseen the double dip and purchased the following Monday it would be significantly more. We are not talking telephone figures here, but it's never wrong to take a profit, so I have just top sliced and put all the profit into a listed UK share with a gambling interest in China. Incredibly speculative, but that's me!
If it all goes horribly wrong the cheap diseasal Focus is growing on me...
|
Good show LL. The share I said here looked volatile in a rising way a few months ago (Glencore) at about 90p is now £1.80. I bought and sold at 10% profit in a few hours one day but then put the proceeds into something which is currently about 50% down, so it's not all rosy!! I'm too much of a gambler to be a successful investor!!!
I bailed out of China a couple of months ago and I was reading some stuff the other day which seems to confirm there's still quite some risk investing there. But good luck to you!
|
>> I bailed out of China a couple of months ago and I was reading some stuff the other day which seems to confirm there's still quite some risk investing there. But good luck to you!
Probably why Mrs May is holding back on the Hinkley development.
|
>>Probably why Mrs May is holding back on the Hinkley development.
Put orf 'til Brexit negotiations begin with the frog Barnier more like it!
|
Any investment in China is risky at best. Different rules to us. The one I've just stuck my money in today is primarily concerned with online gambling and having read several hours of reports, projections, background material & how the thing actually works, or not, my head was spinning.
Should know within 6/12 months whether it was worth it, or just spent the brass elsewhere!
|
Risky is right. I was at lunch yesterday with a couple of Chinese central bank officials.
Ambitious would be a good word, but working to quite diffferent rules / thought processes.
|
but working to quite different rules / thought processes.
>>
Broadly speaking, in what sense?
|
>> Broadly speaking, in what sense?
>>
Just ask Truthful James:
"Which I wish to remark,
And my language is plain,
That for ways that are dark
And for tricks that are vain,
The heathen Chinee is peculiar
Which the same I would rise to explain."
www.bartleby.com/102/200.html
|
mega SQ
>> www.bartleby.com/102/200.html
I'm afraid ye olde english poems aren't much help. I prefer something more straightforward talking rather than cryptic clues, but thanks for trying.
Last edited by: VxFan on Sat 30 Jul 16 at 17:33
|
Smokie,
Off-topic again but the earlier thread is RO.
Mrs K just decided to play something we recorded ages ago from Beeb 4. It's called "Rich Hall's You Can Go To Hell I'm Going To Texas" - available on youtube.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOR8OdGfavg
It's from 2013 but has some bits you might find interesting about the Austin music scene.
Last edited by: Kevin on Sat 30 Jul 16 at 00:16
|
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36976528
Which says
"UK interest rates have been cut from 0.5% to 0.25% - a record low and the first cut since 2009.
"The Bank of England announced a range of measures to stimulate the UK economy including buying £60bn of UK government bonds and £10bn of corporate bonds.
"The Bank also announced the biggest cut to its growth forecasts since it started making them in 1992.
"It has reduced its growth prediction for 2017 from the 2.3% it was expecting in May to 0.8%."
That seems a rather gloomy outlook. The growth prediction cut is a massive cut.
|
>>That seems a rather gloomy outlook. The growth prediction cut is a massive cut.
No surprise here. Our company stats are showing a massive downturn across most sectors based on our portfolio of clients and the accounts that they send us on top of our lending statistics.
|
Britain will be billions of pounds better off within a year of leaving the EU, a leading businessman who sacrificed his job for Brexit has said.
www.express.co.uk/news/politics/697309/brexit-britain-better-off-former-chambers-of-commerce-boss
|
Reality starts to kick in.
I thought that was worthy of a thread in its own right - but I guess it would be moved. So I have added to the old thread.
The headline says it all.
We won't trigger Article 50 until after 2017 – and that means Brexit may never happen at all.
www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-article-50-leaving-eu-wont-happen-after-2017-european-elections-france-germany-a7198736.html
Last edited by: sherlock47 on Sun 21 Aug 16 at 11:44
|
|
I wouldn't trust Denis Macshane to fill in his expenses correctly. Nor have I seen anything objective from the Independent on Brexit, so best not to give too much weight to that piece I would think.
|
>>Denis MacShane
It wouldn't be incorrect to call him a thief, a liar, and an ex-convict.
|
I was talking to family in Holland about Brexit.Not that they are that interested more the effect it would have on business over there.
Refugees is the discussion point how to cope and deal with people in trouble.
Some are concerned others couldn't care less and want the crisis to go away.
|
... will do this country nothing but harm. It won't help the economy - quite the reverse - and makes us look like a bunch of petty-nationalist halfwits.
Whether mischievous or 'sincere', the promoters of this moronic scheme deserve to be put up against a wall and executed out of hand. I can't imagine what has induced an effective majority of our compatriots to swallow such a tissue of horse manure. Masochism perhaps.
|
Wasn't that last month AC?:)
Pat
|
>> Wasn't that last month :)
>>
>> Pat
>>
Nope, we are still in there and will be for the next couple of years plus a bit.
Then we will have a couple of years after that before we know what the effects have been, except that many of the things that happen may or may not be due to Brexit and who knows what will happen to the EU itself in the next few years.
We are going out, for better or worse, let's just get on and make the best of what the majority decided. Moaning, arguing, name calling etc will get us precisely nowhere
|
>> We are going out, for better or worse, let's just get on and make the best of what the majority decided.
The majority didn't decide, it was led by the nose, slack-jawed and open-mouthed. Pathetic.
|
I didn't agree with the decision either AC but to imply that all the intelligent, rational people voted remain and that everyone who voted leave was weakly led astray by some evil plot is pushing it a bit far.
We've had this discussion already on here there is not a lot of point in going over again who was right, who was wrong, and whether we had a majority to leave and all the rest of it.
Like I said, it's happening get used to it.
|
Make the best of it? Well I suppose ther's little alternative but you can't expect all those who voted remain to be suddenly be enthusiastic about leaving the EU and being happy at the prospect. Personally I would support any politician or party who attempts to ameliorate the consequences of what I consider to be a foolish decision.
|
>> Make the best of it? Well I suppose there's little alternative
>>
exactly.
I don't like it either, but the best we can try for is to get the exit conditions and future relationship with the EU and the rest of the world as good as we possibly can, and the economy and culture of this country as good as we possibly can.
As I said to AC, why reopen this particular can of worms? Moaning etc will solve nothing.
|
No moaning is not the answer but I must say that I have little respect for those who go us into this position. We now have years of uncertainty and huge amounts of political and economic effort to get us back to as good a position as we were in the earlier part of the year.
I can certainly understand AC's sentiments
|
>> I can certainly understand AC's sentiments
>>
But why start another topic when we have thread number 38 on the referendum, brexit, the relative intelligence of remain and leave voters etc etc etc just 9 lines down the page.
And why start the nyaah nyaah stuff again just when it seemed to have settled down a bit.
|
>> the nyaah nyaah stuff
That takes me back a bit, 70 years or so.
:o}
|
>>Wasn't that last month AC?:)<<
Hope you are stocking up for WW3 Pat, the Belgians are looking a bit twitchy :-)
|
The French were looking a bit twitchy yesterday Stu!
I always take a small minor road back into France from Belgium across the border which has always been unmanned in the last 10 years at least.
Yesterday we were met by at least 10 military armed personnel, who made a sort of chicane we had to drive through (and they weren't moving!), while they looked into the cars and weighed us up. Despite the privacy glass in the XC60 we apparently passed muster and were allowed to continue:)
But it is good to see France taking some action at last.
Pity they can't do the same at Calais on the corridor.
Pat
Last edited by: Pat on Tue 23 Aug 16 at 17:07
|
>>Pity they can't do the same at Calais on the corridor.<<
My sister and family have gone to La Rochelle for a couple of weeks, via Cherbourg I think it was, didn't have any problems although they searched my dads car. Apparently pensioners are really suss :-)
|
That doesn't hold up Stu, I never even got stopped at customs yesterday, dammit, I could have stocked up on ciggies as well as wine!
What will I do when I can't buy Brouilly and Rioja at those prices:)
Pat
Last edited by: Pat on Tue 23 Aug 16 at 17:25
|
Incidentally the car in front of us got pulled in but we didn't.
I think that was down to the fact we were two females giggling and saying 'Oooooh look, he's got a big one (gun)'!
Pat
|
We should push for another referendum until we get it right because there hasn't been much rain in Cornwall since we voted incorrectly and I'm beginning to worry about my bore hole running dry.
Also, my feet don't hurt now since I butchered the callouses on Sunday.
|
There are some positives in the negativity as well, house prices are dropping, so more first - time buyers are at least getting chance to put a foot on the ladder, people with debts are finding it a bit easier to get a grip with low interest rates, people that need to borrow money are finding it cheaper, and according to Google news today, Tourists are flocking here to spend their money 'cos they get more pound for less Euro, this is rallying the retail trade.
All in all it seems to be favouring the less well-off, which is what the common folk needed and why they voted "out". Things will get even better as time goes on!
Last edited by: devonite on Tue 23 Aug 16 at 13:44
|
|
Just a question for the Remain supporters - how may hours each did you put into helping the Remain campaign?
|
Personally, Stuu, none. What difference does that make exactly? I expect you'd get the same answer from 99% of the population.
Anyways most of those at the top of the Leave campaign who did put a lot of effort in ran away once they'd won. On the strength of that alone I'd feel pretty miffed if I'd voted Leave, but those who did seem delighted with everything with no regrets and no hard feelings over being lied to and then deserted. Strange really. It'd be different if it was a marriage.
But as has been said, all of this has been done before. I do not however subscribe to the school of thought which says it can no longer be talked about.
|
>>Personally, Stuu, none. What difference does that make exactly? I expect you'd get the same answer from 99% of the population.
Anyways most of those at the top of the Leave campaign who did put a lot of effort in ran away once they'd won. On the strength of that alone I'd feel pretty miffed if I'd voted Leave, but those who did seem delighted with everything with no regrets and no hard feelings over being lied to and then deserted. Strange really. It'd be different if it was a marriage.<<
It would be odd for those who said they passionately believed in Remain to have sat at home on their hands rather than try and make a difference, so I wondered how committed, aside from being rude online to people, the stronger online advocates for Remain were. It is after all pretty easy to just emote online, much harder to go out on the streets and make the case to the undecided voter in person. True belief is matches by actions as well as words.
As for people running away, Boris, Fox and Davis are in government, so it is strange to characterise that as 'running away'. Gisela Stuart is Labour and unlikely to be invited into government by a Tory PM, which is hardly her fault.
Last edited by: Stuu on Tue 23 Aug 16 at 15:25
|
I live somewhere that voted to remain - and over 90% those I spoke to were going to vote remain. Didn't feel I needed to convince anyone personally. We had plenty of people locally who did campaign on the street etc.
I'd have thought most who voted leave didn't actively campaign. I assume you did because you are involved in local politics aren't you Stu?
|
>>I'd have thought most who voted leave didn't actively campaign. I assume you did because you are involved in local politics aren't you Stu?<<
A fair few did, more than those that get involved in party campaigning and it was cross-party too, which seemed to tempt more than usual out, party politics isn't for everyone.
In the end, the referendum was Remain's to lose and given the backing they had, they should have won by 10 points, so all those people who thought they didn't need to do anything got it wrong.
|
The one neighbour I know that voted leave did so for some incorrect reasons and I couldn't get him to see how he was wrong in his reasons. He said for example there were too many Somalis and other Africans coming to the UK.... so that's the fault of the EU?
None of his reasons for disliking the EU were valid. So how can you reason with someone like that?
|
>>The one neighbour I know that voted leave did so for some incorrect reasons and I couldn't get him to see how he was wrong in his reasons. He said for example there were too many Somalis and other Africans coming to the UK.... so that's the fault of the EU?
None of his reasons for disliking the EU were valid. So how can you reason with someone like that?<<
You cant, he was wrong, but you meet people like that from all sides of the political debate. I met a Green supporter who thought the Tory government were trying to affect our health through magnetic waves - what exactly can you say to that? I did tell him I would keep a closer eye on my toaster, much to the amusement of my colleagues.
|
In my experience it isn't in the least odd for people who hold a view to not actively do anything to promote it. None of my moderate sized group of friends did anything active in the Referendum campaign, or ever have in any other campaign, that I know of. That does not diminish their right to have an opinion and take part in discussion.
My recollection of the key Leave campaigners post-referendum is that it felt like they had run off to hide in the aftermath, having achieved a result they never thought possible. I expect I'm at least half wrong there. Whatever, the invitations to join the new government came later, and were not really a foregone conclusion (- how many people foresaw Boris at the Foreign Office??). Given the result, at the time I assumed that the next PM would have been a Leave person and I think it says something about the Leave leadership that he/she wasn't.
|
>>In my experience it isn't in the least odd for people who hold a view to not actively do anything to promote it. That does not diminish their right to have an opinion and take part in discussion.<<
If a person says disaster is coming but sits on their hands and watches it happen, can it really have been such a strong belief?
>>My recollection of the key Leave campaigners post-referendum is that it felt like they had run off to hide in the aftermath, having achieved a result they never thought possible. I expect I'm at least half wrong there. Whatever, the invitations to join the new government came later, and were not really a foregone conclusion (- how many people foresaw Boris at the Foreign Office??). Given the result, at the time I assumed that the next PM would have been a Leave person and I think it says something about the Leave leadership that he/she wasn't.<<
This whole running off thing is more a narrative than reality, appearing in TV interviews is just gesture politics and in the immediate aftermath, that was as much as they could do, they weren't in government.
David Cameron confirming he had no backbone and quitting, despite saying he wouldn't, was a surprise and had he not done that, it may have been more stable, but what the arrogant toff does is up to him.
Winning the referendum was never a vote to elect anyone, it was an instruction to the government of the day on a specific issue. The next PM was decided by internal Tory Party jazz, which seemed rather odd to me watching their leadership contest, if one can call it that.
If I can say one thing about PM May, the fact that she stayed almost on the fence during the referendum has meant that she could adopt either result fairly easily, so she was smart in that sense.
|
I don't think you would find many people on either side who, if they were honest, expected the leave vote to get anywhere near winning. let alone actually win on the day.
Maybe it was sheer apathy which lost the Remain vote. As a theory I'd have to agree that it holds more water than the outcome was determined by honest, truthful campaigning from the Leave side. :-)
|
>>Maybe it was sheer apathy which lost the Remain vote. As a theory I'd have to agree that it holds more water than the outcome was determined by honest, truthful campaigning from the Leave side. :-)<<
I think there were some pretty daft claims from both sides, Osborne especially started to sound rather shrill, as did those on my side of it who kept banging on about Germany doing a peaceful takeover of Europe.
|
>>In my experience it isn't in the least odd for people who hold a view to not actively do anything to promote it. None of my moderate sized group of friends did anything active in the Referendum campaign, or ever have in any other campaign, that I know of. That does not diminish their right to have an opinion and take part in discussion.
<<
I agree, but let's hope they have learned what happens when you get complacent and over confident!
Pat
|
|
I'll pass on to the Remainers amongst them that little nugget from the Leavers, I'm sure they will be most grateful :-)
|
Just be sure to tell them it's too late now!
Pat
|
It ain't over yet, even though Brexiteers might wish it so.
The vote was incompetently and negligently structured, even with poisoned input from the right wing press, within the margins of error. Effectively a draw, which a competent PM and cabinet Office would have foreseen as a possibility, and set criteria. The Supreme Court is probably going to be involved in considering how the decision on Art. 50 must be made, before May has a chance to invoke it. The Court will, I believe, put it to Parliament for a decision, the correct arbiter on an issue on the scale of EU membership, in a representative democracy, knowing the referendum was botched.
Nigel Farage's role is perhaps as in Macbeth's speech foretold:
"Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing."
|
BREXIT means BREXIT.... which means nothing. But I don't think we can ignore the vote.
The oft said BREXIT means BREXIT is no different to anything you repeat twice. Liar means Liar. Fat git means Fat git.
It's actually meaningless. The vote wasn't. But we can't assume anything from the little that's happened in two months.
Nobody ever defined what Brexit should deliver apart from being outside of the EU. You could be outside the EU but with exactly the same deal couldn't you. That therefore is Brexit without any changes.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Tue 23 Aug 16 at 20:11
|
@ NortonES2
Sour grapes!!! Nothing more
Had the vote gone the other way by the same margin, you would have called it fair, equitable and of course, democratic :))
|
The margin issue was raised, if you recall, by a Brexit enthusiast, on the basis that if "they" lost narrowly, it would be a reason to rerun the referendum. Quite a lot of the U.K. thought he was right in principle, as do I, because the chap in Number 10 was too complacent to consider the effects of a hung verdict, which is useless and divisive, but what we now have. And the leader of the opposition thought he was Boycott. Blocking the bowling, with no thought for the bigger picture.
The difficulties in leaving, after the UK has been a member of the EU for circa 40 years are not trivial, and the advantages would seem to be transient and ephemeral. As yet, given we are still in, the effects of tariff and immigration negotiations on UK health and unity are unexplored and as yet unknowable. This is an issue too important to be treated as a binary yes/no matter. I know MPs are derided, by some, but nonetheless they are able to debate important matters with consideration for wider issues than the dodgy stats and meaningless slogans cynically deployed by Brexit ad men for emotional effect.
|
>> seems to be favouring the less well-off
Well, one can't object to that of course. Let's hope it proves to be the case when the dust has settled.
|
It also favours quite a few well off too....take stock markets since Brexit. Friends of mine have SIPPs & substantial stocks & share ISA funds. A lot of them had readily available liquid funds at the time of the referendum, held within their pensions and Isas.
I know for a fact that a few of them are six figures ( yes, six figures) better off tax free since then. Bought very cheap in the sectors most affected by the Brexit result and made massive gains since then. Not paper gains either. They have bought & sold within several weeks and are now sitting on liquid ( cash) funds again.
And they are not rocket scientists either... Average working people with financial nounce.
|
|
That is obviously true LL but there was something of a personal gamble in that. Not everyone can afford or would want to take that kind of risk. It could have gone the other way (and some shares I'm still holding are still only 2/3rds of their pre-BREXIT value)
|
Well just back the other France, as it had been mentioned on here about it was a hot topic of conversation i was interested to see if it came up in either conversation in a work environment or socially out and about. Over about a week it came up once, in a bar someone heard us talking and shouted 'English, brexit!' and then promptly disappeared. Never saw who it was nothing more.
Not scientific but I did think it would crop up more.
|
After two recent trips to Turkey ( 12 days In July & 7 in August) and spending considerable time sat around bars with Turks, French, Germans & Brits, only one , a Scottish iFA chap, brought up the subject.
I spent more time talking about skiing in Europe with the continentals than I did about Brexit.
They couldn't give a stuff.
|
|
In mid July some of the Greeks we came across thought we (collectively) as the UK were stupid for voting to leave the EU. That's Greek's for you.
|
I know this sounds simplistic rtj but is that because the Greeks got out far more than they contributed?
Let alone the fact their banking system was bailed out, without which there would have been financial meltdown, civil unrest and consequent chaos within member states
|
>> In mid July some of the Greeks we came across thought we (collectively) as the
>> UK were stupid for voting to leave the EU. That's Greek's for you.
>>
One less rich country to help fund their hairdressers when they retire at 50 on 90% salary.
|
|
This weed of a thread has sprung back to life amazingly and needs more glyphosphate. We should get on with planning for the exit which has been democratically agreed.
|
Why are the leavers so keen to shut down discussion? Other aspects of history and democracy continue to be discussed long after their Sell By date. You'll be needing to get used to that as I don't think discussion will stop, whatever you may want.
Talking of which, did you see Owen Smith's comment? www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37167253
|
|
As the Labour party is currently imploding - does anyone take the word of one of the conspirators? When the leadership issue is done, perhaps.
|
"Why are the leavers so keen to shut down discussion?"
I can't speak for others, but I couldn't give a toss as to whether the Remainers want to continue to discuss Brexit. However, I shan't be taking part.
It seems to me like flogging a dead horse; there is little that hasn't already been said; it has become utterly boring, especially on this forum, and has generated massive ill-will.
In fact, the topic has brought out such nastiness that it probably explains the dearth of activity recently. Certainly I have seldom felt so disconnected from this place.
How things have changed in a few years.
|
>> Why are the leavers so keen to shut down discussion?
I can only think that it is because it inevitably descends back into insults, with leave voters characterised as ignorant, racist, stupid, bigoted et al. That's not susceptible to any form of useful discussion by the insultees, and to reply in kind to those who voted remain just perpetuates a playground argument.
IMO a similar proportion of sheep voted remain as voted leave. The votes for remain are not individually worth any more than the votes for leave.
So - to those remain voters who are still preening themselves for being so much cleverer than those who think, for a variety of reasons, that the EU has become a fatally flawed project on which our eventual losses will probably be cut by leaving - just pause and think a bit more.
Real wages, following the previous probably 30 years of fairly steady growth, are still c. 10% lower than before the 2008 crisis, 10 years ago. That is pretty much the same at every percentile up to the 90th, but it's clearly a much more serious problem for the lowest paid.
Perhaps many of those people, rather than just being thick, prejudiced and ignorant, have reasoned that a very large supply of labour that would be more than happy with a fraction of our minimum wage and with uncontrolled access to the UK, has something to do with their shrinking purchasing power and the low unemployment figure. Would that make them stupid?
It shames the remain lobby to credit the result to xenophobia/racism/bigotry or whatever. As far as I can be objective, I would say the UK is among least racist of the European countries I know.
Having got that off my chest, I think there is in fact a lot ahead to discuss. The referendum was a bad idea, but it is over.
The result does not offer any sort of solution (nor would it have done either way) but poses a lot of questions, under the catch-all "What should/will our relationship with Europe and the EU be like?
|
Is there much to discuss until we know what leaving the EU will look like? i.e. what compromises we have etc. No point in speculating.
When we know what we will have, then it might be worth discussing. For all we know all of the leave and remain voters will be annoyed by what those in charge are going to agree to.
|
"Is there much to discuss until we know what leaving the EU will look like? i.e. what compromises we have etc. No point in speculating."
A fair point. We have voted to leave the EU. and I accept that position. We have not voted for any particular version of a post leaving relationship with the EU and that need to be hammered out.
No doubt some of the hard core leavers will not be happy with anything short of severing of all trade deals and relationships with the EU but realistically in my opinion that is not going to happen and people on both sides of the fence will need to compromise and be realistic in their aims
|
Two important issues to resolve:
- Access to the single market
- Passporting for banks
The second one has big implications for tax revenues of course... but we're unlikely to get it without access to the single market.... and that currently means freedom of movement.
There are some hard decisions to be made for any deal.
I wonder how close they will stick to the process for leaving the EU. We can't negotiate new trade deals until we have actually left the EU. Well those are the rules and hopefully they can be bent a little.
|
>> Access to the single market <<
Pretty much every country in the world has access to the Single Market, aside from those under sanction.
Baffles me that people cant differentiate between Single Market access and membership, unless you are really suggesting that the EU will impose trade sanctions on the UK???
|
I would guess that we will live under the same environment as we do now, with the same access to the market, the same free movement, the same need to abide by EU standards, rules and laws, the same incorporation of those standards into UK Laws and the same irritation at Brussels with ultimately only three differences;
1) We will not actually be a member
2) We will have no input into those rules, laws and standards.
3) The needs of the UK will be officially ignored rather than simply undervalued.
Well 4) differences I guess, if you include how various politicians are going to have to change their chosen scapegoat.
I seriously wonder how long it will be before a politician who had previously been vocal for Leave starts blaming stuff on leaving and saying we should have remained. A maximum of 12 months, would be my guess.
As for the voters themselves, then I assume that on both sides a fair proportion of voters voted the way they did having thought about it sensibly and chosen carefully.
Equally, I have no doubt that on both sides stupid people voted stupidly. I've never seen any political opinion as being indicative of pure intelligence or absolute stupidity.
Manatee already listed the stupid reasons the stupid Leave people used. I wonder what the stupid reasons were that stupid Remain people used.
|
>>
>> Pretty much every country in the world has access to the Single Market, aside from
>> those under sanction.
>>
True but it depends on what terms. I think we would be looking achieving something like the same terms as we have now as a member of the EU and that comes at a cost, one that Norway for example is willing to pay. Many of the hardline leavers would see it as a sell out but a compromise of that sort seems fairly inevitable.
|
As you know Stu I meant to have access without tariffs. We could default to WTO terms and therefore those tariffs. Without the banking passporting then those banks will move the functions to EU countries.
We might not miss the over pad bankers but we will miss the billions in taxes they generate for the revenue.
|
>>True but it depends on what terms. I think we would be looking achieving something like the same terms as we have now as a member of the EU and that comes at a cost, one that Norway for example is willing to pay. Many of the hardline leavers would see it as a sell out but a compromise of that sort seems fairly inevitable.<<
Of course, I was only making a point about using accurate terms.
I think it will be some time before we know what the ballpark is and in the meantime the EU may yet have other crisis that we cant yet factor in, so it is really just speculation for the time being.
I suspect PM May and Co. will be bolder than expected, she has been far bolder so far than I would have predicted already and we haven't yet had a clear indication of her policy agenda - politically the Tories have a free hand to do what they wish with Labour utilising the circular firing squad, so I expect a fairly ideological policy direction.
|
>> “Brexit means Brexitâ€
>>
>> www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/26/theresa-may-will-trigger-brexit-negotiations-without-commons-vot/
Given the Telegraph's long standing anti EU cheer leading I'm not sure I believe that story. Any reaction in other media is comment on Telegraph's content rather than confirmation.
There is a case awaiting hearing in High Court over whether a vote is needed. In circs that is likely to go to Supreme Court, albeit fast tracked.
Practical politics, with May accused of acting like a medieval monarch, will weigh heavily too.
|
|
I can't see a vote in the Commons being anything other than a rubber stamping exercise. Yes, the vote is not binding, however for it to be a no vote in the commons or even to block it would be cause such an uproar, the likes of we haven't seen.
|
>>for it to be a no vote in the commons or even to block it would be cause such an uproar, the likes of we haven't seen.
And some!!!!!!!!!
|
The way some people talk they seem to be under the impression that a small minority somehow fiddled the vote to force a result that 90% of the population did not want. If Brexit isn't triggered at some point there will be widespread dissatisfaction and a lot of ugly civil unrest. You cannot con the population by giving them a vote which you then ignore because the result does not suit you.
The fact that the result was not legally binding is neither here nor there. Go back on it and prepare for something very ugly.
|
I'm not sure about the civil unrest maybe if we lived in France.
Take the bedroom tax a dirty underhand nasty bit of law which did hit the most vunerable in our society.
Nothing happened.
|
>> Nothing happened.
The bedroom tax only affected a handful of elderly widows in social housing. Hardly the type to take to the streets.
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 29 Aug 16 at 02:08
|
>> The bedroom tax only affected a handful of elderly widows in social housing. Hardly the
>> type to take to the streets.
Doesn't affect elderly widows at all, pensioners are exempt. Those affected are small families in three bed properties and where there is insufficient supply of two beds.
If the policy objective were genuinely to tackle under occupiers it would have tackled the most egregious cohort in that group; pensioners.
|
The bare-majority support for Brexit will wane when the negotiations bring home reality.
Then the veiled insurrection mutterings will evaporate.
|
>> The bare-majority support for Brexit will wane when the negotiations bring home reality.
>> Then the veiled insurrection mutterings will evaporate.
>>
I take it you think we won't actually leave?
|
|
It's possible we will leave, but there are a number of permutations. The EU might alter over the years, in the light of the real difficulties amplified by Schengen, and the crisis from the Middle East. Until we know what the trade and immigration control options are, it is impossible to make a decision. Certainly I doubt that Parliament will relinquish a final say, and some flexibility will be needed.
|
Certainly I doubt that Parliament will
>> relinquish a final say, and some flexibility will be needed.
>>
See that's the thing they can have a say, but I don't see how they can do anything meaningful in terms of not leaving. Many of them won't be happy about it of course, but they'll have to get on with it.
> Until we know what the trade and immigration control options are, it is impossible to make a decision
Not sure what you mean?
|
>> The bare-majority support for Brexit will wane when the negotiations bring home reality.
>> Then the veiled insurrection mutterings will evaporate.
Really. Thank you for that insight.
|
My views.
1 We will certainly leave the EU. Politically there is no alternative.
2 The leaving arrangement are drafted in favour of the remaining countries. There is no advantage in triggering the process early.
3 We cannot start negotiations until we decide what our aims are.
4 There are a multiplicity of possible arrangements with the EU. They vary from something like the Norwegian model which would look very similar to being in the EU to severing all connections.
5 There is no consensus as to what arrangements we are seeking
6 it is not going to be a quick process. There are decades of legislation to review, repeal, renegotia
|
|
I think we have to leave and nothing can change that. I do think some discussion in Parliament is appropriate as to what deal we end up going for. That is not for May and her team to decide. If there were a few options then that should be put to a vote. Otherwise we'll end up with something nobody want - well we might anyway.
|
Other than point 1, I agree, CGN. The 2016 referendum has not settled anything, rather it has opened a Pandora's box, due to lack of political planning and foresight at the level of Parliament. To leave the EU will take years disentangling legislation and treaties and setting up new relationships. As a country, we do not have a clear idea of what should be done, and the PM will have her work cut out to unite Ministers in common cause.
Inevitably views on exit and it's terms will change as the negotiators flesh out the options. There is no constitutional reason why a second referendum, with voters in possession of the facts, could not be held in due course. This time, with options to consider! Dept X will have much to do.
A view from Belfast, prior to the 23 June: tinyurl.com/jyrpkd2
This makes the point that a two-option referendum skews the result. They were right!
|
My thoughts:
Ignoring the referendum result would make a complete mockery of the process and set a destabilising precedent for any future referendum on any subject. Even Remainers or SNP campaigners for Scottish independence wouldn't want that - they may not like some recent results, but they surely would like their own particular standpoint, if successful, to be respected?
Why do we have to negotiate or trigger anything? What seems to be happening is that we just slowly drift away and make links elsewhere, and meanwhile the EU slowly collapses under its own weight. At some point they'll wonder why anyone ever wanted it in the first place.
A most satisfactory outcome :)
|
Brexit may send EU 'down the drain' - German vice chancellor
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37210138
.......as a result, the world now regarded Europe as an unstable continent.
|
You say ignoring the referendum would be a mockery but go on to say why do we have to trigger the process for leaving the EU.
That would surly be seen as ignoring the free sum wouldn't it?
|
>> You say ignoring the referendum would be a mockery but go on to say why
>> do we have to trigger the process for leaving the EU.
>>
>> That would surly be seen as ignoring the free sum wouldn't it?
>>
Because triggering clause 50 and asking to leave is not the only way. We didn't vote to trigger it, simply to leave by whatever means available .
We could just write a letter of resignation, or as seems to be in process now, simply let things drift while everyone gets used to the idea that we are not members any more.
If someone doesn't turn up to meetings and lets his subscription lapse, sooner or later he ceases to be a member.
Last edited by: Cliff Pope on Mon 29 Aug 16 at 14:48
|
SQ 4 LB
>> If someone doesn't turn up to meetings and lets his subscription lapse, sooner or later
>> he ceases to be a member.
If only it were that simple, we have treaty obligations until we formally leave the EU and the process of leaving is laid out in the treaty so we could be stroppy and break the treaty but then who in the world would trust any treaty that we entered in to in the future?
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 30 Aug 16 at 01:38
|
Shamelessly lifted from a Facebook post. Hat tip - Michael Goldie.
Dear Remain voter,
I'm sorry you did not get your own way in the EU referendum, don't blame the people who voted to leave!
Blame the 28% of eligible voters who did not bother to turn up
Blame the 232 people who left their ballot paper blank
Blame the 9,084 people who crossed both boxes in protest
Blame the 836 people who added their names to the ballot paper
Blame the 15,207 who voided their vote for other reasons
Leave voters are not selfish, racist, xenophobic, bigoted or stupid.
They voted for our children & grandchildren, they voted for our democracy, they voted for our sovereignty, they voted for our fishermen, they voted for our farmers, they voted for our steel industry, they voted for our NHS, they voted for our schools, they voted for our laws, they voted for our borders, they voted for our economy, they voted for our rights, they voted for our freedom of speech & they voted for a Greater Britain.
They didn't vote for YOU!
|
"I'm sorry you did not get your own way in the EU referendum,"
Why are you sorry? . I thought you would have been pleased or are doubts creeping in?
"Leave voters are not selfish, racist, xenophobic, bigoted or stupid."
What none of them at all ? Are you really absolutely sure of that? I'm not. I rather think that a significant proportion of the population are all of those things and I would be suprised if none of them them voted "leave".
|
R
"Leave voters are not selfish, racist, xenophobic, bigoted or stupid."
Perhaps you meant that " Not all leave voters are not selfish, racist, xenophobic, bigoted or stupid."
|
"They thought that they voted for our children & grandchildren, for our democracy, for our sovereignty, they voted for our fishermen, t our farmers, our steel industry, they voted for our NHS, for our schools, for our laws, they voted for our borders,for our economy, for our rights, our freedom of speech & for a Greater Britain."
Look at this - www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/24/eu-referendum-how-the-results-compare-to-the-uks-educated-old-an/
But the children voted remain and then look at the correlation with education! Draw your own conclusions!
I will not bother with the other erroneous statements.
Last edited by: sherlock47 on Mon 29 Aug 16 at 19:18
|
>>
>>
>> But the children voted remain and then look at the correlation with education! Draw your
>> own conclusions!
>>
>>
>>
Another person mistakenly equating education with intelligence. It was the "Educated" who were responsible for the crash of 2008, who led us into war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and who thought the Euro would be a sound currency among many other brilliant ideas.
|
>>. It was the "Educated" who were responsible for........
Well at least they can't be blamed for the leave vote.
|
>>
>> Well at least they can't be blamed for the leave vote.
>>
Thank God we don't have to leave everything to them. Ten years hence people will look back and wonder what all the fuss was about.
|
>>Ten years hence people will look back and wonder what all the fuss was about.
You may be right. I certainly hope you're right.
|
Shamelessly lifted from the Cornish Guardian. Hat tip - David Challice UK Independence Party .
One of the worst things about the Brexit Referendum was the way the bad losers reacted.
The Leave voters (the majority, remember) were dismissed as "extremist" or "stupid and easily-led by the lies of Farage". Or even worse, they were "old" and their vote "jeopardised my children's future".
At no stage did Nigel Farage or UKIP ever lie about anything.
You might have disagreed with things but it was always based on fact.
Second, how dare these bad losers pour such hate against their fellow Britons?
We've had a democratic election. Everyone's vote is worth the same, in Scotland or Cornwall.
How dare they imply that the "old" shouldn't vote (presumably because they'll soon be dead, so the future doesn't matter to them) or that their vote somehow counts less than some brainwashed teenager, who knows nothing of life, and thinks their most important possession (after their phone) is a Euro Railcard.
Tim Farron (Liberal Democrat leader) even demanded another vote because he didn't like the result of the first one, which doesn't sound very Liberal or Democratic to me.
I pose a question. As Mr Farron is neither Liberal nor Democratic what exactly is he, and why should anyone vote Lib Dem?
|
Tim Farron (Liberal Democrat leader) even demanded another vote because he didn't like the
>> result of the first one, which doesn't sound very Liberal or Democratic to me.
>>
Seems perfectly understandable to me, however I don't agree with him it isn't unexpected. If the result went the other way, UKIP/Leave would be equally campaigning for another vote.
|
>>>Shamelessly lifted from the Cornish Guardian. Hat tip - David Challice UK Independence Party .<<<
I suggest you research the character of your friends and heros to avoid underming your credibility!
( I do speak from experience - I made a similar mistake recently :( )
news.sky.com/story/ukip-stands-by-women-stay-at-home-official-10408194
blogs.spectator.co.uk/2014/04/ukip-stand-by-their-latest-trouble-man/
|
>>I suggest you research the character of your friends and heros to avoid underming your credibility
Heroes & undermining ;)
I did check 'im out before posting said piece actually - minor Kipper gaffs really IMO, although I don't think Challice will be a contender for the leadership squabble :)
|
>> At no stage did Nigel Farage or UKIP ever lie about anything.
Really?? All that stuff about Turkey being in EU by 2020?
|
|
And the small matter of the big lie about 350 million per week for the NHS, which Farage really wanted to privatise? UKIP health spokesman wanted to continue public funding. Obviously there is a communication issue. Brain not connected to mouth.
|
>> big lie about 350 million per week for the NHS
If you read the "lie" carefully, you will note that nowhere did it say that all that would be spent on the NHS. Indeed, Ian Duncan Smith said some of it would go to the NHS. Similarly all the other slogans/lies - you have to remember that they are designed by PR spin merchants to mean whatever the reader wants to read in to them.
Remoaners need to understand that the referendum was simply an in/out vote, it was not about electing a "Leave" Government which would carry out the promises or lies or whatever stated by them during the campaign. Just as different Remoaners had different reasons for voting In, different Leavers had different reasons for voting Out. How Theresa's cabinet and the overwhelmingly pro-EU civil service deliver Brexit is something that voters can only watch from the sidelines and hope for the best.
It is really hard to keep my promise/lie not to be drawn in to this debate.
|
>>Remoaners need to understand that the referendum was simply an in/out vote, it was not about electing a "Leave" Government which would carry out the promises or lies or whatever stated by them during the campaign<<
They know, they are just dishonest and can lie just as easily as their great leader, Tony Blair.
|
|
Read the side of the lying battle bus. Is it that hard to remember?
|
>>Read the side of the lying battle bus. Is it that hard to remember? <<
The Vote Leave campaign was run by Matthew Elliott and his campaign team. The government is run by someone called Theresa May. The government decides the NHS budget, not Matthew Elliott and his campaign team. Is the government running the country, not Vote Leave, difficult to understand?
The referendum debate offered numerous possibilities following either referendum outcome, it did not promise what government policy would be. Was this difficult to understand too?
|
For a lot of the population it probably was too difficult to understand and they really believed the £350m figure. And other lies. I've seen an interview on the news with one such voter.
And they weren't thinking who'd deliver anything but they probably hoped/thought the buffoon known as Boris Johnson became PM.
At least Gove saved us from that.
|
The leave campaign, not the Government, were lying, knowingly, and with advice from the campaign strategists. So, the big lies and the xenophobic implications found a receptive audience. They didn't need to understand. They probably didn't. The job was done. All emotion, no facts. Exactly what was intended.
Last edited by: NortonES2 on Tue 30 Aug 16 at 00:46
|
>>The leave campaign, not the Government, were lying, knowingly, and with advice from the campaign strategists <<
Saying that money you could potentially save could be spent elsewhere isn't lying, it is a suggested outcome. Until we have actually left the EU, it is premature to judge whether or not the government at the time raises NHS funding.
George Osborne suggested a punishment budget, which hasn't materialised - because it was a suggested outcome. This stuff aint rocket science.
|
"Saying that money you could potentially save could be spent elsewhere isn't lying, it is a suggested outcome. Until we have actually left the EU, it is premature to judge whether or not the government at the time raises NHS funding."
It was the amount Stuu, which was a gross figure presented as fact. Guess we will have to differ, and as you say, we haven't left yet.
|
>>It was the amount Stuu, which was a gross figure presented as fact. Guess we will have to differ, and as you say, we haven't left yet. <<
The amount is/was disputed, even by people on the Leave side, but trying to nail down a precise figure is like trying to get Blair to admit he isn't a god walking among us.
Personally I never promoted that figure but the polling suggests it wasn't very important either in terms of why people voted Leave, so it is a rather peripheral point.
I fought on the basis of democratic control. As far as NHS funding goes, the Right may not like it, but it needs more money, as does adult social care which is in a terrible state right now.
|
>> Read the side of the lying battle bus. Is it that hard to remember?
>>
Yes, I saw it and read it carefully from the very first time it appeared. Very cleverly worded spin just as much as the Armageddon messages were from Cameron and Osborne.
In a BBC Question Time programme Michael Gove said he believed around £100 million a week could go to the health service. Similarly, Ian Duncan Smith never said the NHS would get all of it, and said the "promises" were just a series of "possibilities".
The only one to say all of it could go on the NHS was Gisela Stuart “Every week we send £350m to Brussels. I’d rather that we control how to spend that money, and if I had that control I would spend it on the NHSâ€.
In the game of politically spun promises, ever since this art of spin was introduced by Tony Blair and Alistair Campbell, you have to be smart to understand what remains unsaid. And sometimes you get told blatant lies without any hedging spin or get out clauses - just look up Cameron's promises where he says "no ifs or buts".
|
>>And the small matter of the big lie about 350 million per week for the NHS, which Farage really wanted to privatise? UKIP health spokesman wanted to continue public funding<<
Did Farage want to privatise it? Even if he did, it wouldn't matter. I recall the party had an internal debate many years ago, decided it wasn't the way to go and publically funding the NHS remained party policy, to this day.
The only people who continue to raise privatising the NHS are those on the Left who cant accept it hasn't happened, nor will it, but enjoy very much trying to scare the public with the threat, vacuous though it is. You can never accuse the Left of abandoning a broken record, that is for certain.
Labour have been saying the Tories will do it for decades, but it hasn't happened, although given that the Left has long since given up on reality, no doubt for the next 20 years a similar threat narrative will be pushed. Just don't mention PFI, or that the current Labour Party is rife with anti-Semitism for that matter.
|
>>Even if he did, it wouldn't matter.
I'd guess that is true. As far as I can see neither Farage nor UKIP matter very much anymore. I don't even think the Daily Mail cares anymore, does it?
I should think it only really matters to the politicians, mostly second rate, who were finding their 15 minutes within its reflection who now have to see the spotlights fading.
I can't see its relevant to anyone else. Or am I missing something?
Last edited by: No FM2R on Tue 30 Aug 16 at 00:47
|
>>I'd guess that is true. As far as I can see neither Farage nor UKIP matter very much anymore. I don't even think the Daily Mail cares anymore, does it?<<
Possibly not, although with Labour suffering an infiltration of racists and bigots, who knows how that will change the landscape.
|
>>
>> >> At no stage did Nigel Farage or UKIP ever lie about anything.
>>
>> Really?? All that stuff about Turkey being in EU by 2020?
>>
Not Farage afaik.
It was Michael Gove who implied it, when he said population of the UK could increase by between 2.6 million and 5 million by 2030, based on the on the assumption of accession of five new countries by 2020.
|
>>Really?? All that stuff about Turkey being in EU by 2020?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fczOgXvzm8
|
"They voted for our children & grandchildren, they voted for our democracy, they voted for our sovereignty, they voted for our fishermen, they voted for our farmers, they voted for our steel industry, they voted for our NHS, they voted for our schools, they voted for our laws, they voted for our borders, they voted for our economy, they voted for our rights, they voted for our freedom of speech & they voted for a Greater Britain."
You left out motherhood and apple pie Roger. I was nearly convinced until I realised.
|
|
At least the bad losers have succeeded in almost killing this forum, and are still trying.
|
>>At least the bad losers have succeeded in almost killing this forum, and are still trying.
How are they doing that?
|
">>At least the bad losers have succeeded in almost killing this forum, and are still trying.
How are they doing that?"
To take Mark's question at face value, some would say, by stirring up a lot of unpleasantness which many forum members have been disgusted by, resulting in fewer posts, and by fewer individuals.
Actually, the question was probably disingenuous. Maybe.
|
>>Actually, the question was probably disingenuous
It wasn't. Rude I may be, but disingenuous I am not.
Mind you, after I posted that I then noticed a bunch of unpleasant Brexit oriented posts started appearing, so I guess the question doesn't really need answering.
Though the comment was about the losers being unpleasant, presumably referring to those those who voted remain. Most of the snidey comments, though obviously not all, then seem to come from those who voted Leave.
All rather silly, though.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Mon 29 Aug 16 at 23:59
|
>>To take Mark's question at face value........
By the way, why can you not answer my question directly to me? Why do you talk about "Mark's question" but not speak directly to me?
A couple of others do the same, but I think they're intimidated by me; I very much doubt that you are. Its a curious thing.
|
>>Why do you talk about "Mark's question" but not speak directly to me?<<
Because it would be very bad etiquette and quite rude to do so in a public forum.
Pat
|
>> Because it would be very bad etiquette and quite rude to do so in a
>> public forum.
Really? I have never heard that. Why would answering directly to the questioner be rude? Surely talking about the matter in the third person cannot be more polite or better etiquette?
I'm quite genuinely curious, and if I've misunderstood, I didn't mean to.
|
Simply because it's a group discussion and not a one to one chat.
Talking directly to another person excludes (even unintentionally) any one else.
Pat
|
'By the way, why can you not answer my question directly to me? Why do you talk about "Mark's question" but not speak directly to me?
A couple of others do the same, but I think they're intimidated by me; I very much doubt that you are. Its a curious thing.'
I'm not intimidated by you, but I often try to avoid the "in your face response" if I make a critical comment which might give you an excuse to kick off. And I don't mean you exclusively.
It's a bit like the convention in debating of making comments to the chair and not addressing other debaters personally - it discourages emotional issues getting in the way of dealing with the topic.
The personal attacks and similar unpleasantness are what have ruined this forum, in my view. I always thought it was part of civilised and considerate behaviour to accept that other people's views - even those which seem wildly off-beam to some - are to be treated with respect, not contempt, and are certainly not a cue for personal comments.
|
|
Probably why the world is in the turmoil it is, 20 odd members of a forum, whom are supposed to be "friends" can't even play nice together for a few minutes a day! ;-) Probably a good idea that we don't have any "Back-room" meets like there once was on H.J, probably end in mass fisticuffs!
|
>>Probably why the world is in the turmoil it is
Tis why I live up 'ere away from it all - far from the madding crowd, like. Sheep have been a bit noisy of late mind.
Baa.
|
|
Have you moved Dog ? - I always thought Cornwall was "Down there" somewhere! ;-)
|
|
Get on with your knitting ike will ya for gawds sake ;-)
|
I have just read the link posted below and thinking back at the reactions of some of the members here, some parallels of the article seems remarkably applicable.
www.bbc.com/future/story/20160824-what-would-happen-if-all-animals-were-as-smart-as-us
But I think that the failing would be how do the new dominant species operate a keyboard or touchscreen?
:)
Last edited by: sherlock47 on Tue 30 Aug 16 at 09:34
|
"All told, the situation would probably end badly for almost everyone. As species fell, ecosystems would collapse, leaving only the heartiest survivors – the bacteria, cockroaches and perhaps rats – to inherit the Earth"
What an awful thought - a rat or a cockroach as PM.
:o}
|
What an awful thought - a rat or a cockroach as PM.
Seems very similar to me at the moment Dog! - and I've finished mi knittin! ;-)
|
>> Probably why the world is in the turmoil it is, 20 odd members of a forum, whom are supposed to be "friends" can't even play nice together for a few minutes a day
Indeed! Just came back from holiday and discovered fight is still going strong :-)
Some other car forums (not UK based) prohibit any political discussion. On hindsight, I think that is a good approach. Somehow Brexit discussion made apparently normal people hostile to each other.
|
I think that somehow "Brexit" somehow polarises the population more than class. somehow it splits us into two group who think in a fundamentally differenet way and have a real difficulty in undertanding the thought process behind the way the other group think.
It seems a very ingrained element of our personality and is not always altogether rational. I know of very few people who have ever changed sides as a result of argument or presentation of facts. It is going to be a very devisive factor in English politics for years to come.
|
>> I know of very few people who have ever changed sides as a result of
>> argument or presentation of facts.
Indeed. The mantra "nobody ever changed anyone's mind on the internet" is why I rarely bother to argue, post an opinion piece or otherwise make my views known. It's pointless. All such stuff falls into "you won't win" or at best "nobody cares what you say".
I'm quite happy to burble on with anecdotes, ask questions, (and of course knowingly using the passive/aggressive "play dumb" approach as you get the best answers that way) and read other people little life episodes, but as a forum for venting, here or anywhere on the internet, or getting involved in personal spats, well, life is too short.
In my opinion.
|
>> I'm quite happy to burble on with anecdotes, ask questions, (and of course knowingly using the passive/aggressive "play dumb" approach as you get the best answers that way) and read other people little life episodes, but as a forum for venting, here or anywhere on the internet, or getting involved in personal spats, well, life is too short.
>>
>> In my opinion.
Mine too. Thanks for expressing it for me.
|
>>I think that somehow "Brexit" somehow polarises the population more than class. somehow
>>it splits us into two group who think in a fundamentally differenet way and have a real
>>difficulty in undertanding the thought process behind the way the other group think.
Really? I wasn't ever going to vote for change, I'm too conservative for that, but I did think that leave might have considerable benefits for the UK.
I have friends who turn out to have voted to leave as an absolute-last-minute in-polling-booth decision.
So I don't agree that it's completely polarised.
If there were to be another referendum tomorrow I would vote 'Out' as to vote anything else would be to be undemocratic.
|
>>If there were to be another referendum tomorrow I would vote 'Out' as to vote anything else would be to be undemocratic.
S'not the first time I've heard that of late. Remain had the 24 hour extension for registering to vote AND the awful killing of Joe cox - but they still couldn't pull it orf.
I'll wager (Lud's money) that if there was a 2nd referen dumb, Gran Britannia would vote Leave by a similar margarine.
:}
|
>>Somehow Brexit discussion made apparently normal people hostile to each other.<<
Nah, those Remainers we're never normal before Brexit:)
Pat
|
>>It's a bit like the convention in debating of making comments to the chair and not addressing other debaters personally - it discourages emotional issues getting in the way of dealing with the topic
I guess that's a fair point, although it wouldn't have occurred to me.
Anyway, not important, I was just curious, appreciate the answer.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Tue 30 Aug 16 at 14:18
|
I would generally, I think, do the same as FP unless a question was clearly to be directed at a specific person. Less so the answer - which is for anyone who is interested in it.
Comments made here are made to everybody, and it can be quite irritating to read posts that are really just a direct conversation between two other posters.
|
I guess naturally that I wouldn't. I'm kind of wondering which is better.
Though I think it would feel odd if I now wrote something like;
"it was interesting to read Manatee's question on llamas and I feel sure that he will enjoy the experience but will prefer leather"
as opposed to;
"Interesting to see your question, Manatee, I feel sure that you will enjoy the experience whichever you choose, but I recommend leather".
One sort of feels like I am trying to answer your question, the other like I am grandstanding and more concerned with everybody else seeing how clever I am.
|
Doesn't it make a difference as to what is going on?
If I post about my recent trip to Scotland, I would expect people to address me and my specific experiences rather than to refer to me as though I were not there.
If I am contributing on the Brexit thread, it is like a crowd of people having a conversation in a pub. So statements are generally directed at the large and appreciative audience, thought sometimes - Mark - I might address you directly if I think you are wrong (or right) on a particular topic.
|
Anyone who is genuinely interested in this topic, rather than searching for sticks to beat the other side with, might enjoy this programme on Radio 4 that has just finished.
www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07qbcb6
|
|
Just listened to that while clearing up the garage.Anintelligent and informative program.
|
BREXIT means BREXIT as Theresa May said today.
There is no going back on the June 23rd Referendum vote.
|
"Candygram for Fluffy...Candygram for Fluffy"
"Duh Fluffy like candy..."
Boom
|
|
Ah, Doctor old chap, Lost your email address, could you possibly drop me a line? Ta ever so.
|
>>could you possibly drop me a line?
email sent
|
>> email sent
Not very often you'll get a Doctor doing something for nothing ;)
|
|
But nobody knows what it will look like - i.e. what deals we will have etc. Maybe we'll just stick with WTO.
|
Matt's take on Brexit talks today:
tinyurl.com/rain-drops-roses
|
Company I visited last week employs scientists (all PHDs) lots of them, from all over the world, astonishingly about 60% of the staff were PHDs.
They design and manufacture very expensive boxes of electronics that are sold around the world.
Problem is that the PHDs tend to complete a project and move on to bigger companies or back to academia once the project is completed.
The company didn't mind that, they could always get good quality PHDs and their CVs used to come in a continuous stream. This stream has come to a trickle. The company is being told that they just don't want to come to the UK with things so undecided at the moment and with the uncertainty of being allowed to stay or not.
So the company has little choice, they can't make their product without the experts and so they will go to where the experts are, lock stock and barrel!
Last edited by: zippy on Sun 4 Sep 16 at 13:53
|
Uncertaintly not being allowed to stay?
We haven't become that hostile are we or are we perceived as such.
|
No doubt it is the uncertainty for now. Nobody knows. So if you could come to the UK to work or go to somewhere else in the EU... well maybe the other places are safer bets for now.
And then today Japan is spelling out what the likes of Nissan, Honda and Toyota might do. And their banks and pharmaceutical companies... not surprising because it was inevitable if we don't allow them access to the single market without tariffs. And for the pharmaceutical companies if the EUMA is no longer in London... well why would they stay?
Ah well. Unless you work for the car industry, banking or pharmaceuticals.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Sun 4 Sep 16 at 21:34
|
>>We haven't become that hostile are we or are we perceived as such.
Perceived as such I think!
Also, these folks fly all over the world selling and training the users of the "boxes". The UK's lack of investment in travel infrastructure doesn't help - how long have we been talking about a 3rd runway at Heathrow!
|
|
I see Theresa May has ruled out a points based immigration system which was one of the main requirements for many leavers.
|
I din't think it was ruled out yet. The point is nothing is known yet. So many things can change and not match up with what people hoped for by voting out.
BREXIT = BREXIT is a meaningless statement. We could leave the EU and have a new agreement that is 100% the same and called EU2 for example.
So what do the members on here hope for?
For all we know the EU will become EU2 on our leaving and we join it immediately. So we leave and join something. You get what I mean - I hope. It's all words. There's a few years for twists and turns.
But what if the EU morphs and renames into something that's not the European Union.... if we're not in the EU does that satisfy the referendum?
Last edited by: rtj70 on Mon 5 Sep 16 at 01:39
|
Her words came about about as close to ruling it out as a a cautious politician is likely to. Bit of a put down for Boris who has promoted the idea.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37271420
|
It would seem the Prime Minister has clarified the portion and has completely rejected a points based immigration system.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37271420
|
>>So what do the members on here hope for?
Like most leavers, I gather from today's DT; free trade, control of immigration and an end to EU contributions.
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 5 Sep 16 at 10:21
|
>> >>So what do the members on here hope for?
>>
>> Like most leavers, I gather from today's DT; free trade, control of immigration and an
>> end to EU contributions.
>>
The problem is of course that what you want and what is possible may well be two different things and a degree of compromise is likeLy to be called for.
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 5 Sep 16 at 10:21
|
Any comment from those that voted to leave? Strong words from ShinzÅ Abe.
He did say a bit in May too:
www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/05/05/japanese-prime-minister-shinzo-abe-warns-brexit-could-hit-foreig/
Or was the Project Fear?
Last edited by: rtj70 on Mon 5 Sep 16 at 00:26
|
|
Keep it up rtj, you will soon be listening to your own echo.
|
I think he's well and truly doing that already.....across the internet;)
Pat
|
Here's what the ardently pro-EU BBC has to say.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36956418
|
>> Any comment from those that voted to leave? Strong words from ShinzÅ Abe.
>>
Isn't he the prime minister of that Asian country who has managed to contrive a permanent state of economic stagnation? I didn't realise he was also a leading economist, like the Stiglitz:
www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/09/04/britain-can-leave-eu-and-still-thrive-says-stiglitz/
But we can go on for ever trading he says this, he says that.
It's obvious that neither Remain nor Brexit were going to be disasters. Both have opportunities, but we have chosen the second, so let's just get on with it now and seize them.
|
Seems like we won't have a points based system for EU migration control. What else might the leave campaign fail to deliver?
In response to the echo comment - you're right it is a bit empty here at the moment, probably the cause of the echo. Perhaps members are hiding somewhere?
Last edited by: rtj70 on Mon 5 Sep 16 at 15:53
|
>> Perhaps members are hiding somewhere?
They'd be crap at hide and seek if that were the case. Perhaps they've just become grumpy old farts instead.
|
" Perhaps members are hiding somewhere?"
"Perhaps they've just become grumpy old farts instead."
As far as I'm concerned, either or both of those might fit. Not actually hiding, but lost interest and peed off with the recent negativity. I look in occasionally, read some of the stuff and usually don't feel inspired. I doubt anyone cares, really.
|
No FP, they have started their own sad little forum where they can all agree with each other and bitch about those of us who don't agree with them!
Haven't you had an invitation to join it?
No, neither have I :)
What an ungrateful bunch they are.
They had a forum here but couldn't help but discourage it from flourishing to give the owner a little bit of recompense for providing it, and then like a true kick in the teeth to him they de-camp without so much as a thank you.
Well, manners were never their best point so I guess they will get bored without the arguments and will soon be arguing among themselves about the price of fish.
I must say though, I'm surprised and disillusioned at some of the names I see on there....I really must check out my ability to weigh people up as it seems I have been very wrong about more than a few of our old regulars.
Pat
|
These places are like pubs Pat - hence the title of the new one. If the place doesn't change and the landlord doesn't enforce the rules, or worse enforces contrarian stuff, then eventually the punters migrate.
|
Bromptonaut, I think there have been instances of double standards in how this site has been moderated at times. I've even tried pushing boundaries hoping whole sub-threads would then get chopped like they should have been. Sometimes a forum does need active moderation.
But a forum also needs to be active... When did we have anyone new join this site? I can't remember anyone sticking around apart from fluffy.
|
Rob. The activity on this site slowed a few months ago. No one new will join as it currently stands.
Reason being, no one will find this site as I turned off Google indexing, thanks mainly to your antics of trying to publish everything about anyone online - misrepresentation etc.
The easiest approach was just to stop search engines indexing it rather than trying to reason with you. I simply don't have the time or inclination.
But for the record, no, it is not possible to earn loads from advertising on a forum-only site. I gave a significant amount of our advertising revenue to the mods here as a thank you - though I notice that one moderator has joined you without so much as a courteous mod nod.
No doubt, like Lord of the Flies, once the 'in' crowd get cosy they will find a 'Piggy' to bully and kill. Just remember that this forum was set up years ago with the friendly pub kind of feel. I laid out the principles of respect etc. But you guys have made it what it is, and just like the survivors on the Lord of the Flies island, some personalities have bullied the others and created the atmosphere you got. We should all learn from that story, where the strong characters ended separating into a corner of the island where they again could rule the roost and exercise their power and influence, bullying and killing the 'outsiders'.
Just like any relationship breakup you only take yourself and your own problems into the next one.
Let me make a prediction, because the personalities are exactly the same and no lessons learnt, once the 'Piggies' stray near them, the same old nastiness will come out.
There is a curious dynamic in online forums where normally weak people in real life, once endued with internet powers, become someone online. Just like road rage where a person becomes someone because of the power and privacy the car gives them. And like road rage, they can use that power in unhealthy, unsociable ways. I don't know anyone who knows the solution to this problem.
|
>>No doubt, like Lord of the Flies, once the 'in' crowd get cosy they will find a 'Piggy' to bully and kill
Is that what you feel happened with the move from HJ to here? That it happened in HJ, nobody stopped it and so it moved here, and now it will move to The GOF Pub?
Why didn't you moderate to prevent it? Its possible you know, especially if you saw it coming. Surely that is exactly what the moderators are there to prevent?
Still, on the bright side, at least moderation solved that most bothersome of problems, excessive quoting. So that was a bullet dodged.
And turning off Google indexing is the reason that no one will find it? I think not. It hardly stemmed the non-stop flow of new members from when indexing was available, did it?
>>I don't know anyone who knows the solution to this problem.
There is no solution, but it can be prevented and removed.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Tue 6 Sep 16 at 13:31
|
>> And turning off Google indexing is the reason that no one will find it? I think not..
... speechless....
|
>> I gave a significant amount of our advertising revenue to the mods here as a thank you
And I think they deserve it - as you clearly do. Thanks and well done.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Tue 6 Sep 16 at 13:38
|
>>Haven't you had an invitation to join it?
>>No, neither have I :)
>>What an ungrateful bunch they are.
I expect mine is still in the post - I do live in the far reaches of the wild west of Briton after all.
:)
|
Hiding?
If that's the best you can do I'd be very, very careful.
Pat
|
|
Hiding? I thought that they had all taken the honorable course of action now that they have realised what they had done.
|
|
It didn't end well for him in the end. Should have stayed in the mountains.
|
>> Seems like we won't have a points based system for EU migration control.
I don't think May has applied her supposed intelligence to that comment (to the effect that a points system will not reduce immigration).
At its most basic, you have some policy rules (e.g. anybody from Ireland passes, anybody convicted of violence fails), then you award points in varying weighting for positive attributes (e.g. education, occupation, age, financial status. job offer or whatever is desirable). You can either then set a points cut-off based on the minimum requirement, and let the numbers find their own level, or you can monitor the numbers and move the cut-off to manage the number you want (which might not be a good idea if you are turning down people who are needed, or letting in people who will be a burden on the state).
She says that the government wants to decide who comes and who doesn't. I can just about guarantee that the way to implement that will be a points system in all but name (as it is now, for people without other entitlements).
I am v. disappointed with what I have seen of her so far as PM. She was rushing her words and stumbling in her speech to the G20.
Shinzo Abe seems to have made a great impression on you. He has said next to nothing, other than what he and the Japanese owned firms here would like, which we could have guessed anyway.
(And I am not hiding anywhere. I considered abandoning in light of the abusive tone by some Remainers, but I prefer just to ignore the nasty posts, here or elsewhere.)
|
>>I am v. disappointed with what I have seen of her so far as PM.
Certainly from afar she seems a bit of an anti climax. She attracts very little attention here whereas previous incumbents have been watched.
Mind you, other than the complete balls up over the referendum (having it, designing it, managing it, etc. etc.) I quite liked Cameron.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Mon 5 Sep 16 at 18:33
|
>> Shinzo Abe seems to have made a great impression on you. He has said next to nothing, other
>> than what he and the Japanese owned firms here would like, which we could have guessed
>> anyway.
Because if the Japanese car manufacturers, pharmaceuticals and banks moved from the UK that is a lot of jobs disappearing.
It is fairly obvious if there are tariffs then they'd apply to imported components and then export of the whole car. So we need a tariff free access to the single EU market which might mean we have to agree to freedom of movement.
Manatee, you'd have to agree it would not be good if the assembly plants for Honda, Nissan/Infinity, BMW/Mini, Toyota all moved to the EU. And the same for engine plants for BMW and Toyota.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Mon 5 Sep 16 at 19:08
|
"She says that the government wants to decide who comes and who doesn't. I can just about guarantee that the way to implement that will be a points system in all but name (as it is now, for people without other entitlements)."
I don't think so
From what she has said I think it is fairly plain that for EU residents she favours limiting immigration by only allowing those with the firm offer of a job to enter the UK. This will allow her to claim a reduction in immigration but would also allow a negotiating position with the EU regarding access to the European Market
|
It's not just the Brits... - Mike Hannon
