***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 65 *****
==============================================================
IMPORTANT - PLEASE READ
Before discussions start in this thread, I would like to point out that any petty arguments, personal attacks, or any other infringement of house rules, etc. will be deleted where we feel fit from now on. It seems that discussion about Brexit brings out the worst in some people.
We will not give notice that we have deleted anything. Nor will we enter into discussion why something was deleted. That will also be deleted. The select few who are unable to have a reasonable discussion, cannot contain their anger, be keyboard warriors, trolls, etc. should not be allowed to spoil the enjoyment for others.
Also bear in mind that genuine posts 'may' well end up also getting deleted. I apologise in advance for this, but we simply do not have the time to pick through and be selective with anything we delete. If your reply is tagged onto an argument, etc. then due to the nature of the forum software, chances are it will also vanish.
Finally, if it becomes too time consuming to moderate these threads, then we might ask that Brexit discussion stop altogether.
Be nice, Play nice, and control your temper.
Your co-operation would be appreciated.
Dave.
Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 9 Nov 18 at 02:00
|
I was watching BBC2 Newsnight a few days ago.Evan Davis did the interviewing and George Osborne ex- Conservative chancellor and Polly Toynbee Guardian news paper journalist.
What a condescending character this George fellow is. With some of the answers he came out with regarding the British economy.The welfare cuts under his watch and the misery they caused.
He had no sense of responsibility and couldn't care less.What is it with these people who run a nation into the ground and end up with top jobs after the event.
Polly took him to task at least she didn't stand for his nonsense and called George a hyprocrite.He had a section in the Telegraph asking for collections helping the poor in London.
Cameron is writing a book but it is delayed, it is called fantasy island.
|
>> He had no sense of responsibility and couldn't care less.What is it with these people
>> who run a nation into the ground and end up with top jobs after the
>> event.
So you think he did it out of spite? just because he could? You think he personalty hated you so did it on purpose?
Get real or get an understanding about the financial crisis, and what was needed to fix it.
Polly Toynbee cant talk either, she has never had to balance a budget and knows rock all about finance, she is mostly a fiction writer.
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 5 Nov 18 at 09:59
|
>> So you think he did it out of spite? just because he could? You think
>> he personalty hated you so did it on purpose?
>>
>> Get real or get an understanding about the financial crisis, and what was needed to
>> fix it.
He did it out of political conviction. There were other ways of balancing the books.
|
>> He did it out of political conviction. There were other ways of balancing the books.
Ah the labour way I assume. Borrow more. Hasn't worked yet, which is why we always have to vote in nasty tories crucifying the poor.
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 5 Nov 18 at 01:40
|
Looks like a deal between the U.K. and the EU is imminent. The question is of course can May carry her party and parliament with her. I rather think she will, despite their bluster,at the end of the day I don’t think even Boris and his Cronies are prepared to be seen as resposible for a “no dealâ€
Interesting few weeks ahead
|
Exactly. It is not a choice between this deal or another deal, it is a choice between deal or no deal.
|
>> Exactly. It is not a choice between this deal or another deal, it is a
>> choice between deal or no deal.
Well I know it doesn't take a mastermind, but I'm sorry I dont have a clue, I would say Only if the price is right and we play our cards right. The countdown starts now.
|
I are depress.
I read that 4 times and even started a scathing reply before I suddenly thought "ohhhh".
Sometimes I am slower than a slow thing.
|
>Sometimes I am slower than a slow thing.
As fast as a striking slug.
|
|
What does the banker say? I'll go with box 6 I think.
|
Aaron Banks again
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46109883
Like that picture they have chosen, makes him look like the slug he is.
|
Why do remainers term 2nd referendum as people's vote? Why the 1st referendum was not people's vote? Who other than "people" ever voted on anything?
|
I didn't know it was "remainers" by which I assume that you mean all people who voted remain in the referendum.
For example, I do not term a second referendum as a "people's vote". However my Father does and he is determinedly in favour of Brexit.
Do you not think that it is limited to classify people by how they voted in a past referendum? Why do you keep returning to that? Is it because you understand that level of complexity and not more?
|
Because there will be a parliamentary vote on "the deal" but no plebiscite, as things stand. That parliamentary vote is now looking like a gun-to-the-head choice.
Having a people's vote on the same question (deal or no deal) would really mess things up, as it would almost certainly be rejected (as satisfying neither remainers nor many leavers). Best not, really.
|
I have half a dozen or so politicians with me on Thursday and I don't really want them yanked back for a vote.
Still, I can't see anything happening that quickly.
|
Even more fool them then, especially with a massive army of ex-pats working all across the EU sending hard currency home.
Breitbart is a totally impartial credible news source of course.
Last edited by: R.P. on Tue 6 Nov 18 at 16:33
|
And that has what to do with Brexit? Apart from you desperately seeking out whatever confirmation you can find to bolster up your own prejudices and paranoia?
|
I love Briebart, its funny how their advertising stream at the bottom reveals the type of readership they expect.
On second thoughts, the readership probably think the sponsored articles at the bottom is real news.
|
|
As ever you need to read the full article. It's much more nuanced than you seem to think.
|
Movilogo,
Given Breitbart's Far Right stance and general position on immigration, you do realise what they think of you and others in your position, don't you?
Are you really sure that's a part of the media you want to support and publicise?
|
Didn't know about Breitbart before. Now looked up on Wikipedia about them.
That Poland news was published in other places too including ft.com.
Last edited by: movilogo on Tue 6 Nov 18 at 18:46
|
>>Didn't know about Breitbart before
I thought that might be the case. Perhaps a caution that in future you should check your sources and their bias and/or credibility?
>>That Poland news was published in other places too including ft.com.
Indeed yet, as so often with Breitbart stories, the others managed to tell it quite a different way.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Tue 6 Nov 18 at 18:56
|
>> Didn't know about Breitbart before. Now looked up on Wikipedia about them.
>>
>> That Poland news was published in other places too including ft.com.
The current government in Poland is on the right. Donald Tusk was PM in a former, more left leaning, coalition. Conflict between them is no surprise.
I don't claim any real understanding of Polish politics but two issues disturb me.
(1) Changing retirement age of senior judges creating vacancies the government can fill in its own image;
(2) Re-writing history so that air crash that killed Poland's President in 2010 is down to Russian interference and not crew with 'press-onitis' taking a sixties technology aircraft outside its performance envelope for landing in poor visibility.
|
On the 26th October Pat posted a link;
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45990243
"Brexit: French officials dismiss UK fears of Calais 'go-slow'"
And asked "So who do we believe?
Well, there's this....
www.senat.fr/leg/pjl18-009.html
So, I'm going with "not the French bloke".
It's in French, so either Google translate it or accept the TL:DR version -> We're FUBAR'd without a deal.
|
Government responded to "Stop possible second referendum on E.U. membership" petition:
A clear majority of the electorate voted to leave the European Union. We must respect both the will of the British people, and the democratic process which delivered this result.
The Government is clear that we will respect the result of the 2016 referendum, and that we will not hold a second referendum.
A clear majority of the electorate voted to leave the European Union in the 2016 referendum. Almost three quarters of the electorate took part in the referendum, resulting in 17.4 million votes to leave the European Union. This is the highest number of votes cast for anything in UK electoral history. This was the biggest democratic mandate for a course of action ever directed at any UK Government.
Parliament then overwhelmingly confirmed the result of the referendum by voting with clear and convincing majorities in both of its Houses for the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill.
In last year’s General Election, over 80% of people then also voted for parties committing to respect the result of the referendum - it was the stated policy of both major parties that the decision of the people would be respected. The Government is clear that it is now its duty to implement the will expressed by the electorate in the referendum - respecting both the will of the British people, and the democratic process which delivered the referendum result.
The British people must be able to trust in its Government both to effect their will, and to deliver the best outcome for them. As the Prime Minister has said: “This is about more than the decision to leave the EU; it is about whether the public can trust their politicians to put in place the decision they took.†In upholding that directive to withdraw from the European Union, the Government is delivering on that promise. We recognise that to do otherwise would be to undermine the decision of the British people, and to disrespect the powerful democratic values of this country and this government.
The Government therefore continues to be committed to delivering on the instruction given to us by the British people: working to overcome the challenges and seize the opportunities this brings to deliver an outcome which betters the lives of British people - whether they voted to Leave or to Remain.
The people of the United Kingdom gave a clear instruction and the Government is committed to seeing that through. We will leave the European Union on 29 March 2019.
|
|
All that can be countered very simply. If there were to be another vote most people would vote Remain.
|
Did you even bother to read the response above?
Pat
|
>> If there were to be another vote most people would vote Remain.
Have you got something concrete to prove "most" people would now vote Remain?
I voted leave, and would do the same again without any hesitation. There are so many rumours flying around, doom and gloom merchants stirring it up, etc.
What will be, will be. I just wish they could pull their fingers out and get on with it, instead of all the pussy footing around.
|
|
There is no way there should be another vote. Its already been demonstrated the British electorate cant be trusted with important choices. You dont give a gun to a lunatic a second time.
|
|
Quick edit, Yes MPs count as lunatics as well.
|
|
So there are 17.4 million lunatics in Britain? .. Wow! best I stay up here on the moor with the pasty crunchers then.
|
>> So there are 17.4 million lunatics in Britain? .. Wow! best I stay up here
>> on the moor with the pasty crunchers then.
Absolutely and yes you are at home there with the rest of them.
|
In the 20 years I've lived in Cornwall I've met a few folk with 'demons in the head' .. all incomers.
Hahaha, hehehe, I'm a laughing gnome and you can't catch me.
|
>> So there are 17.4 million lunatics in Britain? ..
Sounds quite conservative to me.
|
>>I just wish they could pull their fingers out and get on with it, instead of all the pussy footing around.
They are getting on with it - they just don't tell us everything that is going on. No doubt we'll be in some sort of customs union, but I'm okay with that, y'all can't have everything ya know ;)
Brexit means Brexit!
8-)
|
>> Brexit means Brexit
You've misspelled BEANO.
|
>> Brexit means Brexit
Ah, but what does Brexit itself mean? I have forgotten.
|
>> >> Brexit means Brexit
>>
>> Ah, but what does Brexit itself mean? I have forgotten.
Yes its been conveniently subverted according to what your stance is. Mind you its was never clear when the vote was offered, and therein lies the problem.
|
>> The people of the United Kingdom gave a clear instruction and the Government is
>> committed to seeing that through. We will leave the European Union on 29 March 2019.
You see I object to that article in many ways. There was no CLEAR instruction.
The voting population of the uk is 45,766,000. the mandate to leave the EU was a mere 38%
Still damage is done now, leave we must, there is no going back.
|
The reply posted by Dog was, of course, written by the same goons who produced the Govt's "Remain is best" letter before the referendum.
It has the same level of plausibility, conflation, and BS...
|
>> The reply posted by Dog was, of course, written by the same goons who produced
>> the Govt's "Remain is best" letter before the referendum.
>>
>> It has the same level of plausibility, conflation, and BS...
The World today is plagued with "spin". Classically Trump has hailed the loss of congress as a "Tremendous Victory. One of his spokespersons proclaimed on TV " He increased the number of seats in the senate, its a unique victory that has only happened 10 times in the last 80 years. WTF!
Honestly if we had as much spin in 1939 as we do now Churchils famous "Dark clouds Speech" would be be "We have been gifted with a tremendous new opportunity"
Bollards all of it. We want real true news, facts, maybe some informed comment and no sensationalism and words in block capitals from those who now, free of this Spin shiesse
Last edited by: Zero on Wed 7 Nov 18 at 11:51
|
>> Still damage is done now
Ah, and I was only recently talking about doom and gloom merchants ;)
|
>> >> Still damage is done now
>>
>> Ah, and I was only recently talking about doom and gloom merchants ;)
Look out, sound the alarm one of the inmates has escaped the asylum
|
|
My ole mum (1910-1998) used to say there were more out than 'in'.
Last edited by: non-emmet on Wed 7 Nov 18 at 13:10
|
Gosh, my earlier email was like tossing a match in a firework store.
Although I do believe a referendum would now result in a Remain majority not least that we would have three years mortality in the over sixties and three more years of young people qualifying to vote I don't think such a vote would be wise.
What I do think would be wise is some sort of common Sense and compromise breaking out in the died in the wool remainers. The referendum was nearly 50/50. We all need to work together. No side can get everything they want
|
Now there's the voice of reason.
Pat
Last edited by: Pat on Wed 7 Nov 18 at 16:24
|
Sorry, I meant to type “Died in the wooll leavers.â€
I guess your comment still applies.
|
Foot either side of the fence perhaps CG?
Decision time is looming!
Pat
|
Which fence?
Leave/Remain? Surely you're not harping back to that again?
|
Failed to ignore me yet again Mark:)
Pat
|
Pat, you're either drunk, delusional or have problems.
It is *YOU* that have been droning on and on and on for months and months and months triumphantly announcing how proud you are that ignoring *me* is your enjoyable and satisfying approach. Where you got the idea that I was trying, and failing, to ignore you I am not sure.
But, to clear the fog, I am not trying to ignore you, I have no intention of ignoring you, the only time I don't reply to something you've written is when you have made such an idiot of yourself there is nothing left for me to point out.
I do hope that is clear now. Pointing out the ridiculousness in most of what you say is one of my joys on a pressured day.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Wed 7 Nov 18 at 19:43
|
I'm sure a lot of people would appreciate it if the pair of you were to give it a rest and stop baiting one another all the time!!
|
"stop baiting one another all the time"
We know what's been going on. Crap shag and trying to blame each other.
Soooooooo obvious.
|
|
Damn. Was it that obvious?
|
|
And what an age difference. You're not exactly BBD.
|
I simply asked previously why you didn't ignore my posts and suggested it was because you couldn't.
I suggest, in the interests of forum harmony, we both ignore each others posts.
How's that for a compromise for everyone?
Pat
|
|
I have no intention of ignoring your posts. You do what you want to do.
|
I absolutely give up.
I find the perfect solution to keep everyone happy and you refuse flatly to even entertain it despite being asked >>I'm sure a lot of people would appreciate it if the pair of you were to give it a rest and stop baiting one another all the time!!<<
Perhaps that points to where the blame lies.
Pat
Last edited by: Pat on Thu 8 Nov 18 at 06:21
|
>> I absolutely give up.
I don't often post on the Brexit threads, because for some strange reason, they keep getting grumpy. Can't understand it.
However, I have just had another one of my fantastic ideas!!
Why don't you just ignore - you know - him?
If he responds to your posts then - ignore him!
Don't worry how many times he replies, just - ignore him!
You have to admit, it's brilliantly simple - yet somehow elegant, don't you think?
As for your intimate personal relationship, well, that's another matter. Still, as long as the children don't find out, as Derek Trotter would say "It's bonnet de douche", innit?
|
Can you tell me that is fair Duncan.
It involves self-restraint so why should I bother if the other party won't, and is allowed to continue unchecked?
I've always believed in a level playing field for everyone.
As for your last comment, I shall treat it as an extremely bad taste attempt at humour.
Pat
|
The request wasn't to ignore one another.
The request was to stop baiting one another.
For example:- I consider the sentence "Failed to ignore me yet again Mark:) baiting. Regardless the smiley, it was still baiting IMHO.
The same applies to Mark.
Reply to one another by all means, (and anyone else) BUT keep it polite and in keeping with forum rules.
If you cannot do that, then that is the time to ignore the other person. Continually biting back at them just causes more arguments. Report the post(s) if you have to, and the moderators will take a look and decide whether any intervention is required.
Thank you.
|
>>Reply to one another by all means, (and anyone else) BUT keep it polite and in keeping with forum rules. <<
But we all know that will never happen hence my suggestion which would have put an end to this altogether.
I thought the mods would welcome it.
Pat
|
Pat,
If people want to reply to each other that is up to them.
If people want to ignore one another, then likewise that is also up to them.
Now why don't you be the bigger person and start ignoring Mark's comments if they rile you that much?
Without sounding patronising, I know you often like to have the last word, but how about not once in a while?
Now can we move on before I have to get my scissors out and start removing stuff (again).
|
This petty argument kind of sums up Brexit in reality doesnt it?
As far as I am aware, in all the 64 threads, no one has managed to convince another to change their mind? Brexiteers are happy for us to go down this loony road to oblivion following numpties like Johnson, Farage Rees Mogg etc and the Remainers cant believe, in the face of all the evidence, that they could be so stupid.
All as a result of David Cameron and his posh cronies having a fall out and consequently a vote that will in the near future prove to be fraudulent but will still be accepted.
This thread ain't going to change any of that so how folks get so uptight and insulted about an online chat when they are about to get something far more serious to worry about!!
|
>> This petty argument kind of sums up Brexit in reality doesnt it?
>>
>> As far as I am aware, in all the 64 threads, no one has managed
>> to convince another to change their mind? Brexiteers are happy for us to go down
>> this loony road to oblivion
Bit of a value judgement there Bobby. You should mention the Remainers who were happy to sign away all our rights and sell us into slavery to Germany, for balance.
|
>>Now why don't you be the bigger person and start ignoring Mark's comments if they rile you that much? <<
How about you ask Mark to do that too?
....and you wonder why I complain about unfairness?
I was the bigger person for almost 12 months. I ignored the continual baiting until the day I got fed up of still being cast as the guilty one.
However, I have tried to solve this and still no support from anyone for making an effort, so I may just as well take it as it comes and deal with it as I see fit.
Hung for a sheep..........?
Pat
|
Pat,
I give up. I no longer care what you think.
If you feel hard done by, then that's your problem, not anyone else's.
For the record, when you don't post here, there are few arguments. When you post here, or more specifically reply to Mark, the arguments start again. So, yes, IMHO you are the guilty one.
Now get over yourself for everyone's sake.
|
I think it's pretty common knowledge VX, that it takes two to argue, so that blows your theory and yet another allocation of the blame on to one side only!
I'm afraid it's just a red rag to a bull for me to see unfairness, yet you keep poking the pig, stoking the fire or fanning the flames, whichever suits your location best.
I think you enjoy it really despite your protests.
Pat
|
Whatever Pat.
Whilst you're still in constant denial, and it's always someone else's fault, you'll continue to argue until the cows come home.
|
She must be a scouser.
They'll argue alone, in an empty room.
|
|
Why does Violet Elizabeth Bott keep entering my mind?
|
>>Why does Violet Elizabeth Bott keep entering my mind?
Why does Botfly jump to mind?
youtu.be/d7Iw0-7EMUo
|
I think it's because most of you have trouble accepting a female who sees herself as an equal and expects to be treated as one.
Certainly, one who is as outspoken as many of the men on here must be a bit of a shock to the system.
Despite many of you complaining about the constant spats, when I come up with a perfect solution, without involving the mods, a solution between two grown adults that we both ignore each other, it gets no support whatsoever.
On the contrary, I see the great and the good, the wannabe respected on here resorting to toilet humour and downright rudeness.
Maybe it's because I do stand up to Mark, and you wish you could bring yourself to do it too?
I do notice that when I ignore him it becomes someone else's 'turn' to provide his amusement.
Love me or hate me, I refuse to be anyone's toy to be played with at will, but I am here to stay, within the forum rules of course.
I learned long ago that when back up was needed it only ever came privately, and no-one was ever prepared to stand up an be counted, nothing has changed.
Now, back to Brexit.
Michael Gove has demanded that we get to see the lawyers full verdict on her escape mechanism, will we get to see it I wonder?
Do we need to? I suppose that depends on how you voted
Pat
|
>> Michael Gove has demanded that we get to see the lawyers full verdict on her escape mechanism
No he hasn't demanded that at all. He has said cabinet ministers should see the legal advice. We won't get to see it.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Thu 8 Nov 18 at 15:07
|
>>He has said cabinet ministers should see the legal advice.<<
What he actually said was that Cabinet Ministers should get to see it 'at the very least'
In which case it will be leaked to the public, as always.
I would have thought you would have wanted to see it?
Pat
|
|
I was merely commenting that he said cabinet ministers should see it. You said he had said everyone should see it.
|
>> I think it's because most of you have trouble accepting a female who sees herself as an equal and expects to be treated as one.
>>
>> Certainly, one who is as outspoken as many of the men on here must be a bit of a shock to the system.
Really? Sounds like a cop out to me, it must be because of your sex?
>> Despite many of you complaining about the constant spats, when I come up with a> perfect solution, without involving the mods, a solution between two grown adults that we both ignore each other, it gets no support whatsoever.
I'm not sure why you want or expect 'support' for ignoring someone on the internet?
Maybe it's because I do stand up to Mark, and you wish you could bring
>> yourself to do it too?
>>
I don't imagine myself ever being held 'hostage' online to someone that I'd need to 'stand up' to an anonymous poster on an Internet forum.
If anyone or topic became too tiresome I'd just not bother in perpetuity.
|
>> it must be because of your sex?<<
Last resort Sooty but I can think of no other reason.
I certainly don't have this trouble in real life and I am just the same face to face as I am on here.
Most expect me to give back what I get and respect that, as I do when they do it to me.
It's how it should be.
Pat
|
>> >> it must be because of your sex?<<
>>
>> Last resort Sooty but I can think of no other reason.
>>
Noted, however it seems to me to be a pretty obvious personality clash.
|
>> >>
>> Noted, however it seems to me to be a pretty obvious personality clash.
FM2R has an analytical approach to issues and presents an informed and logical argument but sometimes his anger at what he perceives as stupidity gets the better of him
Pat is all emotion and her arguments tend to lack coherence.
They are never going to agree.
I guess it makes for a sort of spectator sport.
|
I gave you the thumbs up there CG, I think you and Sooty have pretty much hit the nail on the head.
You an I disagree very often, Z and I do too, as do Bromp and myself but we do at least remain relatively polite with each other and at the bottom of it all, we do respect each other's views.
I just wish it could be like that with everyone as when I'm working (which is more days than I would like at the moment) it is always a 'points scoring' situation with the drivers, so for me, this forum needs to be relaxation.
Pat
|
|
Dyed in the wool? Or did you mean you'd prefer they died?
Last edited by: Manatee on Wed 7 Nov 18 at 18:31
|
|
Wow, from "the voice of reason" to wishing people dead in 6 posts. Shame on you CG, you fell from grace so quickly..
|
Died in the wool: I think I like it better than “dyedâ€. I guess it’s the end of all sheep.
Either way it was a substitute for my original adjective, rabid, which I changed since thought might exacerbate the situation.
|
The first referendum was the most god awful cock up imaginable. But it happened and the result was the result. I would have scant regard for the leave side pleading for a second referendum f they had lost, so I cannot see why it should be more acceptable the other way around.
Secondly, rightly or wrongly, the decision was offered up. No minimum threshold was specified and the result was clear.
Thirdly, even if the result was different a second time around, and that is by no means assured, it would be no landslide. It best it would be 51/49 the other way. So it would resolve nothing.
Lastly we have opened Pandora's Box. It cannot be closed, even if it was closed we could never convince the world that it would stay closed. So there is no point.
It is easy to say that a compromise is best. Obviously. But it's difficult to see one.
Take one example, the ECJ.
Whenever one writes or signs an international contract, part of that contract defines who arbitrates that contract. Consequently a commercial dal with the EU would need that either the UK Courts or the ECJ was designated as the court with jurisdiction.
But the leave side in general and Teresa May in particular have said that ECJ jurisdiction is a hard line in the sand that shall not be crossed.
So how do you compromise that? Cross it a little bit?
With the best will in the world when one side says yes to the ECJ and one side says no, where do you meet?
Because, for example, freedom of movement in a pain in the backside and it is very noticeable that those who have no need of it any more are determined that it should not exist. But it's a pain in the backside that can be resolved and stepped around.
Ditto residency etc.
But ECJ jurisdiction is black or white in a situation where grey is not possible.
I think in the end we will swap a country/government agreement of membership of the EU (and ECJ Jurisidcition) with a commercial agreement of adherence to every EU requirement (with ECJ jurisdiction).
And one can try all one wants, one can neither vote against nor stop an economic, financial or business decision by a company or corporation.
This is nothing to do with my preference, I can see no alternative.
It is, as I have said, called BEANO.
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 5 Sep 19 at 10:41
|
|
Actually I agree with most of that. The thing is as I see it remainers are being forced to accept a pretty big compromise to their desiired position whatever the version of Brexit is finally agreed upon. Leavers need to accept that they need to accept some pretty major compromises too. Recognising the jurisdiction ECJ would be one of them.
|
I agree with it too. The result of the referendum was anything but clear, as a measure of what people actually wanted, and a 'no deal' type Brexit would be scarcely any more representative of it than no change at all.
The result was really a vote for a compromise, so if that is what we get then some will be happy, and those who aren't will be more evenly distributed in the reasons for their disgruntlement!
Last edited by: Manatee on Wed 7 Nov 18 at 19:06
|
>>The result was really a vote for a compromise,
I don't really think that it was., that's the problem. It was evenly split across incompatible desires.
Of all the many problems it started with the referendum being badly defined. It never established anything beyond an in/out decision and never explained what either 'in' or 'out' were.
Consequently, as happens with vacuums, everybody has their own understanding of what they were.
Our position with the EU was wrong, and it was going to go wronger. Had there been a "fix from the inside" vote, that would have been mine. I could have happily accepted a "leave but retain x,y, and x" Consequently neither a flat 'stay as we are' nor an absolute "leave everything" worked for me. And there must be many people kind of where I am that then fell one side of the fence or the other because the options we wanted were not there.
So we have the absolute leavers, those who tend towards leave, the absolute remainers and those who tend towards remain who all voted the way they did for different reasons with their own 'customised' understanding of what they were voting for.
Consequently whatever situation is arrived at, which ever side of and however far from the middle, far more of the country will be unhappy than will be happy. Far, far, more.
I do think though that if we arrange a deal, and it is almost unimportant what the details of that deal are, that as long as it comes with a lengthy transition period then everything will rebalance.
I think a transition period needs to be 3 years. Also it would be better if different areas had different transition periods to stop the media focus on one explosive end date.
I think the Government (any Government) needs to keep out of it as much as they can, and the vast majority will be dealt with by the relevant commercial concerns.
The border arrangements, territorial agreements, shared healthcare, validity of the ECJ and immigration are all that the Government can really fix themselves. [no doubt I've forgotten something] The rest will get fixed by the commercial world given sufficient time.
However, 'fixed' is likely, in most cases, to be a lot less favourable than being in the EU.
So I don't think the vote was for compromise, desperately though we need it. Understanding, open-mindedness and visibility are what we need now.
The sooner this period from now 'till March is over the better.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 8 Nov 18 at 11:30
|
>> The result was really a vote for a compromise,
It wasn't, it was a protest, about lots of "stuff". The stuff they were protesting about wont change, in fact it will be worse.
Such is life.
|
>>it was a protest, about lots of "stuff".
Very true.
I am often asked where the whole Brexit thing started. It's difficult to say, but I think people's frustration started coming to the surface with the Abu Hamza charade.
I think that was when people's resentment really started to take shape.
Ironically that was actually little to do with the EU and far more to do with our own judges sanctimonious interpretation of the law.
I think years of our politicians misleading us, making unfulfilled promises, spinning everything, expenses, immigration, terrorism, all blown up and misrepresented by the media was just building up deep resentment inside people with no real target or realistic chance of solution.
When Farage popped into the media representing himself as the "anti-politician" it was a perfect storm. People wanted something different because they weren't happy with the situation.
The fact that Farage gave them someone to blame made it work perfectly. And in one way or another, it was and is possible to blame everything on the EU, even when it was not their fault.
I had hope that Brexit and Trump would give the other politicians pause to think about what happens when you try to mislead the people over a long period of time. Sadly it would appear not and nothing has actually changed.
Quite what will happen when we are out of the EU and we have to find something else to blame for our frustrations I really don't know. But I do think it is going to be an issue. A very significant issue.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 8 Nov 18 at 11:52
|
>>It wasn't, it was a protest, about lots of "stuff". The stuff they were protesting about wont change, in fact it will be worse.
Fact of the day.
|
>> Although I do believe a referendum would now result in a Remain majority
So it's your opinion, rather than based on any proof, which is different to what you said earlier
>> If there were to be another vote most people would vote Remain.
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 7 Nov 18 at 20:26
|
>>
>> So it's your opinion, rather than based on any proof, which is different to what
>> you said earlier
>>
Well without the benefit of a time machine I think it fairly self evident to most that there can be no proof of a hypothetical future event but well done for making the observation.
|
>> Although I do believe a referendum would now result in a Remain majority
I think that is unclear, I wouldn't even like to guess.
I do think that it would not be a significant lean either way though. We'd end up slightly to one side of 50:50, one way or the other.
So it'd do us no good.
|
|
It's a bit of a north south divide, I don't think the vote would change much, the north and rural areas have little left to lose after years of neglect. By the north I don't include Scotland.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Thu 8 Nov 18 at 12:49
|
But somewhere like Sunderland that benefited from say a Nissan factory (originally part funded by EU) may lose big time if the freedom of movement of good means their cars become more expensive so Renault/Nissan move production to say a factory in France.
Although Sunderland is not rural northern England by any definition.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Thu 8 Nov 18 at 13:12
|
Shame about Michelin in Dundee.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-46107383
I guess we will never know if it's a consequence of Brexit but if there are two factories on the line and one to be saved, I guess the one in the EU gets saved.
|
I thought they'd said they made smaller tyres there and so the demand for their product was down. But if you have a factory that can make tyres, are they really limited to making particular ranges of tyre size?
We probably never will know if this was Brexit related.
Sounds like they did not want to repay to retool it. Probably make Michelin tyres cheaper elsewhere already.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Thu 8 Nov 18 at 13:37
|
Brexit Discussion - Volume 63 - Dutchie
