|
Project fear 2nd wave, that's all it is.
People are frankly ridiculous, the shops shut for one or possibly two days at Christmas, and yes it will always be Christmas not any sort of winter festival...NURSE...and you'd think they were shutting for ever.
Remember keep calm and carry on...not as the current leadership (what a shower) would have you do, keep quiet and carry on.
|
Project fear 2nd wave, that's all it is.
Are you sure? If we crash out and go from Eu terms on 29-3-19 to WTA on 30th then I'd be far more worried than by shops shut, or even no ferries, on Xmas day. There's an awful lot of fresh food and other time critical stuff coming through Dover etc every day.
OK, i'm a 'Remoaner' who thinks the referendum and it's result were massive mistakes. But even if I accept them as the verdict of the people the current state of lack of preparedness looks like an act of dereliction by HMG.
|
Project fear 2nd wave, that's all it is.
Are you sure? If we crash out and go from Eu terms on 29-3-19 to WTA on 30th then I'd be far more worried than by shops shut, or even no ferries, on Xmas day. There's an awful lot of fresh food and other time critical stuff coming through Dover etc every day.
OK, i'm a 'Remoaner' who thinks the referendum and it's result were massive mistakes. But even if I accept them as the verdict of the people the current state of lack of preparedness looks like an act of dereliction by HMG.
There's preparedness and there's doom-mongering. Just like Phase 1 with the 800k more unemployed we should now have (but don't), or in a nasty recession for the last year or more (but aren't) and all the big corporates are leaving for Paris and Frankfurt (but aren't), just for voting Leave...
If a club we are a member decides to 'punish' us by (illegally) shutting their ports and skies to us just for 'temerity' of leaving the club after a democratic vote, then why would we want to stay in the club - out of fear of getting proverbially beaten up. Nice.
And, by the way, the Civil Service has had already 24 MONTHS to make preparations, and yet...as usual, the British establishment wait until the proverbial hits the fan, says either it can't be done (no talent there) or it'll cost vast amounts more to do so (no planning/empire building, Sir Humphrey) and then makes a proverbial pig's ear of the whole exercise. Nothing to do with Brexit itself, just an endictment of those running the show. You have to wonder why the likes of 'Commie' Robbins got a bonus for his 'wonderful' capitulations to cross all those red lines of May's and undermining Davis' authority (deliberately?).
If May had brought in experts in international trade and business management from the best of the private sector (those with proven track records), the whole process and preparations for next March would've been already done and dusted and we would've had a great deal and would be £40Bn better off, plus already pre-negotiating bespoke tade deals with other nations.
|
|
And, by the way, the Civil Service has had already 24 MONTHS to make preparations, and yet...as usual, the British establishment wait until the proverbial hits the fan, says either it can't be done (no talent there) or it'll cost vast amounts more to do so (no planning/empire building, Sir Humphrey) and then makes a proverbial pig's ear of the whole exercise. Nothing to do with Brexit itself, just an endictment of those running the show. You have to wonder why the likes of 'Commie' Robbins got a bonus for his 'wonderful' capitulations to cross all those red lines of May's and undermining Davis' authority (deliberately?).
The usual message then Andy, it's all the fault of the idle beggars in the public sector and an EU that won't let us abrogate 45years of treaties on a whim.
Surely you know that Ministers make policy and Civil Servants (or experts in international trade and business management from the best of the private sector) inplement policy. Ministers have to first set that policy. They're not doing that over leaving the EU because theyre fighting like ferrets in a sack. They finally came out with something after May locked them up in Chequers only for two ministers to resign and disown it and Rees Mogg to threaten a veto.
May's Red Lines were absurd and Davis is a thick idle overbearing clown of the first order. It's reported that as an early gambit he suggested a UK/Germany bilateral trade agreement. So ill informed he didn't seem to understand that was impossible while Germany was in EU.
|
|
Believe that if it gives you comfort. Most other people, other than The Remonainer-loving Establishment (including the top at the Civil Service), fortunately don't.
|
Believe that if it gives you comfort. Most other people, other than The Remonainer-loving Establishment (including the top at the Civil Service), fortunately don't.
One of us may be believing improbable stuff for comfort but it's not me.
|
Believe that if it gives you comfort. Most other people, other than The Remonainer-loving Establishment (including the top at the Civil Service), fortunately don't.
One of us may be believing improbable stuff for comfort but it's not me.
What, like 48 is greater than 52? Nice to see so many innumerates (is there such a word? Maybe I could replace it with 'remoaners', 'wets' Blairties, champagne socialists, etc etc) at the top of the Establishment - no wonder we're up the proverbial creek without a paddle!
|
Believe that if it gives you comfort. Most other people, other than The Remonainer-loving Establishment (including the top at the Civil Service), fortunately don't.
One of us may be believing improbable stuff for comfort but it's not me.
What, like 48 is greater than 52? Nice to see so many innumerates (is there such a word? Maybe I could replace it with 'remoaners', 'wets' Blairties, champagne socialists, etc etc) at the top of the Establishment - no wonder we're up the proverbial creek without a paddle!
Lots of name calling but very little facts...are you in governemnt? :-)
|
Believe that if it gives you comfort. Most other people, other than The Remonainer-loving Establishment (including the top at the Civil Service), fortunately don't.
One of us may be believing improbable stuff for comfort but it's not me.
What, like 48 is greater than 52? Nice to see so many innumerates (is there such a word? Maybe I could replace it with 'remoaners', 'wets' Blairties, champagne socialists, etc etc) at the top of the Establishment - no wonder we're up the proverbial creek without a paddle!
Lots of name calling but very little facts...are you in governemnt? :-)
His reply was no ruder than Bromptonaut’s, unfortunately Brexit discussions always seem to go down these routes, each side calling the other stupid or ignorant. Maybe this is a sign of the degree of unknowns associated with Brexit.
|
|
Actually its because I'm thoroughly fed up with having to re-explain for the nth time my position and to keep giving the same lengthy evidence I've done in the past on this forum and elsewhere (e.g. on the comments sections of the Telegraph and other news websites) to show that I am talking sense on the matter.
On the other hand, I have yet to see ANY credible evidence from people like Bromtonaut, who appears to work (and seemingly sympathise) for/with the remoaner Fifth Columnists working at the top of the Civil Service, political establishment and similarly Big Business, none of whom really represent ordinary people, even if many work for them in some capacity. It was telling that, outside of London, the VAST majority of those people voting Leave were poorer people living in deprived areas. Why would they vote for a policy that supposedly would make their situation far worse?
Much, if not all of the remoaners' 'evidence' is made up of biased opinions (and not facts) and often downright lies from other remoaners (to scare people into changing their minds) who have a large vested interest (money and/or power) in the status quo and who have significant influence in the media, where these days truth means very little.
|
It was telling that, outside of London, the VAST majority of those people voting Leave were poorer people living in deprived areas. Why would they vote for a policy that supposedly would make their situation far worse?
Maybe they did not fully understand the implications of leaving the EU and that by doing so could make them poorer. Maybe they belived what people like Farage and Boris told them even though the leave campaign has been shown to have told lies to get what they wanted. You say people pushing to remain have vested interests...you don't believe anyone pushing to leave also has vested interests?
Using terms like 'Remoaners' just makes you look foolish and silly - name calling is what children do and would have thought you had grown up about it by now. Brexit is an incredibally important issue in the UK and it needs to be taken seriously with intelliegent discussion rather than the general mud slinging it is now.
|
|
Maybe they did not fully understand the implications of leaving the EU
Here we go again, everyone I know that voted out did so knowing what it was all about and its getting a little tiring when people keep saying the same old thing....
I think most people have a dislike for Farage as he says it like it is, good luck to him
|
It was telling that, outside of London, the VAST majority of those people voting Leave were poorer people living in deprived areas. Why would they vote for a policy that supposedly would make their situation far worse?
Maybe they did not fully understand the implications of leaving the EU and that by doing so could make them poorer. Maybe they belived what people like Farage and Boris told them even though the leave campaign has been shown to have told lies to get what they wanted. You say people pushing to remain have vested interests...you don't believe anyone pushing to leave also has vested interests?
Using terms like 'Remoaners' just makes you look foolish and silly - name calling is what children do and would have thought you had grown up about it by now. Brexit is an incredibally important issue in the UK and it needs to be taken seriously with intelliegent discussion rather than the general mud slinging it is now.
Remoaner is a term that is quite apt - it describes someone who doesn't accept a result, then agitates to overturn it by any means (forgetting at how many devious things their side did to bully, cajole or downright lie to get their way, several magnitudes worse than those opposing them ever did), then trying to sabotage the brexit process itself by getting themselves into positions to wreck the negotations from within and without, including one George Soros. To me, that sounds like a little child throwing a temper tantrum because they did get their way.
Also, implying that those who voted Leave are 'stupid' (read working class white men in run down former industrial heartlands and rural areas in the SW and Wales) for 'not understanding the implications' is disingenuous to those people who knew blimmin well what they were voting for (and believe you me, it wasn't the extra NHS money 'promised' which no-one really believed).
This despite the Remain campaign being financed far higher, having biased government support (including 'guides' sent to all homes on the vote) e.g. the phoney Treasury 'forecasts' of 800k more unemployed within 6 months of the VOTE (not actually leaving) which turned out to be, well, not exactly in the same ballpark as reality (as so many so-called 'experts' have forecast in the past) and under-the-counter spending via the likes of Soros and Co. (not to the 'official' Remain campaign, but 'unofficial' ones) which amazingly never got on the radar of the Electoral Commission, despite being far, far higher than anything Vote Leave may (or may not) have done. That, and of course, the highly biased coverage on the BBC (they even admit to this openly, and especially [they toned it down a bit during the campaign] before/after the 'purdah' around the campign) - tit was recently found that the number of remainers interviewed on the BBC outweighed brexiteers by (if I recall) about 40:1. No bias there then.
People like me on the Brexit side WANTED to get on with the process, only to be frustrated by the like of remainers in the Establishment who want to scupper the whole thing, despite saying many times they would 'accept the result of the will of the people', probably because they arrogantly believed that Project Fear would win. The very well financed Project Fear 2 just started up again within days of the referrendum result and has continued ever since, and yet we hear nothing from the Electoral Commission about money from Big Business, Unions and outsiders such as Soros being funnelled into this campaign despite a democratic decision been made.
Funny how all those bleating on about stopping political lobbying by wealthy vested interests are now completely silent on the matter when it benefits them as regards the UK's Brexit strategy.
|
Actually its because I'm thoroughly fed up with having to re-explain for the nth time my position and to keep giving the same lengthy evidence I've done in the past on this forum and elsewhere (e.g. on the comments sections of the Telegraph and other news websites) to show that I am talking sense on the matter.
On the other hand, I have yet to see ANY credible evidence from people like Bromtonaut, who appears to work (and seemingly sympathise) for/with the remoaner Fifth Columnists working at the top of the Civil Service, political establishment and similarly Big Business, none of whom really represent ordinary people, even if many work for them in some capacity. It was telling that, outside of London, the VAST majority of those people voting Leave were poorer people living in deprived areas. Why would they vote for a policy that supposedly would make their situation far worse?
If you've produced credible facts around anything other than the bare numbers in the referendum I've missed it. References to 5th columnists, the political establishment, calling a distinguished public servanf (Ollie Robins) a Commie and a rather dubious fixation with George Soros don't count as evidence.
I used to be a Civil Servant but helluva long way from the top. I now work part time for an Advice Charity. I think the vote to leave was a mistake and that if we crash out in 250 or so days time it will be a disaster for this country.
Let's be clear, Cameron didn't offer a referendum because there was a massive public demand for one. He did it to try and solve a problem in the Tory party. Hold that thought. He took a massive gamble with this country's future, knowing a Leave outcome could, and probably would be a disaster, to solve a problem in his own political party. That's why he scarpered within three hours of the official result.
OK. If we want to leave the EU we can do it but it will be difficult, costly and complicated. First of all we need a government with a common understanding of the version of out it wants. Once it knows what it wants it can put proposals to the EU and both sides can negotiate. There are some givens there. We know that the EU regards the Four Pillars of the Single Market (Capital, Goods, Services and People) as indivisible. We know that a border on the Island of Ireland is a no-no because of the terms on which that place's troubles were settled. We know that if we go to WTO terms we will have to pay/charge import duties and have physical borders to police them.
The present government had not even got a basic negotiating position together until Chequers. There's no preparation for crash out. That's not the fault of Civil Servants. They will rightly give Ministers advice, which the latter will find unpalatable, about how complex and time consuming the reality of withdrawal is.
We cannot just say f%7k them and walk. Surely you recognise that?
|
|
Quite. The remainers predicted that civilisation as we know it would cease to exist in the U.K. were we to foolishly vote leave. We did, and it hasn’t. The problem is that they no longer have any credibility, so even if they are right most are not prepared to believe them.
May is a waste of space. She proposed a weak Brexit, and not surprisingly the EU is chipping away at it bit by bit. They think she is weak, and we will accept remaining effectively in the EU but with no voting rights. Either we will pretty much stay in the EU or we will crash out. I see the former happening. The government and opposition has always been pro EU and never wanted to implement the will of the people, cos we gave the wrong answer to the question, and we’re thick innit bruv.
|
Quite. The remainers predicted that civilisation as we know it would cease to exist in the U.K. were we to foolishly vote leave. We did, and it hasn’t
No, they said after we leave...have not left yet.
|
Quite. The remainers predicted that civilisation as we know it would cease to exist in the U.K. were we to foolishly vote leave. We did, and it hasn’t
No, they said after we leave...have not left yet.
Actually you're wrong, they said it would happen just if voted to Leave, not that we actually did.
|
|
|
|
Quite. The remainers predicted that civilisation as we know it would cease to exist in the U.K. were we to foolishly vote leave. We did, and it hasn’t. The problem is that they no longer have any credibility, so even if they are right most are not prepared to believe them. May is a waste of space. She proposed a weak Brexit,
What sort of a Brexit do you think the 52% wanted?
|
Quite. The remainers predicted that civilisation as we know it would cease to exist in the U.K. were we to foolishly vote leave. We did, and it hasn’t. The problem is that they no longer have any credibility, so even if they are right most are not prepared to believe them. May is a waste of space. She proposed a weak Brexit,
What sort of a Brexit do you think the 52% wanted?
People who voted Leave undoubtedly did so as they wanted the U.K. to be outside of the political control of the EU. They didn’t vote for a version that leaves us not formally a member but having to obey EU diktats which is the worst possible case. Unfortunately the EU simply will not compromise and it is looking as if we will crash out of the EU which is bad for both parties. They seem wedded to a philosophical viewpoint that does not allow any departure from an agreement that we cannot sign up to. And unfortunately May seems to be useless, having foisted her own plan on the government, much to the annoyance of some.
|
|
|
|
|
If May had brought in experts in international trade and business management from the best of the private sector (those with proven track records), the whole process and preparations for next March would've been already done and dusted and we would've had a great deal and would be £40Bn better off, plus already pre-negotiating bespoke tade deals with other nations.
How would we be £40Bn better off?
|
|
|
|
|
Project fear 2nd wave, that's all it is.
People are frankly ridiculous, the shops shut for one or possibly two days at Christmas, and yes it will always be Christmas not any sort of winter festival...NURSE...and you'd think they were shutting for ever.
Remember keep calm and carry on...not as the current leadership (what a shower) would have you do, keep quiet and carry on.
I`ll second that GB, as I recall they reckoned after the vote the world would be destroyed, well country would collapse, if everyone believed what this lot said ( I dont call it a government now) a lot would have a nervous breakdown by now......
I hear there are a lot of bets it wont happen now, bring back Farage I say
|
I hear there are a lot of bets it wont happen now, bring back Farage I say
And do what other than being a pompous ass?
|
|
The day after the Brexit vote my very own SWMBO said we wouldn't be leaving, and as far as i can see, with actions at the top of this govt edging towards treason, it appears that as usual she was absolutely on the money.
Democracy in the UK it appears is over, but i suspect the establishments and elites joy at fiddling it to their way will backfire on them in ways they will come to regret, look at how quickly political parties in other countries can go from main to minor, our main parties have deserted their core traditional voters and have made no secret of their loathing of them.
Cameron the Vanished's Govt hated genuine Conservatives, what currently masquerades as the Labour party hates the genuine British working class, May's govt is all about betrayal, though why anyone expected the most hopeless home secretary of the last 40 years to be anything but a pointless PM is beyond me.
If this Brexit fails to be, as it will then at long last (possibly 30 years late) the Tory party is finished, the electorate will never forgive them, what they haven't realised yet is what will replace it, i suspect bad times are coming and the blame can be laid at the govts of all hues of the last few decades who have ignored and betrayed the people of this country.
The police heavy mob and army arn't to be mobilsed and trained for food and medicine distribution, but for keeping the peace and the rounding up of those on the lists of the non compliant.
|
|
Yes. I am as usual gradually restoring the content of the wood store for cosy winter evenings by the woodburner.
As an antidote to all this unwarranted pessimism, I suggest reading 'The Better Angels of our Nature' by Steven Pinker.
|
|
Just about anybody is pinker than Farage.
|
|
|
|
I hear there are a lot of bets it wont happen now, bring back Farage I say
And do what other than being a pompous ass?
You need to be more generous. Farage is extremely good at being a pompous ass.
|
|
Regarding some of the arguments above, there is no need for insults, that's best left to the child like creatures the electorate for some reason managed to place in the house.
For richer or poorer, personally i aint bothered, it makes no difference because you can't take it with you.
I'm quite prepared to be poorer, because things worth having always cost you some investment, being a working class chap i'll still be working until the last minute and then i'll get shafted over my pension, which is what normally happens to working class people, i voted No in 1975 and i voted Out 2 years ago, and as my dear SWMBO reminds me often enough, we haven't left and we most likely won't because we have those steeped in betrayal at the head of the country.
I want to vote for something meaningful again, and thankfully at long last the Tory party is heading for self destruction, not before time it should have died when Cameron the Vanished went for a second term, quite why the electorate continue to vote for the least worse option of three failed dead horses is beyond me, i flatly refuse to vote against something, i wish once again to vote for someone or a party who says what they mean and means what they say, a bit like President Trump.
I want the people i vote for to lead our independent country, if they mess up i don't want any weasel blairite excuses along the lines of it wasn't my fault i was told there were WMD's, i don't want any whistle blowers allegedly hanging themselves in dubious circs, i don't want poor excuses for politicians blaming their collective mummy in Brussels for their failures....note here, think back to the Falklands conflict and the sinking of the General Belgrano, whether you liked her or hated her PM Thatcher sat there being interviewed and her wrds were ''My Decision'', that's what i want in a leader again someone with 'the buck stops here' written in bold across their forehead, compare with blair's WMD farce.
I want genuine restrictions on immigration, i want someone reliable to take responsibility, never again to have someone as hopeless as home sec May tell us that immigration will be in the tens of thousands when it proves to be tens of thousand per month and growing (wonder why there's housing/nhs/schools etc crises), i want terrorists convicted and hung when we can get our death penatly back after leaving the EU, i want potential terrorists ejected from the country without having some self salary setting bods in a foreign court telling us we can't, i want acid throwers and other assorted violent scum, if not British to be thrown out without a moments hesitation back to where they came from, if British to be locked up for many years until no longer a threat to normla people.
I want trade agreements with the whole world, for countries who have similar western costs ie American Australia Japan Canada totally free trading, for the EU if they want us to put WTO tarriffs on when the balance of trade is so far in our favour then good luck to them, it's they who will lose that war, it will be stickly at frst because betrayer May has done what was required and kicked the can down the road for two years without planning for leaving the EU.
There is no soft or hard brexit or nor crashing out ( another term designed to frighten the horses), we either leave the EU or we stay, we voted to leave so blinking well get on with it already.
None of the above is possible until we leave the EU.
Yes i am quite prepared for whatever the EU throw at us, regaining control of our borders and re-establishing the rule and responsibility of parliament are fundamental, i do not want a half out instead of half in solution.
One final observation, Heaven has a wall and strict immigration policies. Hell has open borders.
Edited by gordonbennet on 06/08/2018 at 17:13
|
|
Whilst I also voted leave, as I don’t want Britain to become a state in an EU Federation subservient to EU laws, I think you underestimate how unpleasant EU politics is. It’s all about horse trading, mutual back patting and power. All that matters to the EU politicians is what they can gain. May seems to think they will agree to something that is in the best interests of both peoples. That’s irrelevant. A looser group of cooperating states, each benefiting from trade and help is not what they want. They want more and more power so as to make themselves more and more important. It is sometimes said that Germany tried to dominate the world by military means, and now is trying to do so economically. There is some truth in that. And the French are by nature centralising, they hate regional power, and favour central control.
|
|
I voted Leave for two reasons.
The first is my deep mistrust of the direction the EU is heading as part of the European Project, a concept going back to the nineteenth century. While the EU started off as a trading bloc, many of its proponents envisaged (and still do) a complete political and economic union, with an army and uniform tax system. As it has developed, the centres of power have been Germany (on the back of its post-war economic resurgence), and France.
Put simply, I don't wish to be part of that. I don't believe that Germany and France ever had any intentions of treating the UK as an equal partner, as we might have expected. I have absolutely no wish to bend the knee to these two.
The second reason is money - the appallingly wasteful agricultural incentives, the financial support of dodgy economies like that of Greece, the ridiculously generous MEP expenses and so on. The EU's accounts never seem to be satisfactorily audited; the bureaucracy is Byzantine and by definition wasteful. The location of the European Parliament, oscillating between Strasbourg and Brussels, with all the expense that this involves, is a ludicrously wasteful exercise. In short, the EU is either a money-pit or a cash-cow, depending on where you stand.
I could also add that voter turn-out in UK general elections has been in the vast majority of cases since records began above 65%. In European elections it has been under 50% since 1999 and is falling; in 2014 it was an abysmal 42.5%. So how this is supposed to reflect democracy in action is rather hard to see.
To add a footnote: I do not see why Brexit and Trump are linked in people's minds. While support for both may have been partly because of disgust at the status quo, I find myself loathing Trump and everything he stands for. I didn't vote for Brexit because I hated immigrants and immigration, or because I hated Europe (which is not the same entity as the EU, in case some people don't realise). And I resent Trump's insertion of himself in Brexit affairs - him and his big mouth. As for the Daily Express viewpoint that we need someone like Trump to tell the EU where to get off... words nearly fail me.
Edited by FP on 06/08/2018 at 21:31
|
|
An alternative point of view:
www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/06/rich...x
|
An alternative point of view:
www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/06/rich...x
But that is just the same old project fear. As I said before, they predicted mayham after a vote to leave, which did not happen. So why should we believe these people? I also note the lack of any long term thinking in the article that you posted, and any positive notes. Biased? The reader can decide.
|
But that is just the same old project fear. As I said before, they predicted mayham after a vote to leave, which did not happen. So why should we believe these people? I also note the lack of any long term thinking in the article that you posted, and any positive notes. Biased? The reader can decide.
It's an op ed piece by a left wing writer in a liberal paper so it starts from a particular standpoint. Project fear was a massive mistake by Cameron and Osborne, they could have put up so much positive stuff about the benefits of unhindered trade, EU funded projects, removal of roaming charges and a thousand and one other things. OTOH it worked for the Tories in two general elections so thet probably thought it would work again.
Those who voted out though need to think a bit before just writing off every pessimistic scenario around what Brexit might look like. Two years after the referendum and barely six months from expiration of article 50 we still don't know what our government wants.
John Harris's article is based on known facts including the 'hard' free market expounded by people like Fox and Rees-Mogg. Do you dispute those or the fact that Trump's cheerleader Bannon is in Europe trying to organise a pan-national populist movement in Europe. That's a foreigner, funded by big money from a foreign country, interfering in our politics for their ends. Why are our media not all over him?
Do you deny that the people likley to be hit hardest in what's now openly (and you use the phrase long term thinking) being admitted that what might be Brexit consequenced turndown/recession is a price worth paying for sunlit uplands in a few decades time.?
|
But that is just the same old project fear. As I said before, they predicted mayham after a vote to leave, which did not happen. So why should we believe these people? I also note the lack of any long term thinking in the article that you posted, and any positive notes. Biased? The reader can decide.
It's an op ed piece by a left wing writer in a liberal paper so it starts from a particular standpoint. Project fear was a massive mistake by Cameron and Osborne, they could have put up so much positive stuff about the benefits of unhindered trade, EU funded projects, removal of roaming charges and a thousand and one other things. OTOH it worked for the Tories in two general elections so thet probably thought it would work again.
Those who voted out though need to think a bit before just writing off every pessimistic scenario around what Brexit might look like. Two years after the referendum and barely six months from expiration of article 50 we still don't know what our government wants.
John Harris's article is based on known facts including the 'hard' free market expounded by people like Fox and Rees-Mogg. Do you dispute those or the fact that Trump's cheerleader Bannon is in Europe trying to organise a pan-national populist movement in Europe. That's a foreigner, funded by big money from a foreign country, interfering in our politics for their ends. Why are our media not all over him?
Do you deny that the people likley to be hit hardest in what's now openly (and you use the phrase long term thinking) being admitted that what might be Brexit consequenced turndown/recession is a price worth paying for sunlit uplands in a few decades time.?
In my opinion the Guardian is illiberal, it is a far left propaganda sheet, in the same way that the Telegraph is all too often a Tory party mouthpiece. I do agree with you that the remain group should have put forward a positive campaign. As for Bannon, so what. We had Russian interference which was far worse, and needs to be removed. It does not automatically mean Leave was wrong, but we shouldn’t have outsiders influencing voting, and I speak of course as a Leave voter. As to those worst hit, studies showed that those worst hit by immigration from a Eastern Europe were the lower paid, and they voted disproportionately for Leave. Coincidence? Clearly not. They’re not racists, they just saw their jobs going elsewhere. A hard Brexit will have short term consequences without doubt, in the same way that German unification did, but in my view the long term gains make Brexit worthwhile. I do hope the EU reach a sensible agreement but I very much doubt it. But I believe that parliament will sink Brexit. They are remainers, and think that voters are too stupid to decide on such weighty matters.
|
In my opinion the Guardian is illiberal, it is a far left propaganda sheet, in the same way that the Telegraph is all too often a Tory party mouthpiece.
If you think Guardian is far left what on earth would you call the Morning Star or Marxism today?
I do agree with you that the remain group should have put forward a positive campaign. As for Bannon, so what. We had Russian interference which was far worse, and needs to be removed. It does not automatically mean Leave was wrong, but we shouldn’t have outsiders influencing voting, and I speak of course as a Leave voter.
My point about Bannon isn't so much about the referendum (though there was probably American money there too). It's about his meetings with JR-M, Boris and possibly Gove too and attempts to influence politics here and in rest of EU. This is a man who wears racism on hs sleeve, admries Mussolini and thinks 'Tommy Robinson' represents the backbone of England or some such thing.
As to those worst hit, studies showed that those worst hit by immigration from a Eastern Europe were the lower paid, and they voted disproportionately for Leave. Coincidence? Clearly not.
Where are these studies? Opinion appears to vary:
blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/05/eu-immigration-hasnt.../
or
www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/jan/17/eastern-europea...s
You pays your money and takes your choice. While some leave voting areas such as Boston have been heavily affected by migration others, just as massively against in the working class strongholds of the north, hardly hear a Polish voice.
People have been hit far harder by the post 2007/8 recession and by austerity leading to a backlash against an isolated elite.
|
I’ve never read the Morning Start or Marxism Today.
I don’t really know why you are going on about Bannon. It’s as if you want to discredit those who voted Leave by focusing on him. I know almost nothing about him, and I bet the same goes for almost all Leave voters. Farage for example is in some respects unpleasant, there is a crass simplicity about his thinking, something shared by those further to the left and right. But I did not vote Leave due to Farage, or Bannon etc. UKIP,did well for many year not because people liked him, or UKIP, but as a protest against the weakness of the U.K. when dealing with the EU. I voted Leave on the basis of national sovereignty. It makes me angry when some people try to tar the Leave vote as xenophobic or racist. On that basis, since we restrict immigration from non EU countries, we must be racists.
But as I said, immigration was not the key issue for me.
I find it interesting that when EU migration is discussed, those on the left hail it as a good thing, and highlight increased employment in the U.K. and of course they bang on about “Isn’t the diversity wonderful,darling?” But then say that the Tories have presided over record employment, and the left then change their tune and say that they are low paid insecure gig economy jobs. The statistics are twisted to suit the required conclusion. That is why I find publications such as the Guardian hard to stomach, it is fundamentally dishonest. The Telegraph is not much better, though I find the general quality of reporting (obviously biased pieces excepted) higher.
|
|
"I don’t really know why you are going on about Bannon. It’s as if you want to discredit those who voted Leave by focusing on him."
That is probably the intention. Those who voted Leave did so for a wide variety of reasons, and since the vote some of them have adopted Trump, Bannon, Johnson, Farage et al. as their guiding lights - a sort of hardening of attitudes which places them, if not to the right of Genghis Khan, at least pretty far to the right. Look for example at the Daily Express and in particular at the comments to various articles to do with the European Union, Trump, Bannon etc.
Well, I can't help my bedfellows. I didn't choose them and in fact I despise all in the list above. They all stink in one way or another. They represent the people who give support to the empty demagogues that they are. They represent the unthinking, knee-jerk-driven, prejudiced and ignorant section of the population who have no sense of the wider world, no sense of history and no vision of the future if it's more than a couple of years ahead.
I know of some people who felt they couldn't vote Leave because it would place them alongside some pretty horrible people, but that is a failure on their part to see the way democracy should work.
Edited by FP on 08/08/2018 at 21:15
|
I don’t really know why you are going on about Bannon. It’s as if you want to discredit those who voted Leave by focusing on him. I know almost nothing about him, and I bet the same goes for almost all Leave voters.
My point in focusing on Bannon is't about discrediting Leave. This thread is headlined Anyone Stockpiling? For all my strong feelings about the principle of Brexit we're talking here about what happens next.
If you are looking to the future then with respect I think you need to familiarise yourself with Bannon and the sort of post Brexit UK he, his buddies JR-M etc and American big money want.
|
I don’t really know why you are going on about Bannon. It’s as if you want to discredit those who voted Leave by focusing on him. I know almost nothing about him, and I bet the same goes for almost all Leave voters.
My point in focusing on Bannon is't about discrediting Leave. This thread is headlined Anyone Stockpiling? For all my strong feelings about the principle of Brexit we're talking here about what happens next.
If you are looking to the future then with respect I think you need to familiarise yourself with Bannon and the sort of post Brexit UK he, his buddies JR-M etc and American big money want.
Why? Bannon is a small fish of little significance who once had a say in the US but doesn’t any more. It really does sound as if your aim is the old one of discrediting leavers as racists and fruit cakes. Farage is also a yesterday man. Notice how UKIP votes have plummeted now that UKIP has served its purpose of getting an EU referendum? I voted for them once, even though I consider Farage totally unsuitable to lead a nation, or a party and i don’t care for UKIP policies. The people who will determine what happens next are May et al, and the EU leaders, though it does seem as if May is forcing her will on those around her. Whilst I do not see Brexit leading to doom and apocalypse, I do see it as potentially having a hit on the economy. I say potentially because we do not yet know what form it will take, and how the EU will proceed. A hard Brexit will have a hit, perhaps a large one, but my view is that better a hit tomorrow, than an even bigger long term hit in the decades to come. Unfortunately in my view the EU is led by some very arrogant and intransigent people, who do not realise what they are doing. I am sure they expect us to roll on our back to have our tummy tickled. Incidentally, I really do think you underestimate most voters. Stories about wrongly shaped bananas and the EU may fill the pages of the Sun etc, but for ordinary people the question was do we want to become a European state subservient to an EU parliament, with all of the benefits and costs, or not.
|
|
|
There is a strand of thinking that equates Trump and Leave with a generalised distrust of the 'establishment' by which is meant, I guess, governments. Trump put himself forward as anti-establishment despite being humumgously rich. It's true he was not part of the political establishment. We've seen this leaning to the right across Europe with some unpleasant parties winning power. Trump is, as a person, rather distasteful. However, we've heard some unpleasant business regarding Bush snr, and Clinton, too.
Like you I voted leave, not because I'm a racist - I'm not - and not because I hate Europe - I don't - but because of a distrust of the European bureacratic gravy train project and the unaccountability of EU politics combined with a desire for Britain to remain soverreign. In theory it's democratic, in practice no. Governments appoint their own commissioners based on how far they are up the backside of the government. Thus Mandelson was appointed because be was best mates with Blair.
|
|
I agree with most of that, Leif. To me it's ironic that, though Trump had no political background (and, boy, does it show when he attempts international politics) his wealth means he is part of what passes in America as upper class. Now, if some guy, preferably black, from a poor background, dragged himself up by his bootstraps to become president Americans ought to be impressed... Land of opportunity and self-reliance and all that... Oh, hang on... And it's part of Trump's repertoire to villify Obama? Bizarre.
Why Trump was attractive to voters is also perhaps as much to do with what they saw as the unattractiveness of the alternative as anything else.
As regards Brexit, my view was essentially long-term. I'm fully aware that many who voted Out did so for what I regard as dubious reasons. Take immigration, for example. The country has historically thrived on it. It has become a problem only because it has not been properly managed. There are people in this country who should never have been allowed in, but we do need people from abroad - lots of them - for jobs in the NHS and beyond. If only the UK authorities could get a proper grip.
There is also a disturbing underlying current of xenophobia amongst some Brexiteers, which shades off into pure racism for some of them.
I never doubted that the process of Brexit would be messy and costly; nothing that's happened over the last couple of years surprises me at all.
Edited by FP on 07/08/2018 at 13:34
|
|
Clearly there were many who voted Leave at least in part for racist reasons. But I suspect they were a tiny minority, albeit one that the Remain lobby focus on in order to discredit the Leave campaign, which in my view is no different from racism. After all, racism is the act of applying attributes , usually derogatory, to a group of people based on a shared attribute such as religion or skin colour.
Without doubt revulsion at the Clintons was a key reason for Trump getting in.
Regarding immigration, yes we do indeed require some immigration. The NHS is known for taking doctors and nurses from Africa and India, which incidentally seriously damages African countries who spent money training these people only to see them leave. And it is often said that many crops would not be harvested were it not for Eastern European labourers. However, sometimes immigration is about cheaper labour. I work as a software engineer. At one time companies said they were short of staff and needed Indian engineers. The truth was that they could get staff, but Indian engineers were significantly cheaper, and often required less training as they move around so many companies, and were so numerous. So the issue is not black and white, no pun intended.
|
|
|
|
I want trade agreements with the whole world, for countries who have similar western costs ie American Australia Japan Canada totally free trading, for the EU if they want us to put WTO tarriffs on when the balance of trade is so far in our favour then good luck to them, it's they who will lose that war, it will be stickly at frst because betrayer May has done what was required and kicked the can down the road for two years without planning for leaving the EU.
You will neverhave free trade with USA, Austrail, Japan, Canada etc - why would they give that to us when they don't to anyone else?
|
|
|
i want terrorists convicted and hung when we can get our death penatly back after leaving the EU, i want potential terrorists ejected from the country without having some self salary setting bods in a foreign court telling us we can't,
If you think leaving the EU will open some door that allows us to get our death penatly back oreject those the government decides are terrorists at will you're going to be very dissapointed.
|
|
"i want terrorists convicted and hung when we can get our death penatly back after leaving the EU..."
I can't see it happening. Although different surveys have produced varying results, support for the death penalty among UK voters fell below 50% some years ago and, despite some blips, continues to fall. (YouGov 2014 - 45%.)
The link between leaving the EU and the reinstatement of the death penalty is certainly there, though - but just in the minds of some or even most of those who voted Leave, who (unfortunately, as far as I am concerned) seem to be mainly older, right-wing, conservative, anti-immigration, "back-to-the-good-old-days" people.
And here's another link between Brexiteers and Trump's supporters: they are anti- a whole range of stuff - an outpouring of negativity and hatred, particularly against some vaguely-defined "establishment". What a miserable lot many of them are!
Edited by FP on 22/08/2018 at 16:41
|
"i want terrorists convicted and hung when we can get our death penatly back after leaving the EU..."
I can't see it happening. Although different surveys have produced varying results, support for the death penalty among UK voters fell below 50% some years ago and, despite some blips, continues to fall. (YouGov 2014 - 45%.)
The link between leaving the EU and the reinstatement of the death penalty is certainly there, though - but just in the minds of some or even most of those who voted Leave, who (unfortunately, as far as I am concerned) seem to be mainly older, right-wing, conservative, anti-immigration, "back-to-the-good-old-days" people.
And here's another link between Brexiteers and Trump's supporters: they are anti- a whole range of stuff - an outpouring of negativity and hatred, particularly against some vaguely-defined "establishment". What a miserable lot many of them are!
I get sick of this nonsense and find it quite offensive. You can’t or won’t argue for remain, so you resort to ad hominem attacks instead, portraying Leave voters as extreme, racists, bigots and geriatric. It’s rather like all too many on the Left who rather than discuss issues, resort to childish name calling, classifying any dissenters as bigots and racists. As for the death penalty, most MPs are against it. I am against it except perhaps for extreme crimes with absolute certainty of guilt.
|
|
"I get sick of this nonsense and find it quite offensive. You can’t or won’t argue for remain, so you resort to ad hominem attacks instead, portraying Leave voters as extreme, racists, bigots and geriatric."
I think if you read what I put carefully (particularly my post on Tue 7 Aug 2018) you'll see that I voted Leave. For the record, I am 73 years of age.
I was commenting on what strange bedfellows that has left me with. I have no time for racists, but clearly some people voted Leave for reasons that are xenophobic and in some cases border on racist; certainly one of my neighbours (aged 80-plus) isn't ashamed to admit as much. I think it's pretty much accepted that a majority of younger people didn't want to leave the EU. The Brexit hard-liners in Government and elsewhere (e.g. Rees-Mogg, Johnson, Farage) have some very right-wing attitudes and beliefs - whether they are bigots is open for discussion.
Perhaps you should check the meaning of "ad hominem", which I've noticed has recently become an easy riposte to sling out at someone in the course of an argument; it refers to making personal attacks in the course of arguments, discussion or debating, in an attempt to discredit one's opponents. For a start, Leif, I know next to nothing about you, so it's pretty unlikely I could even begin to make an "ad hominem” attack. Describing many (not all) Leave voters as a "miserable lot" doesn't come near, nor does "mainly older, right-wing, conservative, anti-immigration, 'back-to-the-good-old-days' people."
|
|
Perhaps you would prefer to live on the continent, where everything is peachy. Say, I don't know, Paris? A shining beacon to the 'European ideal' of unfettred immigration, especially from lands with religious ideologies completely opposite to ours, plus corruption is rife in government, bureaucrats living the high life off of the working populus who barely see a pay rise and significantly worsening living conditions, crime levels, ghettos, treatment of women by certain migrants, job prospects, regular terrorism, etc.
Oh yeah, the EU is a lovely place to live in. Migrants only go there because its better than the ****hole of their own country and the cushy freebies and benefits. Soon, much of the EU will resemble parts of North Africa. Just look at how London has shrply declined since Citizen Khan took over from Boris. That's how the EU does things.
Nice.
BTW Mogg is a right winger, as that's what the historical definition of a 'conservative' is. He is also a practical and honest man, who has on many occasions accepted that some of his personal views, e.g. those related to his catholic faith (and BTW, many catholics are labour supporters, so that should make him a 'bigot' [not a term for someone who disagrees with your opinions, BTW]?) are not the majority view of the Tory Party, inside or outside parliament and would readily accept their/its will on such matters - being a true democratic parliamentarian.
I should note that he has been voted in the HoP to be parliamentarianof the year at least once, if not more times, which shows that others, including opposition MPs (including one from the SNP I might add), respects the man. Bioted people don't win that sort of award.
|
|
"Perhaps you would prefer to live on the continent, where everything is peachy."
Is this directed at me? As I've said (more than once) I voted Leave. Not surprisingly, I don't want to live abroad. Don't people read any more?
As for your evident enthusaism for R-M - yes, the way you describe him no doubt fits well with the image he wishes to project. Personally, I don't buy it, and I don't buy him. However, I didn't say he was a bigot - merely that this was something that could be discussed. I was extremely careful with my choice of words.
I have to wonder again, don't people read any more?
|
ust look at how London has shrply declined since Citizen Khan took over from Boris. That's how the EU does things.
He's only been Mayor since 2016 - not enough time to have much impact - what exactly do you think he's done? And what would Boris have done differently?
|
|
Just noticed this thread and have read with interest. Some really well written arguements made both for and against.
I do think it funny that a Guardian article was considered an unbiased view! Mind you the Telegraph is equally "unbiased".
Does anyone remember when The Independent launched? It used the clever strapline " It is, are you?" Anyone who has read the online version now, would suspect that the strapline needs changing to - We aren't, and neither are you.
|
|
...especially as its owned by that Russian Oligarch who also owns the Evening Standard, and Russians always know (IMHO, sic) how to be unbiased. It was, I think, previously owned by the Guardian Newspaper group and to me, still panders to the same 'soft left' Blairite virtue-signalling audience, a bit like the Financial Times.
|
...especially as its owned by that Russian Oligarch who also owns the Evening Standard, and Russians always know (IMHO, sic) how to be unbiased. It was, I think, previously owned by the Guardian Newspaper group and to me, still panders to the same 'soft left' Blairite virtue-signalling audience, a bit like the Financial Times.
The Independent was never owned by the Guardian. Mirror Group though had a finger in the pie for a few years before ownership passed to Irish media magnate Tony Oreilly's outfit.
That group in turn sold it to Ledbedev.
|
|
My Bad - I knew it was some Left-leaning media group but got the wrong one - thanks for the correction.
|
|
A personal knowledge of a poster is clearly not a requirement to make an ad hominem attack. If someone were to write "BiG is a p******", while being totally correct, would clearly be directed at me and therefore ad hominem.
|
|
I'm a remainer - I was one of the 700,000 - and I'm not stockpiling anything yet !
Edited by Sofa Spud on 21/10/2018 at 18:22
|
|
So was I. And it was good to see so many youngsters there who were either too young or too far from home to vote in 2016. The future will not matter too much for us pensioner posters but for democracy's sake the youngsters deserve another vote soon, as do those who were swayed by the propaganda perpetrated by the politico Brexiteers who were so misleading that they have been called liars with good reason. I wish I'd stock-piled some dollars.... or euros.
|
So was I. And it was good to see so many youngsters there who were either too young or too far from home to vote in 2016. The future will not matter too much for us pensioner posters but for democracy's sake the youngsters deserve another vote soon, as do those who were swayed by the propaganda perpetrated by the politico Brexiteers who were so misleading that they have been called liars with good reason. I wish I'd stock-piled some dollars.... or euros.
So what we going to do if the remainers don`t like the second vote answer-call for another vote, the people have spoken get used to it and get on with it, its dragging on too long
|
So what we going to do if the remainers don`t like the second vote answer-call for another vote, the people have spoken get used to it and get on with it, its dragging on too long
Remind me who it was who said 52/48 would be unfinished business?
If a more honest and focused campaign, with an eye for foreign money and influence and a realistic view of being out, says out this 'remoaner' will accept it.
|
So was I. And it was good to see so many youngsters there who were either too young or too far from home to vote in 2016. The future will not matter too much for us pensioner posters but for democracy's sake the youngsters deserve another vote soon, as do those who were swayed by the propaganda perpetrated by the politico Brexiteers who were so misleading that they have been called liars with good reason. I wish I'd stock-piled some dollars.... or euros.
So what we going to do if the remainers don`t like the second vote answer-call for another vote, the people have spoken get used to it and get on with it, its dragging on too long
The people spoke two and a half years ago. What's wrong with the people being allowed to speak again, now that a lot of new information has come to light?
Edited by Sofa Spud on 02/11/2018 at 00:04
|
|
When a UK company's directors want to make an important change to its cionstitution or business, they have to get 75% of the shareholders to vote in favour. David Cameron's government should have insisted on something similar, or even a 2/3rds majority in favour of leaving the EU, for a change as fundamental as this.
|
When a UK company's directors want to make an important change to its cionstitution or business, they have to get 75% of the shareholders to vote in favour. David Cameron's government should have insisted on something similar, or even a 2/3rds majority in favour of leaving the EU, for a change as fundamental as this.
The problem, the same could be easily said for our entry into the then EEC, and that if the same methodology were followed, we never would've joined in the first place. I also seriously doubt if most of those advocating such a change in the way the referendum in 2016 (at least) was conducted, that, had the result gone the other way, they'd be still saying the same today.
I would be more sympathetic to such a plan had it been applied retrospectively to public opinion when we joined. I would also note that whilst the 1975 referendum was 67% in favour of staying, that was on a turnout of only 64% of the electorate. That means even back then, only 43% of the electorate voted to stay, NOT a majority, which is the argument often made by those leading the Remain campaign at the moment.
Additionally, as with today's claims by some from the Remain campaign of lies being told by Vote Leave (personally speaking, I think both sides lied quite a lot), the 1973 and 1975 prospectus for being in the then EEC was, not just in my view, but in many experts' opinions, a complete lie, as the public was sold on a common low/free trade area, and not told about the centralising, undemocratic political and prime aim of 'The Project' of politicial 'union', which, I believe was the main driver behind the change in the public's opinion and why Vote Leave won, in spite of the deck being stacked against them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
