LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksThink the old thread went into the sand**.
Post here if the urge is strong...
** I mean the forum bug doesn't seem to want to allow us to continue posting in it
April 5th, 2019, 12:50 PM
Think the old thread went into the sand**.
Post here if the urge is strong...
** I mean the forum bug doesn't seem to want to allow us to continue posting in it
Last edited by geordief; April 5th, 2019 at 01:04 PM.
test
It was sabotaged by the Remoaners.
Great news. We're leaving on Friday!!!!
Which one, anyone's guess.
Yup. Sabotaged by the CBI, the TUC, the car industry, the Head of the Civil Service, the Governor of the Bank of England....and by Parliament itself, the democratic institution the Brexsh1tters were orginally so keen to see restored to full authority over UK affairs.Originally Posted by ox
All these organisations must be an unrepresentative, out-of-touch "elite" that is, for some undisclosed reason, intent on stopping the country "just LEAVING" tomorrow and picking up the pieces afterwards. I mean, what could be simpler than that? Stands to reason. Wosser problem? I 'ad that Mick Jagger in the back of the cab once, Lovely bloke.
New end Oct. 31. Maybe they'll never leave, since they can't agree on how.
End of October and we'll be back at square one again.
Then May will request a further extension, for a year this time.
This is the way she is treating the 17.4 million. The one thing that always talks is money and the super rich that run this country.
I'd grant Scotland their independence just to get rid of them. No need for a referendum this time. Then they can join the Eurozone.
We can also get rid of NI which also voted to remain by joining a united Ireland.
As England and Wales voted to leave then the process of leaving will be greatly simplified.
Just to feed ox's bile
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.eur...over-day-looms
Not that I think we can disregard the result of the referendum but leave never meant no deal .
Correct, as is confirmed by this account of one disillusioned former Brexit campaigner: https://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-a8862931.html
As he points out, the Brexsh1ters have gradually moved to more and more extreme interpretations of Brexsh1t ever since the referendum. They have belatedly realised the snags with one option after another, but cannot bear to admit the whole idea was flawed in the first place. So now we end up with the tortuous absurdity of trying to blame the Queen, having first trashed the judges and then Parliament, the very institutions they were supposedly keen to re-empower!
The coup de grace was when Barnier and Juncker finally confirmed this week what a lot of us have been saying for ages, namely that if we leave with no deal, the first requirement from the EU for opening any sort of trade talks will be......to settle the bill, sort out citizens rights and agree to the Irish Backstop.
So a no deal exit - as now advocated by the Brexsh1tters - solves nothing, unless you are crazy enough to think it makes sense to trade indefinitely on bare-bones WTO terms, with the market of 500m on your doorstep that is responsible for half your exports and imports.
And now the MP's are off their Easter breaks.
No doubt many will be flying to exotic locations all over the world. You will find them on tropical beaches, at golf resorts, on luxury cruise liners.
No wonder these millionaire politicians are opposed to Brexit. They have too much to lose.
They won't want any more referendums. Big issues should not be left to the little people. Democracy is Darwinian. It favours the strong. The weak should play no part because they don't know what they're doing. Hooray for the leavers who are frustrated and declare they will never vote again.
Brexit was bankrolled by millionaires, millionaires made a fortune from the devaluation of the pound following the refendum result, Britain's richest man is a die hard Brexiteer, Brexit is supported by a majority of wealthy Tory voters. Brexit will involve stripping ordinary British citizens of the same rights & ability that millionaires have to travel & live in other countries, rights the EU deemed that all EU citizens should have. The only people to benefit from Brexit will be the wealthy, just exactly what do ordinary people get out of Brexit other than to give away more of their rights & freedoms, that are currently protected by the European Union, to hard right wingers who have openly talked about taking away our human rights, slashing environmental standards, removing employee rights & worker protections and scrapping the NHS in favour of private insurance schemes instead.
Brexit is truly about a battle between equality & personal freedoms pitted against the concentration of power for the privileged & wealthy. The EU is & has always been on the side of the individual, increasing our power, rights & freedoms whilst the Brexiteers just want more power for themselves to make us less equal, so they can discriminate, choose who is or isn't worthy and to take away our rights, freedoms & protections just like they have said they want to. What rights have the EU ever said they would take from us, what power do they have over us, only that which is to protect us from dangers, harmful products or chemicals, unfair treatment, exploitation, torture or discrimination, are our neighbours & the EU really the villains for protecting us or is it the Brexiteers trying to strip us of our protections!
Although a majority of the voters opted to leave, there is no consensus as to how. Don't blame May. The way Parliament is acting, no one can do anything. They have voted on at least a half dozen ways to leave, but can't get a majority for any.
But one should blame May. It is her who has failed miserably to take her MPs with her as the negotiations progressed. Any decent PM would have taken elaborate pains to explain the issues and cajole the MPs in the party into supporting the deal that was being crafted. The lack of consensus in parliament is a failure of leadership, by either of the main parties, at trying to forge one. Consensus does not just happen: everyone has different opinions. The discussion has to be led and a process that most can support used to narrow down options.
May's style is the opposite: secretive, evasive and devious. So it is hardly surprising that when she blindsides her own party with things she has decided alone, often without even consulting her own cabinet, they don't agree with her! It is also her fault that she ran a lousy election campaign and squandered her majority, leaving her a prisoner of the most unreasonable fringes of her party. Corbyn is also evasive and devious. He wants the UK to leave, so he can do all the socialist things the free-market orientated EU forbids, but he wants the Tories to do it,s he can blame the damage on them and justify revolutionary measures. Totally cynical.
Parliament in my view is doing a sterling job, with zero help from either party leader, at trying to save the situation from an absurd and damaging outcome. But none of the competent people, Yvette Cooper, Ken Clarke, Dominic Grieve etc. is in a front bench position because the party leadership on both sides is so lousy.
There is a party on the right and a party on the left who keep each other in power by accusing the other of not being fit to govern.
The UK is a democracy with one person one vote. The rich have the same voting power as the poor, as do the young and old. From yesterday there is even a new party.
Some politicians have declared their dislike of referendums, but democracy is not just about party politics. It's all about the majority verdict.
That is why I want to know what happened to my vote.
As a Brexitshitter, I do want power returned to Westminster from Brussels. However, The Right Honourable Gentlemen are actually apposed to this. The sad fact is, a majority of Members of Parliament are remainers, they are doing everything they can to kick the ball into the long grass. Commons Speaker Bercow displays a massive bias against Brexit, we are up against it. However, our Nigel will save us with his shiny new Brexit Party.
Your pinup girl Gina Miller is not short of a bob or two.You obviously think that the European Union is some sort of utopia, have a listen to some of the people from the Southern European Countries.
No, politics is not all about the majority verdict. This is especially true when the verdict is pronounced before the relevant facts are apparent.
You might care to read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority There are many reasons why so called "direct democracy" is not generally a good idea, as this article explains.
When as in the current case you have a very narrow majority for the course of action, there is a large minority whose views are thwarted. Prudent politics would avoid extreme solutions in such a case, for fear of antagonising half of society. But the Brexshitters have progressively demanded more and more extreme interpretations of Brexit as events have unfolded and their sunny predictions ("easiest trade deal in history"; "the EU will roll over at the last minute"; we hold all the cards"; "I'm pro cake and pro eating it") have been shown to be wrong. None of the extreme interpretations of Brexit now claimed to be the only "real" versions of it was seriously proposed at the time of the original vote. There is no popular mandate for them - and they are thought quite mad by everybody, from the CBI and TUC to the Civil Service and the bulk of sensible MPs.
That is what has happened to your vote: it has been hijacked by a bunch of unrealistic extremists to promote a course of action that nobody was even considering when you voted.
In the UK the result of an election is based on first past the post, confirmed again in 2011 by a democratic vote. Or had you forgotten?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_of_the_2011_United_Kingdom_Alternative_Vot e_referendum
"Politics" consists of a hell of a lot more than the result of a single vote, at one point in time.In the UK the result of an election is based on first past the post, confirmed again in 2011 by a democratic vote. Or had you forgotten?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_of_the_2011_United_Kingdom_Alternative_Vot e_referendum
Politics is a continual process of evaluating and compromising among competing ideas and interests. If it were all about a single vote, the winners in a general election would have a mandate to rule for a thousand year Reich. They don't, because both circumstances and the opinions and judgements of the electorate change, and because the results of one vote are judged by the effects they have.
In the present case, three years have passed since the referendum and it is obvious that we know a great deal more now about what options are available to us in the real world than we did at the time of the vote. The composition of the electorate too has changed: a lot of old Brexshitters have died and a lot of young remainers have reached voting age.
Under the Fixed Term Parliament Act we have the right to review our choice of government every five years. We have now had three years since the referendum and if we are to have another to confirm our choice, now that we know the facts, it would be almost four by the time it is organised.
So the notion that one single, very close, vote must decide this issue irrevocably, for all time, when so much has changed since, is just yet another Brexsh1tter simplistic misrepresentation.
Tell that to the electorate that their vote might not count.
What has Hitler got to do with this? Other than he also hated democracy.Politics is a continual process of evaluating and compromising among competing ideas and interests. If it were all about a single vote, the winners in a general election would have a mandate to rule for a thousand year Reich.
And a lot of old Remainers have died, and young Leavers have reached voting age.a lot of old Brexshitters have died and a lot of young remainers have reached voting age.
And if you still don't get your way you will want another referendum, and another until you do. Then you'll think referendums are great.Under the Fixed Term Parliament Act we have the right to review our choice of government every five years. We have now had three years since the referendum and if we are to have another to confirm our choice, now that we know the facts, it would be almost four by the time it is organised.
So the notion that one single, very close, vote must decide this issue irrevocably, for all time, when so much has changed since, is just yet another Brexsh1tter simplistic misrepresentation.
Duplicate deleted.
Last edited by exchemist; April 17th, 2019 at 04:17 AM.
You have chosen to miss the points I am making, though whether this is done as a debating tactic or out of sheer stupidity, I have no way of knowing. Either way, I can't be bothered to keep repeating myself, as it is clear it suits you to affect not to understand.Tell that to the electorate that their vote might not count.
What has Hitler got to do with this? Other than he also hated democracy.Politics is a continual process of evaluating and compromising among competing ideas and interests. If it were all about a single vote, the winners in a general election would have a mandate to rule for a thousand year Reich.
And a lot of old Remainers have died, and young Leavers have reached voting age.a lot of old Brexshitters have died and a lot of young remainers have reached voting age.
And if you still don't get your way you will want another referendum, and another until you do. Then you'll think referendums are great.Under the Fixed Term Parliament Act we have the right to review our choice of government every five years. We have now had three years since the referendum and if we are to have another to confirm our choice, now that we know the facts, it would be almost four by the time it is organised.
So the notion that one single, very close, vote must decide this issue irrevocably, for all time, when so much has changed since, is just yet another Brexsh1tter simplistic misrepresentation.
By the way, almost three quarters of voters in the age group 18-24 voted Remain, whereas 3 in 5 voters over 65 voted Leave: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-36619342 There is no evidence that young people have become more pro-Leave since 2016. So the longer we wait the more the population becomes in favour of Remain.
You did repeat yourself. Posts #20 and #21 are the same.
It is also clear that you do not understand a democratic decision is there to keep the peace and prevent the rise of the far right and far left.
So what happens if us Brexitshitters win a second referendum ? Will you stand down ? Will you accept democracy ? What will you do ?"Politics" consists of a hell of a lot more than the result of a single vote, at one point in time.In the UK the result of an election is based on first past the post, confirmed again in 2011 by a democratic vote. Or had you forgotten?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_of_the_2011_United_Kingdom_Alternative_Vot e_referendum
Politics is a continual process of evaluating and compromising among competing ideas and interests. If it were all about a single vote, the winners in a general election would have a mandate to rule for a thousand year Reich. They don't, because both circumstances and the opinions and judgements of the electorate change, and because the results of one vote are judged by the effects they have.
In the present case, three years have passed since the referendum and it is obvious that we know a great deal more now about what options are available to us in the real world than we did at the time of the vote. The composition of the electorate too has changed: a lot of old Brexshitters have died and a lot of young remainers have reached voting age.
Under the Fixed Term Parliament Act we have the right to review our choice of government every five years. We have now had three years since the referendum and if we are to have another to confirm our choice, now that we know the facts, it would be almost four by the time it is organised.
So the notion that one single, very close, vote must decide this issue irrevocably, for all time, when so much has changed since, is just yet another Brexsh1tter simplistic misrepresentation.
Me? I'm not in government. "Stand down" has no meaning that I can discern. I am not standing for elected office.So what happens if us Brexitshitters win a second referendum ? Will you stand down ? Will you accept democracy ? What will you do ?"Politics" consists of a hell of a lot more than the result of a single vote, at one point in time.In the UK the result of an election is based on first past the post, confirmed again in 2011 by a democratic vote. Or had you forgotten?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_of_the_2011_United_Kingdom_Alternative_Vot e_referendum
Politics is a continual process of evaluating and compromising among competing ideas and interests. If it were all about a single vote, the winners in a general election would have a mandate to rule for a thousand year Reich. They don't, because both circumstances and the opinions and judgements of the electorate change, and because the results of one vote are judged by the effects they have.
In the present case, three years have passed since the referendum and it is obvious that we know a great deal more now about what options are available to us in the real world than we did at the time of the vote. The composition of the electorate too has changed: a lot of old Brexshitters have died and a lot of young remainers have reached voting age.
Under the Fixed Term Parliament Act we have the right to review our choice of government every five years. We have now had three years since the referendum and if we are to have another to confirm our choice, now that we know the facts, it would be almost four by the time it is organised.
So the notion that one single, very close, vote must decide this issue irrevocably, for all time, when so much has changed since, is just yet another Brexsh1tter simplistic misrepresentation.
Look, from what I have recently read the most likely way a 2nd referendum would come about is Labour's idea, viz. that any final Brexit plan agreed with the EU and ratified by Parliament should go to the people for sign off, with the alternative being Remain. I think the outcome of that would be fairly clear and hard to argue with: we either leave under the terms of that deal, in full knowledge, this time, of what we would be getting, or we stay in the EU.
That's the thing about this, you see. People like me were in a position in 2016 to realise what the consequences would be, but that's because of my background in industry, my education and my experience of living overseas. This is not something that everyone shares, obviously. If I'd been, say, a retired bloke in Stratford-on-Avon, or someone on benefits in a tower block in Gateshead, I might not have had much idea. But now the original myths about about it being easy, having cake and eating it, saving 350m/week for the NHS etc., have been exposed. It will be painful, expensive, damaging to industry and will create a nasty problem at the Irish border if we do not give N Ireland some sort of special status to deal with it. Furthermore our "freedom" to do our own trade deals will give worse results than sticking with the pan-EU negotiations that we do today. All these issues have now been fairly well ventilated. So now we can have a referendum that could actually instruct the government what to do, in full knowledge of the facts.
As for me personally, since you seem interested in that, I could not argue that such a referendum would be unfair. It would address my points that people were not informed in 2016 about what the exit deal would be like and that opinions could well have changed as they have learnt more. But we if were to choose to leave, I might apply for a Scottish passport, once Scotland secedes from the union, which it would in time.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-47936624
This is very strong stuff. Does she hold all the cards (in the US)?
Britain would be exceptionally foolhardy to plow on regardless if she can back up her words with action.
A trade deal with the US contingent on the Good Friday Agreement being honoured in full (ie no border) ? "Don't even think about it"?
The Unionists may have a new bete noire** if she has free rein.
**who was the last one Ted Kennedy,was it?
Duplicate deleted, again. Sodding software bug.
You may recall Bill Clinton was quite heavily involved in the peace process in N Ireland. Pelosi was around at that time. I imagine she and the Democrats generally feel they have quite a lot invested in the Good Friday Agreement and are not willing to see it swept aside in pursuit of a fool's hard Brexit. And yes, Congress has to approve trade deals, so she can certainly put a lot of pressure on the UK to honour the agreement if a trade deal with the US is being sought. Yet another nail i the coffin of this mad idea of crashing out with no deal.
Mind you, I don't see any prospect of Fox being able to do a trade deal with the US in the near future. The obstacles are enormous and the price the US will exact will be unacceptably high. It would mean the destruction of the British countryside and I don't think that even a free-market transatlantic enthusiast like Fox is going to be able to get that through.
Duplicate post deleted.You did repeat yourself. Posts #20 and #21 are the same.
It is also clear that you do not understand a democratic decision is there to keep the peace and prevent the rise of the far right and far left.
The Brexit folks will celebrate. The money behind Brexit will break out the champagne. The adults in the room will try once again to figure out how to actually do it. Brexit will again be postponed indefinitely until they can figure out how to do it with a minimum of pain.
Then in 2031 after the 14th postponement, the New Greater English Nation will finally leave the EU, with heavy tariffs on anyone in-country who trades with Northern Ireland, Scotland or Wales. And the Brexiteers will wave their canes in celebration.
Couldn't have said it better myself dude.The Brexit folks will celebrate. The money behind Brexit will break out the champagne. The adults in the room will try once again to figure out how to actually do it. Brexit will again be postponed indefinitely until they can figure out how to do it with a minimum of pain.
Then in 2031 after the 14th postponement, the New Greater English Nation will finally leave the EU, with heavy tariffs on anyone in-country who trades with Northern Ireland, Scotland or Wales. And the Brexiteers will wave their canes in celebration.
Have you been looking into a crystal ball? Unlike your America First country there will be no England First.
Plenty of English are happy to let Scotland be independent.Have you been looking into a crystal ball? Unlike your America First country there will be no England First.
And the behaviour of some of the Brexiteers (our way or the Highway) reinforces this.
What is left of the union if Scotland is given the cold shoulder?
England is not giving Scotland the cold shoulder, it is the other way around in my opinion. The SNP ( Scottish National Party ) gave the Scottish people a referendum in 2014 on leaving the UK ( United Kingdom ). The outcome was in favour of the Scottish people to stay in the UK. The SNP is still pushing for another referendum on leaving the UK, they will keep going until they get the right result. What I find strange is that had the SNP gained independance from the UK, they wanted to throw that independence away into the lap of the EU ( European Union ). However the EU told the SNP that if they did win independence from the UK they would no longer be a part of the EU, and they would have to apply for membership as an independent nation.Plenty of English are happy to let Scotland be independent.Have you been looking into a crystal ball? Unlike your America First country there will be no England First.
And the behaviour of some of the Brexiteers (our way or the Highway) reinforces this.
What is left of the union if Scotland is given the cold shoulder?
That will not be through lack of desire. It's only a matter of time before the description of "them" moves from Muslims to Europeans to "everyone other than the True English."
This dude really does have a crystal ball.That will not be through lack of desire. It's only a matter of time before the description of "them" moves from Muslims to Europeans to "everyone other than the True English."
I was in York City today ( not New York ) I noticed quite a few identical stickers on various lampposts. The stickers were in a yellow and black writing/background. They read, BREXIT IS A CRIME SCENE, ELECTORAL LAW BREAKING, DARK MONEY, " LIES ON AN INDUSTRIAL SCALE ", INTERFERENCE BY FOREIGN POWERS. That was it, the stickers were not attributed to any political party or organisations. It looks like some dude has gone down to the local printers, spent some money and ran some stickers off.
A few days ago I saw a car sticker which read I VOTED FOR FEWER POLITICIANS.
Must be a reference to Brexit, and nearly spot on in my opinion as I'd also like to add MANY FEWER BUREAUCRATS.
I'd also prefer fewer Marxists as well, as with the Labour Party.
I'm now sick and tired of party politics. It is an impure form of democracy if it can block a pure form, which is a referendum.
The Brexit vote is an an example of a very bad referendum. At the time there was no discussion of what the consequences would be or even how it wold be managed. The current choices, no deal or May's deal, both appear to be unacceptable. As a result the date for leaving gets postponed over and over again.
Sting Abell describes in his book “How Britain really works” how some time in the 70s there was a referendum to see whether Scotland wanted to be devolved - if memory serves me right the outcome was 52% for, 48% against on a 60% turnout
the outcome of the referendum was ignored because the total number of votes (52% x 60%) was deemed insufficient to make the change to devolution
makes you think, doesn’t it ?
Makes me think these referendums need to be well thought out ahead of time ,agreed by all parties (so not used for the benefit of any one grouping) and ,imo there should be a higher bar than 50% to change the status quo.Sting Abell describes in his book “How Britain really works” how some time in the 70s there was a referendum to see whether Scotland wanted to be devolved - if memory serves me right the outcome was 52% for, 48% against on a 60% turnout
the outcome of the referendum was ignored because the total number of votes (52% x 60%) was deemed insufficient to make the change to devolution
makes you think, doesn’t it ?
What's your take on the Brexit backlash in yesterdays local elections?
I think its about time the 2 warring parties realize the public are not happy at the total lack of progress.
If there should be Brexit it should not be in name only.
The biggest gainers have been the Lib Dems, the only party to be unambiguously in favour of remaining. They seem to have taken votes from both Tories and Labour. So I think it's a bit hard to draw simple conclusions, apart from the obvious one about mismanagement by the Tories and pusillanimity - and perhaps just being far too Leftie - on the part of Labour. What it does NOT seem to show, bearing in mind the Lib Dem successes, is a groundswell in favour of a no-deal exit.
But who knows what the Lib Dems stand for and how much of it was a protest vote?
They want a free and fair society (just like most of us). They want free trade (just like most of us). They are a party without policies, always for and against any proposal.
The one policy that they do have, in flashing blue lights, is a firm commitment to a second referendum in the hope of remaining in the EU.
Seems odd to protest against not delivering Brexit by voting for the one major party in favour of remaining.
If the Lib Dems do not get their way, they will then campaign for a third referendum.
They are an irresponsible party and nobody knows what they actually stand for. They have no economic model other than let's see what happens then decide.
Politics is an easy game for the Lib Dems. Sitting passively between the 2 warring parties their strategy is to attract sympathy votes.
.....Except that they want to remain in the EU. Which is a policy.If the Lib Dems do not get their way, they will then campaign for a third referendum.
They are an irresponsible party and nobody knows what they actually stand for. They have no economic model other than let's see what happens then decide.
Politics is an easy game for the Lib Dems. Sitting passively between the 2 warring parties their strategy is to attract sympathy votes.
On the wireless today I heard Cable is quitting.
He should have done so after the local elections, but may have extended it to beyond the European elections, or not until after Brexit is resolved, or the Tories have found a new leader.
What an exciting bunch!
If there is a second referendum it must include a definite statement as to what it means. For example the question may ask "Stay or leave with no deal". An alternative might be "stay or leave with May's deal". A possibility is posing both questions. If either votes to leave, let that be the result. If both vote to leave, have a third question "which one". When it is all over, the question will have been settled.
That is too confusing. You would have to explain the small print of 'May's deal' before people could make an informed choice.
Referendums need to ask a simple question. Like this one:
"Should the EU continue to tell the UK what to do?"
YES / NO.
The EU does not "tell the UK what to do", any more than your local golf club tells you what do to, if you are a member. It simply makes, by agreement with us and the other members, rules for trade and in some cases law to govern our interactions, all of which are put into force by means of international treaties, freely entered into by our elected government.
However, purely in terms of such trade rules, the EU will be "telling the UK what to do" for the next half century, if we leave it. It is ten times our size and only 21 miles away at Dover. It will dominate our economic and geopolitical landscape, whether we like it or not, just as the USA dominates Mexico's. It was realisation of this that led the UK to join in the first place, so that we would have some input into its polices and way of working. For example the Single Market is largely due to the vision and drive of Margaret Thatcher.
So the question you suggest for a second referendum would be one of remarkable ignorance and stupidity. The sort of thing a Daily Mail reader might come up with.
I had to laugh at that one. I read the Mail on line every day, they make a lot of spelling mistakes and grammatical errors. Nearly every report ends up telling you how much a persons house is worth, regardless of what the report is about. Having said that, it is not a bad rag.
I remember a spoof Daily Mail headline from (I think Frankie Boyle)... "There's a Muslim paedophile living under your child's bed!"... It's a comic that plays up to prejudices, calling itself a newspaper should be against the Trades Description Act!
Its a sign of just how bad the paper is when Wikipedia has actively banned it from being used as a Reliable citation source for Politics articles.
Reading it is actively delving into fantasy and pretending its reality
My brother's newsagent, who is Asian, habitually refers to it as the "Daily Hate". I don't know if he has read "1984" but it sounds like it.Its a sign of just how bad the paper is when Wikipedia has actively banned it from being used as a Reliable citation source for Politics articles.
Reading it is actively delving into fantasy and pretending its reality
In fact the paper is gradually starting to become less extreme and unpleasant under its new edtor, now that Paul "Double C*nt" Dacre has finally retired to his estate in the Scotland.
Not so, this news paper has actually won awards. " The Daily Mail has won a number of awards, including receiving the National Newspaper of the Year award from the British Press Awards seven times since 1995. "Its a sign of just how bad the paper is when Wikipedia has actively banned it from being used as a Reliable citation source for Politics articles.
Reading it is actively delving into fantasy and pretending its reality
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Mail
Yes, and this Asian dude still sells the Daily Mail, and turns a profit too.My brother's newsagent, who is Asian, habitually refers to it as the "Daily Hate". I don't know if he has read "1984" but it sounds like it.Its a sign of just how bad the paper is when Wikipedia has actively banned it from being used as a Reliable citation source for Politics articles.
Reading it is actively delving into fantasy and pretending its reality
In fact the paper is gradually starting to become less extreme and unpleasant under its new edtor, now that Paul "Double C*nt" Dacre has finally retired to his estate in the Scotland.
Er yes, he's a newsagent, you see.Yes, and this Asian dude still sells the Daily Mail, and turns a profit too.
I expect 90% of what he sells is not to his taste, from women's fashion magazines to What Car or the Daily Bozograph.
It has a virtual hegemony over other European states, where the biggest nation Germany stands to gain the most.
They do tell you what to do. Jacket and tie, course etiquette, wine with the captain. Failure to comply results in exclusion....any more than your local golf club tells you what do to, if you are a member.
Whether we are in or out the Germans will still expect us to buy their BMW's, the French their wine, the Italians their white goods.It will dominate our economic and geopolitical landscape, whether we like it or not
View their latest video here:So the question you suggest for a second referendum would be one of remarkable ignorance and stupidity. The sort of thing a Daily Mail reader might come up with.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4zYlOU7Fpk
But what does this "hegemony" consist of? As EU members, what has the UK suffered, as a result of being supposedly told what to do by this "hegemony", and in what areas? It seems to me the only rules we get from the EU are the sort of detailed product regulations that enable the Single Market to work properly, and which we would have to provide for ourselves if it were not done for us, on a pan-EU basis.It has a virtual hegemony over other European states, where the biggest nation Germany stands to gain the most.
They do tell you what to do. Jacket and tie, course etiquette, wine with the captain. Failure to comply results in exclusion....any more than your local golf club tells you what do to, if you are a member.
Whether we are in or out the Germans will still expect us to buy their BMW's, the French their wine, the Italians their white goods.It will dominate our economic and geopolitical landscape, whether we like it or not
View their latest video here:So the question you suggest for a second referendum would be one of remarkable ignorance and stupidity. The sort of thing a Daily Mail reader might come up with.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4zYlOU7Fpk
The point of the golf club is you joined, voluntarily, because that way you get to play golf on a jolly nice golf course, something you could not possibly do without the pooled subscriptions of a lot of other members. Sure, you have to observe a dress code, but you do that because wearing a tie costs you little, compared to not being able to play golf.
If we are out on WTO terms then we will be unable to export to the EU without EU tariffs and extra product compliance checks. Whether we can buy EU products depends on what WTO rules have to say. (You see, even under WTO terms, there are rules, made by a WTO "hegemony" if you want to call it that, which we will have to comply with.) But do not kid yourself that the Germans or the Italians or anyone else will tear up their own Single Market rules, just to trade with Perfidious Albion. They will not. (The German chamber of Commerce is on record as saying that the integrity of the single Market is worth far more to them than the exports they make to the UK.)
People say many things that they do not mean. I am certain that the German Chamber of Commerce is at odds with the likes of Audi, BMW, Mercedes, Porsche and Volkswagen. There are many more German manufacturers that export to the UK other than the automotive industry. Project fear is alive and well.
Project Fact, you mean.People say many things that they do not mean. I am certain that the German Chamber of Commerce is at odds with the likes of Audi, BMW, Mercedes, Porsche and Volkswagen. There are many more German manufacturers that export to the UK other than the automotive industry. Project fear is alive and well.
German car manufacturers are exporting to the UK, not exporting from it, by and large (Mini and Bentley are exceptions). In the event of a no deal exit, the barriers on imports to the UK would be set by the UK government, subject to the "hegemony" of WTO rules. It is the exports from the UK to the EU that will be subject to EU barriers, both tariffs and product standards-related.
German car makers, if they were minded to lobby for special treatment for the UK, will not be the top priority for the EU. The first demand from the EU side will be recognition of citizens rights, settling the outstanding bill and .....the Irish backstop. No deal with the UK will be done until those issues are dealt with. Car makers have no chance of overcoming that requirement, as it is a political requirement demanded by the integrity of the EU itself. The car makers actually know that. It is a persistent Brexiter misconception to imagine the EU is all about trade. It is first and foremost a political project. Trade comes second.
But in any case there is not going to be a no-deal exit. Parliament will never allow it. If Bozo or someone tries it there will be a vote of no confidence and enough Tories will vote for it to bring down the government. In the resulting election, the Tories would have no hope of gaining a majority. We would be looking at another hung parliament, and a no-deal Brexit Tory leadership would never be able to form a coalition with any other party. We would be more likely to have a Labour/LibDem/SNP, left of centre coalition So I think we can forget a no deal Brexit.
To be on the safe side, I'll invest in a puke bucket.
Whatever you need to do.To be on the safe side, I'll invest in a puke bucket.
I actually don't think such a thing will be too bad, for short while at any rate. I am sure that such a coalition would be far less extreme than a full-blown Labour government led by the Marx Bros. As with the Cameron/Clegg coalition the policies will need to be those all parties can agree on.
One nettle I think they might grasp, which must be grasped soon, is the need to increase taxation to fund the ballooning health and social care costs we are starting to incur as the population ages. (I say this as someone who will no doubt have to pay more tax as a result.) A government engaged on a social justice crusade is about the only kind of government that will have the guts to do it. But it has to be done, for all our sakes.
And if we do leave the EU these costs will go up even faster, as we will have lost - in fact we are already losing - the pool of cheap nursing labour from the EU that the sector has relied on. At my father's nursing home the quality of staff is already declining and the bills are going up, as all the E Europeans go home.
So it's another Lib Lab pact then. Only this time to include the one policy SNP.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lib%E2%80%93Lab_pact
When has it ever worked?
Merely a triumph of hope over experience.
Ah, goody. I'm 70 next birthday and I look forward to putting my feet up with taxes paid for by the young generation and being cared for by E Asians.One nettle I think they might grasp, which must be grasped soon, is the need to increase taxation to fund the ballooning health and social care costs we are starting to incur as the population ages. (I say this as someone who will no doubt have to pay more tax as a result.) And if we do leave the EU these costs will go up even faster, as we will have lost - in fact we are already losing - the pool of cheap nursing labour from the EU that the sector has relied on. At my father's nursing home the quality of staff is already declining and the bills are going up, as all the E Europeans go home
No E Asians will come. All those countries are getting too rich to be interested looking after a load of smelly roundeyes in exchange for the minimum wage. It will be muslims from Pakistan and Africa that you get, rather than Christians from Spain and Poland. Good luck.So it's another Lib Lab pact then. Only this time to include the one policy SNP.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lib%E2%80%93Lab_pact
When has it ever worked?
Merely a triumph of hope over experience.
Ah, goody. I'm 70 next birthday and I look forward to putting my feet up with taxes paid for by the young generation and being cared for by E Asians.One nettle I think they might grasp, which must be grasped soon, is the need to increase taxation to fund the ballooning health and social care costs we are starting to incur as the population ages. (I say this as someone who will no doubt have to pay more tax as a result.) And if we do leave the EU these costs will go up even faster, as we will have lost - in fact we are already losing - the pool of cheap nursing labour from the EU that the sector has relied on. At my father's nursing home the quality of staff is already declining and the bills are going up, as all the E Europeans go home
As for coalitions, you may not like it but that is what you will probably get.
Some comment. A nearly complete mix of racism and phobias.
The E Europeans are also getting richer. The Poles etc. were only ever mercenaries.
Would you mind who looked after you as long as they proved competent?
In the European elections next week I don't think people will be voting for a coalition. I think the majority will be voting for the Brexit party.As for coalitions, you may not like it but that is what you will probably get.
Does ox have some kind of an irony blind spot or is there some kind of another explanation? "I am always right syndrome" ?
Nope. A substantial minority will do so, that's all.Some comment. A nearly complete mix of racism and phobias.
The E Europeans are also getting richer. The Poles etc. were only ever mercenaries.
Would you mind who looked after you as long as they proved competent?
In the European elections next week I don't think people will be voting for a coalition. I think the majority will be voting for the Brexit party.As for coalitions, you may not like it but that is what you will probably get.
Coalitions, I may remind you, are never voted for by anyone. They are the outcome of a general election (not an EU one) that yields no majority of seats in Parliament.
The arrival on the British political scene of the Great Brexsh1t Betrayal Party is interesting, though. It seems Monsieur Farage intends to field Faragiste candidates at the next general election as well. That will split the Tory vote and almost guarantee a left of centre government, thus ensuring we do not get a hard Brexsh1t. Since his objective seems to be to shout "betrayal" (establish a "Stab-in-the-Back" narrative), rather than do anything positive towards any particular outcome, that would probably suit his purpose. But not yours, sad to say.
I think there is an explanation all right.
Project Fear resulted in the Brexit vote. You are all now living with the result of fear-based voting.
Yes there is, I nearly septigenarian who is a xenophobe and assumes only the things they like are acceptable an everything else is clearly evilI think there is an explanation all right.
I think it's "septuagenarian" , to be picky
That's what I get for trying to remember it off the top of my headI think it's "septuagenarian" , to be picky
If that is your humble opinion, then so be it.Project Fear resulted in the Brexit vote. You are all now living with the result of fear-based voting.
A clear cut case of ageism. Post reported.Yes there is, I nearly septigenarian who is a xenophobe and assumes only the things they like are acceptable an everything else is clearly evilI think there is an explanation all right.
Dnftt
Even worse, a nearly-septuagenarian xenophobe who lives in Stratford-on-AvonYes there is, I nearly septigenarian who is a xenophobe and assumes only the things they like are acceptable an everything else is clearly evilI think there is an explanation all right.and blames the EU for the proliferation of KFC and Indian restaurants......
Agreed, the troll hasn't actually contributed to the forum in years now
The fact that you think calling someone 70 years old is an attack, but calling someone a xenophobe isn't, lends some fascinating insight into your worldview.
I strongly doubt that Brexit won simply because of the old people votes - there aren't enough.
I don't think anyone here was saying that.
Did you hear that?
I think it is fairly well established that older people are more likely to favour some form of Brexit than younger voters.
I am not sure if this qualifies as Brexit discussion but has the US China trade war effected Brexit or the UK negatively?
What I said, ( A clear cut case of ageism. Post reported. ) was said in jest, and no one was reported, lighten up dude.
I've seen no reports of effects so far. I do recall reading earlier this year that Europe would be a likely beneficiary of a rebalancing of trade flows away from the China-US route. The UK might possibly see some of this, I suppose.
Not so much direct effects,I think but perhaps it informs peoples views on globalization.
This ongoing trade dispute seems part posturing,part substantial.
Let's hope it clears the air as a silver lining and provides a lesson to people in the medium term.
To my mind any slowdown in the global economy is a "good" thing if it gives us an unwitting extra year or two to gear up to the carbon free economy we are told we must see in.
If the referendum had gone the way of the Remainers it would have been accepted by nearly everybody. Because it didn't go their way they state they do not favour referendums or they demand another. So they are both for and against referendums. They are all like mealy mouthed liberals, both for and against any proposal. Should another referendum be held they will not want a third one if it goes their way. They are the ones who obey the principle of 'I am right and you are wrong'.
I just happened to vote for Brexit along with the 17.4 million majority and it wasn't predicted to go that way.
You can't show that ,can you?If the referendum had gone the way of the Remainers it would have been accepted by nearly everybody.
I doubted that at the time and have said so since.You seem to be fixed on the idea that "my side is better than yours"
If the Leave side had stated in their campaign that Britain would have to make economic sacrifices for its supposed greater independence, then that would be a different matter.
Oh and that the political integrity of the Union was of secondary importance too.
Did the UK take a hit financially when it began its proceeding to leave the EU? I believe I remember reading somewhere it may have. I believe I recall London being a hub for European trading before Brexit came to be.I've seen no reports of effects so far. I do recall reading earlier this year that Europe would be a likely beneficiary of a rebalancing of trade flows away from the China-US route. The UK might possibly see some of this, I suppose.
Getting back on topic, do you know which markets in Europe and the UK may be effected by the US China trade war?
If we could eliminate carbon emissions from the combustion of fossil fuels we will be one step closer to providing a cleaner healthier world for ourselves and future generations here on Earth. The alternative to living on a solar thermal energy fueled boiling atmosphere on a planet Earth with run away carbon dioxide levels is living in space somewhere and we are nowhere near that level of scientific understanding and technology yet.Not so much direct effects,I think but perhaps it informs peoples views on globalization.
This ongoing trade dispute seems part posturing,part substantial.
Let's hope it clears the air as a silver lining and provides a lesson to people in the medium term.
To my mind any slowdown in the global economy is a "good" thing if it gives us an unwitting extra year or two to gear up to the carbon free economy we are told we must see in.
Yes. The pound fell sharply and the Bank of England had to take a lot of remedial measures to prevent the risk of a recession - successfully. But Brexit is really more of a drip-feed of bad news, as investment dries up, the car makers and financiers decamp elsewhere, British Steel asks for more government help, and so on. It will take five years before the full effects are felt, as is in fact true of most changes in economic policy.Did the UK take a hit financially when it began its proceeding to leave the EU? I believe I remember reading somewhere it may have. I believe I recall London being a hub for European trading before Brexit came to be.
Getting back on topic, do you know which markets in Europe and the UK may be effected by the US China trade war?
A bit like with climate change, we see plenty of warning signs but obtuse and stubborn people, wedded to a fantasy, are able to brush them aside if they try hard. They have a name for anything like this, calling it "Project Fear". A very useful term, enabling them to dismiss as mere propaganda all the warnings, from institutions and organisations as diverse as the Confederation of British Industry, the Trades Union Congress, the Bank of England, the Civil Service and about 95% of economists.
And neither can you show otherwise.
I'm not on any side. It was one person one vote. I accept the democratic decision.I doubted that at the time and have said so since.You seem to be fixed on the idea that "my side is better than yours"
Let me remind you of the question on the ballot paper.If the Leave side had stated in their campaign that Britain would have to make economic sacrifices for its supposed greater independence, then that would be a different matter.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...look-like.html
Hands up how many of you on this thread actually voted?
I get sick and tired of hearing people spouting out their political views who can't be bothered to vote.
Would you have expected a list of outcomes on the voting slip, such as:
'In the event of a leave vote resulting in a no deal or bad deal, should there be a second referendum?'
'By leaving would you be prepared for economic sacrifices?'
'Who would you nominate the last person to leave Britain to turn out the lights?'
I didn't claim it. I said I doubted it.And neither can you show otherwise.
(Enjoy your bile.)
I most definitely did vote leave, as a majority of the voter turnout did, and yet here we are nearly three years on going to the polls next Thursday to elect MEP's. I will be voting for the Brexit Party run by our Nigel. I have just down loaded the Brexit Party app onto my iPhone, and I am considering becoming a registered supporter. Thinking about the European elections of years gone by, I recall that I once voted for a Natural Law Party dude, apparently they were all proficient in yogic flying.
YES! I remember it well, and was amused to find that Youtube still has a copy of their election broadcast, here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=438UKM1Av1g. complete with.......yogic flying.I most definitely did vote leave, as a majority of the voter turnout did, and yet here we are nearly three years on going to the polls next Thursday to elect MEP's. I will be voting for the Brexit Party run by our Nigel. I have just down loaded the Brexit Party app onto my iPhone, and I am considering becoming a registered supporter. Thinking about the European elections of years gone by, I recall that I once voted for a Natural Law Party dude, apparently they were all proficient in yogic flying.
Im going to suggest the mods group all the US/China trade war posting into one seperate thread ( they arent Brexit related)If we could eliminate carbon emissions from the combustion of fossil fuels we will be one step closer to providing a cleaner healthier world for ourselves and future generations here on Earth. The alternative to living on a solar thermal energy fueled boiling atmosphere on a planet Earth with run away carbon dioxide levels is living in space somewhere and we are nowhere near that level of scientific understanding and technology yet.Not so much direct effects,I think but perhaps it informs peoples views on globalization.
This ongoing trade dispute seems part posturing,part substantial.
Let's hope it clears the air as a silver lining and provides a lesson to people in the medium term.
To my mind any slowdown in the global economy is a "good" thing if it gives us an unwitting extra year or two to gear up to the carbon free economy we are told we must see in.
And what percentage of the total able voting populace ACTUALLY turned out? The waffle about the "majority" only goes so far what you see that a minority of able voters actually votedI most definitely did vote leave, as a majority of the voter turnout did, and yet here we are nearly three years on going to the polls next Thursday to elect MEP's. I will be voting for the Brexit Party run by our Nigel. I have just down loaded the Brexit Party app onto my iPhone, and I am considering becoming a registered supporter. Thinking about the European elections of years gone by, I recall that I once voted for a Natural Law Party dude, apparently they were all proficient in yogic flying.
Let's see what the turnout is next week. By the way, I'll be voting for the Brexit Party.
Let's say the turnout is 40% and the BP have 40% of the vote, then it will be a minority of a minority. How much is this costing?
Why have the vote at all? It won't make the slightest difference.
If that happens, then that 16% of the electorate will crow that they have an undeniable mandate for a catastrophically stupid course of action - which Parliament will not agree to. This will oil the wheels of the Faragiste Great Brexit Betrayal* vehicle......... and probably usher in a leftwing government at the next election, after the collapse of the Tories.
[Cue Joss Ackland in Lethal Weapon 2: "Whiew's the dickhid naow?"]
*"Le Grand Trahison de Brexit"?
[QUOTE=exchemist;622917]"La Grande Traison du Brexit"
...thought you'd know better
[QUOTE=geordief;622918]Zut, j'ai fait une bêtise, c'est le Brexit, bien sûr!"La Grande Traison du Brexit"
...thought you'd know better
My French is fairly crap, in fact. It just amuses me that Farage has a French name - as does Mark "Gino" Francois. (My guess is Gino - who is half-Italian - got teased at school about how many reverse gears Italian tanks supposedly have, and that's what's made him so anti-EU today.)
| « Trump vs. Rep. leaders | RIP Corbyn » |
| Bookmarks |
Bookmarks |
