Forum menu
@molgrips: I've had exactly the same argument with a very left-wing (Cuba loving, Ché posters at 35, the lot) friend who voted leave. Whilst I accept the EU is less than ideal in many respects, the alternatives (USA...) are so much worse. But he, along with about 16m others still went through to cut his nose off to spite his face.
I did point out he can't be that left wing as his house (which he owned at the time) was once a council house, and was only his thanks to its previous occupiers taking advantage of a particularly divisive policy that the left wing idol Thatcher enacted. It seems those on the extreme left can pick and choose their philosophies just as much as those on the right. I guess some animals are more equal than others...
What I want to see, once all the shit truly hits the fan, is the lying shits responsible, brought to task for there actions. If we leave the UN as well, we can waterboard and torture the ****s.
Bike bouy.
There's plenty of big shitters on this website.
Their opinions are eye opening.
We don't need to worry everything will be fine apparently.
I ask them what they want specifically and never get an answer.
One way that this could and should be sorted is for the businesses who fund the Tory's and the unions that fund labour to tell their respective party leaders to stop ****ing about and get real, otherwise the plug gets pulled.
Neither have had much of an issue doing that in that past when it comes to serving their own interests. We've now hit a somewhat unique situation where both the unions and business's interests coincide to serve the best interests of the country, in the face of an absurdly self-harming policy by both the government and opposition*
When you've got the likes of John Redwood and John McDonnell in broad agreement on a policy you know you really are up shit creek
* The name 'opposition' is used figuratively in this instance and is not meant to denote any actual opposing taking place
Debate on this topic was destroyed when those self righteous types who voted Remain didn`t get their own way - they spat their dummies out and instantly declared anyone with a different opinion or view was thick, racist etc.
Debating with people like that is pointless.
Hence why others like myself visit this topic occasionally - see if its still dominated by the same people with the narrow minded view on it - and move on.
Keep moving..
You are right about the limited view.
Have the Brexiters announced this lovely weather we are having is part of the Brexit Dividend?
Debate on this topic was destroyed when those self righteous types who voted Remain didn`t get their own way – they spat their dummies out and instantly declared anyone with a different opinion or view was thick, racist etc.
Of course nobody pointed out flaws in logic, impossible solutions and genuine racism though.
You are free to explain how you think we will get out of this hole. Digby Jones was regailing us with tales about how an EU free UK would regain it's Mojo and be able to compete and expand because we got out Mojo back. Yes MOJO!!
Debating with people like that is pointless.
Hence why others like myself visit this topic occasionally – see if its still dominated by the same people with the narrow minded view on it – and move on.
Promise we won't call you racist or thick, just please give us some benefits of the great British brexit
Ok, we will settle for just one instance where we won't be worse off.
He won't.
He'll turn up in another couple of pages to have a gloat/moan at remainers for not getting behind Brexit/calling leavers stupid/racist.....
Has the people making millions out of Brexit been discussed yet, invest 900,000k in leave campaign, hedge a load of shares for when the markets tumble make millions.
Carole Cadwalladr had a jowly man explaining it all on her Twitter feed. If her claims were false surely someone would be suing her.
Promise we won’t call you racist or thick, just please give us some benefits of the great British brexit
The benefits to me are the same as the reasons that Corbyn wants out and as highlighted by molgrips a few posts ago. The EU gets in the way of the socialist agenda. That would be my reason for leaving but it is not worth the mess and decades of impact to many people to get there.
I am a remainer but If we were not already in the EU I wouldn't be voting to join.
The only reaction from every leave voter I've heard, when confronted with the escalating mountain of unanimous evidence that its going to be hugely damaging to all of us is:
"I wish they'd just get on with it!"
Not thick then? No, definitely not!
When faced with the question that I can either...
a) Punch you in the face really really hard
b) Not punch you in the face really really hard
I presume you'll go for option a.... and for gods sake can you get on with it?!
see if its still dominated by the same people with the narrow minded view on it
Well to be honest, now it's more like calling out the shit standard of government, regardless of remain or leave.
But there were many attempts to discuss the issue properly. We kept asking for constructive arguments in favour of leave, but nothing was offered beyond soundbites. So yes, we did get a bit sceptical.
I can see benefits of being able to have government invest in industries - I've been in favour of that for years, and I think the EU prevents it. There are strict rules on state aid, aren't there? This would be worth discussing, but we only have vague stuff about sovereignty which, as far as I'm concerned, was never an issue.
So please join in.
“I wish they’d just get on with it!”
And what the **** is "IT"?
"There’s plenty of big shitters on this website.
Their opinions are eye opening."
Here too https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/forum.asp?h=0&f=205
“I wish they’d just get on with it!”
The thing is, any attempt to educate people who think this way about the timescales and disruption required is countered with … "project fear mk2". And, of course… before we start… we need to decide what "it" is… but, just don't ask for any form of democratic oversight or mandate for "it", as that would be seen as "stalling"…
The thing is, any attempt to educate people who think this way about the timescales and disruption required is countered with … “project fear mk2”. And, of course… before we start… we need to decide what “it” is…
agreed
its why a 2nd referendum would probably still be for leave, its all about heart not head, theres stlill no plan for brexit other than, 'hope that the EU take pity on us at the last minute'
I can see benefits of being able to have government invest in industries – I’ve been in favour of that for years, and I think the EU prevents it.
It does nothing of the sort Molls. The Tory right aren't the only ones guilty of spending decades peddling anti-EU lies. Corbyn and the labour left have been equally as guilty of pushing their own agenda, with the same somewhat difficult relationship with the truth as Boris Johnsons.
What EU rules prevent is the kind of government subsidised dumping of steel by the Chinese government we're presently seeing,. It categorically does not prevent government investment in industry, or state ownership.
Like I said: when Iain Duncan Smith and Dianne Abbott are singing from the same hymn sheet we need to be very very worried
<div class="bbp-reply-author">mooman
<div class="bbp-author-role">
<div class="">Member</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="bbp-reply-content">Debate on this topic was destroyed when those self righteous types who voted Remain didn`t get their own way – they spat their dummies out and instantly declared anyone with a different opinion or view was thick, racist etc.
Debating with people like that is pointless.
Hence why others like myself visit this topic occasionally – see if its still dominated by the same people with the narrow minded view on it – and move on.
</div>
Well, come on then, regale us with your wisdom. What is it that you hope to achieve by leaving the EU, how will it benefit the British society as a whole, and why can't it be achieved within the framework of our (once) influential EU membership? Obviously we'll need some evidence to support any claims that are forthcoming, but then an intelligent chap like yourself wouldn't struggle to support his arguments with facts, would he?
As mooman has been unable to, Ill give a benefit of Brexit:
watching the Tories tear into each other as May looks on, utterly helpless:
oh & another resignation.......
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-44593215
The fact we don't have a government, when we arguably need it most, is cold comfort.
Unfortunately we don't have an opposition either
I can see benefits of being able to have government invest in industries – I’ve been in favour of that for years, and I think the EU prevents it. There are strict rules on state aid, aren’t there? This would be worth discussing, but we only have vague stuff about sovereignty which, as far as I’m concerned, was never an issue.
Going to have to pull you up there Molgrips.
The EU's stance on state aid would not prevent anyone from re-nationalising industries. I think the problem here is when industries in the UK, an example being the steel mill at Redcar could have been helped with state aid, the torys have pedaled the myth that "the EU's state aid rules prevent it."
The Tory's have time and again blamed the EU for their own actions, which funnily enough has led us to where we are today with Brexit. Does anyone think that there would be strict state aid rules with the likes of Germany and France being in the union? Would the banks have received those bailouts in the last financial crisis? Would Alstom,which was saved from bankruptcy in 2003 by the French Government happened? Also, the UK would have to triple the amount it spends on state aid to match the proportion of GDP which Germany spends on aid.
The EU has also never had a policy on privatisation. Now thats not to say that the EU is not a capitalist entity, part of its remit is to create a market, something that was influenced by the UK of all countries. But the EU is pushing policies that open the door to private providers and from 2023, all contracts to run rail services should be open to tender by public and private operators. However, in true EU style, there are exceptions, when authorities can prove the line is not “fit for competition”.
So what we should do is look at the two "reluctant" leavers here. Both may have voted remain, but both can see a prize to be had by leaving. May wants out of ECHR, you can't be in the EU without it, Corbyn wants a socialist utopia, which has been proven you can have whilst being in the EU.
Those on the left of Labour who voted to leave who were labouring under this myth, have given the right what it wants.
So tell, me which version of Britain offered by both leaders is really going to win out?
its why a 2nd referendum would probably still be for leave
Agreed. We need a mandate for an alternative to EU membership, or for retaining it. The whole "membership vs any contradictory set of alternatives" would, once again, likely result in rejection of membership. For what it's worth, I think a referendum to support a "Norway+Customs" type deal, with farming and fishing excluded, would easily beat EU membership in a referendum. A "cold and distant relationship with EU (including Ireland) and cosying up to the USA" wouldn't have a cat in hells chance of beating membership… but that's where we heading for.
I can see benefits of being able to have government invest in industries – I’ve been in favour of that for years, and I think the EU prevents it.
Whilst EU regs for State Aid are more stringent, they don't go away under WTO and chances are any future trading arrangements with partners are likely to include them - assuming that State Aid will "go away" under Brexit is a flawed assumption. My own experience with State Aid is that even Government Departments who put it in their contracts don't understand it and apply the rules inconsistently. On a previous job we took a £1m hit on a Government-funded contract because they gave us the money in one hand and a non-conforming contract in the other and it was only when we sought expert legal advice we had to take the hit.
Brexies racist? No, not the ones wearing Tommy Robinson tee-shirts at the recent march in London then - just knuckle-dragging inbreds.
Wasn't a "Norway" style deal rejected on the grounds that we become a "rule taker" ?
Also a Norway deal still leaves us with massive queues at the border for goods. Just like the ones at the Norway border.
Yes, but that won’t be a problem. All Norway’s Car producers seem to cope with it ok, without any issues.
and on state aid what are the top industries the government plans to give significant aid to?
I think a referendum to support a “Norway+Customs” type deal, with farming and fishing excluded, would easily beat EU membership in a referendum.
Perhaps, but if a referendum has remain and more than one other option on it, the leave vote would be split.
Kimbers wrote,
"its why a 2nd referendum would probably still be for leave"
Even Jamba realised that a 2nd ref would be remain, once some details were actually confirmed- the maths of it are pretty simple, the last referendum let everyone vote for their own fantasy brexit, a 2nd one would only let them vote for the real one.
Though if they ran another referendum today, who knows, since all the fantasy brexits still seem to be alive while we're no closer to the real one than we were in the year 2000.
That is why a re-run of the "membership vs anything else" referendum is being called for by just about nobody. "Membership vs an alternative plan" is the minimum required… "do you support this alternative deal to our current deal" is what is really required… but I don't see as possible now… work needed to commence to put the meat on a plan, before seeking a deal, two years ago, before triggering A50… no chance of having anything other than a vague can kicking fudge available to scrutinise before we leave now. We should still have the chance to say "you don't have a scooby doo what you're doing… abort!" somehow… I don't know how though…
I think that after the total shambles of the last couple of years we need a completely different referendum....
Should we disband the Houses of Parliament, do away with this whole ridiculous democracy lark altogether and hand over the logistics of running the country to someone like Amazon?
Yes
No
Debate on this topic was destroyed when those self righteous types who voted Remain didn`t get their own way – they spat their dummies out and instantly declared anyone with a different opinion or view was thick, racist etc.
Another Leave lie.
This was one of TMH's big assertions, that all the remainers were calling all the leavers thick, despite myself and several others explaining repeatedly that that wasn't what we were saying at all.
1) The voter demographics show very clearly that the lower someone's educational standard, the more likely they were to vote Leave. The more they were concerned about immigration, the more likely they were to vote Leave. The older they were, the more likely they were to vote Leave.
2) It would be unfair (and wildly inaccurate) to say that all the Leave voters are racists. However, the racists were certainly more likely to be leavers.
3) The electorate as a whole was ill-equipped to make an informed decision on the referendum vote, be they leave or remain supporters. The vast majority of people surely had little or no understanding of what they were voting for. Despite the leavers crowing "we knew what we were voting for," this is another lie, few people really did and fewer still understood the ramifications of what would happen if we did leave, preferring to jam their fingers in their ears and dismissing any discourse as "project fear" - an ad hom argument in all but name.
“its why a 2nd referendum would probably still be for leave”
Assuming nothing else has changed, that no-one has changed their minds and the referendum is run fairly, another referendumb would surely be in favour of remain. Two years have passed, some people who voted last time will no longer be alive and others will now be old enough to vote when they weren't before. With reference to my 'demographics' comments above, this alone would be sufficient to skew the vote in favour of remain.
And that's not the case, of course. People will have changed their minds over the last two years, we're generally a little more informed than we were last time. And I'll bet my bike that the number of leave voters who have changed their mind will exponentially outstrip the number of remain voters who regret their decision. And Leave know this of course, that's why they're shit scared of another referendum.
The elephant in the room here of course is, all this assumes a fair vote. My big fear is that in another referendum Aaron Banks and his cronies will get their chequebooks out again, Putin will fire up his botnet, the gutter press will have a sustained Something Something Foreigners campaign and before you know it we'll have lost again. And then we're properly humped.
The vote should also only be open only to British passport holders no matter where they live.
No foreign funding for either campaign must be allowed.
"I think the people in this country have had enough of referendums"
I'm still waiting for politicians to put the country's interests first. We have representative democracy for a reason, and the reason being that the population are not sufficiently informed to make decisions. I'm happy with that.
So are we all agreed that the answer to this is to go back to 19th century style suffrage for the educated and/or landowners only 😀 and then enact a program of soft eugenics, to weed out the idiots? We could go as far as giving the oiks voting rights, in exchange for taking part in decades worth of brutal fighting abroad over opium - Starship Troopers style - to thin their ranks out further. Then there will be more money in the pot for defence and health 😀
And I’ll bet my bike that the number of leave voters who have changed their mind will exponentially outstrip the number of remain voters who regret their decision.
I'm not so sure. People can be really quite intransigent in this kind of situation. I'd be concerned that people would vote the same way purely as to do otherwise would be to admit they made a mistake - that they had been taken for a ride.
@raybanwomble: Yes
I’m still waiting for politicians to put the country’s interests first. We have representative democracy for a reason, and the reason being that the population are not sufficiently informed to make decisions. I’m happy with that.
I've been saying this since before the referendum. A referendum has no place in a parliamentary democracy other than as an opinion poll, the electorate votes for representatives not policies.
I’m not so sure. People can be really quite intransigent in this kind of situation. I’d be concerned that people would vote the same way purely as to do otherwise would be to admit they made a mistake – that they had been taken for a ride.
Oh, sure. The vast majority of people - certainly the ones who are being vocal about it, anyway - won't have changed their minds, they'll just become ever more entrenched as their world view is threatened. Look at this very thread for example. I was talking purely about the ones who have, there will surely have been a bigger shift towards Remain rather than away from it. It's a minority, but I've seen a lot more Leaver remorse than Remain (in fact, I'm struggling offhand to think of anyone who voted Leave and subsequently changed their minds, aside from those who believe the "we won, you lost, get over it" mantra).
The vote should also only be open only to British passport holders no matter where they live.
Err, no. The vote should be open to all of those who live in any of the countries/regions/dependencies that would be leaving the EU.
People can be really quite intransigent in this kind of situation. I’d be concerned that people would vote the same way purely as to do otherwise would be to admit they made a mistake – that they had been taken for a ride.
(below nicked from YouGov site, link below)
Do people still want to go ahead with Brexit?
The main question many people ask is whether people still want Brexit or have voters changed their minds? This simple sounding question is actually a little more nuanced than you may think.
On one hand, public opinion has moved a little against Brexit. Our regular tracking question on whether the vote to leave the EU was the right or wrong decision now consistently finds slightly more people think that Brexit was the wrong decision. This small lead has been consistent throughout 2018.
However, just because people think Brexit is the wrong decision, it doesn’t necessarily mean they think it should be reversed. They do not. When we ask what people think the government should do about leaving the EU, just over half (53%) think that it should go ahead with Brexit, mostly on its current course (42%) though 11% would prefer a softer Brexit. A fifth (21%) think that the government should call a fresh referendum instead, while 13% would prefer them just to halt Brexit altogether.
(source https://yougov.co.uk/news/2018/06/23/eu-referendum-two-years/)
So (according to that poll) people don't like the decision, don't think the government is doing a good job of it but still think it should carry on as is. Does not compute.
I think there's a strong probability that a second ref would generate the same result, only stronger. A large proportion of people aren't really engaged and hardly care but would like to get it over with. They would likely vote leave.
Of course, it doesn't matter how many times people vote for unicorns, there still aren't any unicorns!
For many, Brexit is still an easy answer to the complex problems the country faces
The government & press has gone to huge effort to keep peddling that myth, bonkers, but its where we are.
😱
😡
🤬
🤯