EU Referendum – are you in or out?

You are guessing incorrectly

The referendum (see what I did there) had a significantly detrimental impact on my life in 2016. But one person’/misfortune should not be allowed to overrule the decision of the the majority. The would be extremely selfish.

Are you sure that your final line should not end with your best interests?

Edukator isn’t the Finnish one a trial of a subset of the long term unemployed ? 2000 people ? BFM poll below.

Le pen 25
Fillon 22
Macron 21
Hamon 15
Melenchon 3.5
Dupont ?

I don’t need to persuade you

It’s the 17,410,742 that were persuaded that matter.

So you still don’t have an answer then? We’re leaving Europe because yay numbers?

C’mon man, it’s surely not a difficult question.

The referendum (see what I did there) had a significantly detrimental impact on my life in 2016.

Any business worth doing in H1 2016 is worth doing in H2 2016 and moving in Q4 2019 if necessary, no ? EU cost my business a huge amount 2014-15, all significant players are now outside EU jurisdiction, billions in AUM. I tried to get mine moved to the US but was told regulatory oversight would still be EU based on firm’s HQ. What’s doubly galling is that EU investors bypass rules by investing via Lichtenstein.

The referendum (see what I did there) had a significantly detrimental impact on my life in 2016. But one person’/misfortune should not be allowed to overrule the decision of the the majority. The would be extremely selfish.

But it’s not one person’s misfortune is it? It’s on average everyone’s misfortune to the tune of 4-6%, and as I’ve said already, that really underplays the far more acute effect that it will have on an awful lot of people.

By all means roll over and let Jamby tickle your tummy, but don’t be surprised if many of us do not, for the reasons I’ve already clearly stated.

If we’re in the business of not challenging what’s not right, I assume you’re wholly happy with all of Trump’s decisions so far, as he won an election, so nothing he does should be questioned? It’ll be interesting if you aren’t, given that he did at least win an election, which is not what the non-binding advisory referendum in June was. Far from it, in fact.

I am not rolling over, I am respecting the decision and getting on with things. I would suggest that you do the same. We are leaving the EU. Get ready, that is not going away..

I am also studying how the Brexshiteers won. This is important if we are to prevent a repetition. That’s practical, whining and obstructing democracy isn’t.

C’mon man, it’s surely not a difficult question.

Ccougar, we both know that whatever reasons anyone gave, they wouldn’t be good enough to justify leaving the EU to you. That’s fine, you’re entitled to your opinion, and I fully respect it, but I’m allowed to have an opinion too.

Fortunately we didn’t just ask you and me, we asked forty six and a half million people a pretty simple binary question about whether they wanted to stay, or leave, of which about 3/4 could be arsed to have an opinion – and the majority agreed with me, and the minority agreed with you.

Move on man

I am not rolling over, I am respecting the decision

No decision was made. An advisory referendum, fought on grossly misleading lines, delivered a result for consideration. Nothing more has happened. You can accept May et al trying to tell you otherwise, but that won’t change this subtle fact.

getting on with things.

I too am getting on with things. It is possible to both campaign against this madness and also to get on with things at the same time.

Move on man

Would you have moved on were the result reversed, or if there is a second referendum that reverses it? After all, the people would have spoken, even if some had changed their minds.

Well good luck with life/work and with overturning the democratic process.

Well good luck with life/work and with overturning the democratic process.

Your first version was better #ninjaedit

I’m not campaigning to overturn the democratic process, as I’ve already made clear. We’ve had a glorified opinion poll and a lot of waffling by some people in positions requiring far greater skill than they appear to possess (Davis et al., I’m talking about you). We’ve also had a legal battle to ensure that democratic process is actually followed. But, and this is the important bit, the democratic process surrounding this has yet to begin. I don’t doubt a lot of the rabid Tories will try to undermine this when it happens, as is their wont, but don’t be mistaken into thinking that legally or democratically we’re under any more obligation to leave the EU now than we were on 22nd June. I’ll concede that the referendum definitely raises a moral requirement for the government to have a grown up discussion about the pros and cons of EU membership, but it has no legal standing whatsoever, certainly not to actually go through with a self-styled hard brexit.

THM – always remember that the whole point of the democratic process is to overturn last democratic decision. Otherwise we’d elect MPs / PMs for life.

Ninfan – that vote was in the past. It’s the next vote that matters. And the one after that. And so on. Democracy didn’t suddenly stop at 10pm last June 23rd – time to fight the next battle. And if that is lost then the one after that.
And do stop harping on about soon to be ancient history like a broken record.

zokes is right.

I’m not campaigning to overturn the democratic process, as I’ve already made clear.

You are. Thats clear.

But keep believing that stuff if it makes you feel better (in ignoring the result. )

Being honest would be better

Democracy didn’t suddenly stop at 10pm last June 23rd –

Let’s keep it that way then

You are. Thats clear.

But keep believing that stuff if it makes you feel better (in ignoring the result. )
It’s very clear THM as you well know.
Referendum advisory.
Final decison by parliament.

You may want to twist it all you want but lets not let that get in the way of the actual facts.
#alternatefacts

a pretty simple binary question

Only an idiot would call it a simple question. Sorry for the passive aggression but it’s true.

The democratic process has been stitched up.

And personally, I won’t move on. Our country is being screwed as I type this, it will be being screwed for many years after this. My rights are being eroded. My country is being diminished. The democratic process surely demands my point of view is listened to when this is what’s at stake?

We all know the basis of the referendum. The government laid it out clearly and sent it out to every household. It’s is disingenuous in the extreme to ignore that. That is the alternative fact.

The final decision will be made by parliament. It requires an Act to be passed. It will be.

So at no point are we trying to subvert democracy (that was what the PM was doing) we are free to lobby and petition MP’s up until the vote – they will vote as the wish. One step at a time.

Democracy requires an informed electorate. Onthis as on many other issues there was a misinformed electorate with outright lies from many campaigners and a 20 year campaign of lies from the majority of the press

Define “informed” – give the number of factual inaccuracies that you post here, you might be ruling yourself out. Be careful what you wish for.

It’s is disingenuous in the extreme to ignore that.

I would never have ignord it. It should have been the starting point for a proper debate and constructive *democratic* process.

Democracy should not be rule by plebiscite. That’s utterly insane. As TJ says, and I have said many times – democracy only gives good results if the public take their responsibilty seriously and learn about the issues. They didn’t – we know this. So there’s no point in holding up majority vote as some kind of golden rule.

That’s what parliament is for.

No one, no one was saying this before the result.

It’s disingenuous to say so now and you know it.

But as the Brexshiteers have noted It doesn’t matter. It’s happening…. get used to it

Next step, stop the plebs voting????

A plebiscite is the purest form of democracy, it is just incredibly expensive, so representative democracy is a sensible compromise. But it is perfectly sensible for major issues to be settled by plebiscite and if you are a believer in the concept of the “wisdom of crowds”, a very good one.

Our country is being screwed as I type this, it will be being screwed for many years after this. My rights are being eroded. My country is being diminished. The democratic process surely demands my point of view is listened to when this is what’s at stake?

Our country will be substantially better off as a result of Leave. This will be fully apparent by 2020. The country listened to your point of view during the Referendum campaign with extra lashings of Armageddon for good measure. It then voted.

Next step, stop the plebs voting????

Nope, I want us plebs to get to vote between two fully formed options, not just “status quo” vs loads of different ill defined options.

So a vote once we can see the terms of our exit from the EU.

1) except exit terms (these will need to be defined for other countries to agree to them at some point).
2) ask our partners in the EU for us to keep current terms (they can of course tell us to do one at this point).

In the meantime, both MPs and public alike should be pressuring the government towards trying to get exit terms, and a future relationship with the EU once we leave, that is in the interest of as much of the UK population (and Brits abroad) as possible.

And would..

Shall we start with a little test on “membership of” versus “access to”?
We can disqualify anyone who cannot accurately define the Norway model?

Etc….

Or “in” or “part of” the single market.

Etc…

That’s you out.

Next….

You guys might just be on to something here

The problem with a second referendum is that you completely screw up your negotiating position – it basically a back door way of saying we will remain.

That’s the intention mefty. It’s just that people don’t have the balls/honesty to admit it

Lib Dems aside. They at least are up front about it.

We all know the basis of the referendum.

Indeed we do. It was a non-binding advisory poll of the population, in other jurisdictions known as a plebiscite. Just as it’s not Jamby’s fault that Boris stood in front of a great big lie on a bus, it’s not my fault that Cameron was more than slightly misleading on the legal standing of the vote. In Jamby’s defence, his side won the vote, regardless of the various nefarious means of garnering support it employed. In my defence, the legal significance of that vote isn’t enhanced simply because Cameron told porkies himself over what a result one way or the other would actually mean.

You are. Thats clear.

It’s only clear if you’re being deliberately obtuse, or a moron. I’ll give you the courtesy of deciding which of these two categories your current debating style leaves you in.

Neither thanks.

Go through any post oherpes ore 23 June 2016 and tell me which one was talking about the vote being merely a one off to be followed by a series of other votes. Tell me where you reminded everyone that this was for advisory purposes only, that if it was a remain that we would still be awaiting more bills to clarify and referendums on the basis of us remaining etc..

Its BS and you know it, be honest FSS.

In the spirit of the EU, bon nuit

The problem with a second referendum is that you completely screw up your negotiating position – it basically a back door way of saying we will remain.

Sophy Ridge pointed that out to Salmond today. EU guaranteed to offer a non-dealboth Remainers and Leavers reject which guarantees we stay a member. Job done from EU’s perspective.

Personally I don’t mind a second Referendum on the basis A50 is irreversable and WTO is the default in 2019.

Anyway Parliament is getting a vote on A50 and will get a debate on the White Paper (April/May ?). Then a Parliamentary debate/vote on the final deal too.

People need to get their heads round the fact the EU is in a weak position. Coming into Dutch, French and German elections parties will have to discuss how they will replace the UK’s budget contributions and what happens if there is no deal and WTO tariffs. All during this time the EU is a passenger.

Anyway Parliament is getting a vote on A50 and will get a debate on the White Paper (April/May ?).

The debate has to be before A50 is declared otherwise it’s pointless.

Then a Parliamentary debate/vote on the final deal too.

Fairly pointless as it’s that deal or the hard brexit one really.

People need to get their heads round the fact the EU is in a weak position. Coming into Dutch, French and German elections parties will have to discuss how they will replace the UK’s budget contributions

Given how small the actual amount is in real terms it’s not that tough a choice really.

Given how small the actual amount is in real terms it’s not that tough a choice really

Eh? We are the second biggest net contributor (only nine of the 27 are net contributors)

Ccougar, we both know that whatever reasons anyone gave,
…
blah blah blah
…

C’mon man, it’s surely not a difficult question.

Democracy requires an informed electorate.

Democracy bypasses an ill-informed electorate.

Our country will be substantially better off as a result of Leave.

Now we’re getting somewhere. How / why?

It’s 314 million pounds per member for the UK’s net contribution. (8.5 Billion/27 nations)
In perspective

Germany recorded a €18.5bn budget surplus in the first half of 2016, beating expectations and giving chancellor Angela Merkel’s plenty of financial wiggle room ahead of next year’s crucial parliamentary elections.

https://www.ft.com/content/a33b0456-05b3-3ffa-b0f2-cf64bc5bb659

It’s 314 million pounds per member for the UK’s net contribution. (8.5 Billion/27 nations)
In perspective

But only nine (including the UK) are net contributors, so it’s more like a 10% increase in EU contributions for each of them to fill the gap

and what is that as a proportion of their GDP?
What savings will the UK make from not having the UK there?
These numbers are actually small when you look at them at a whole of government level. One of the ways Leave tried to scare people by misrepresenting the figures and trying to make them sound much bigger than they were in many ways.

Its BS and you know it, be honest FSS.

No, it’s the clear legal standing of the plebiscite. As I have already stated, that this wasn’t discussed before the referendum is no more my fault than the big bus lie is Jamby’s fault. Neither diminishes the result nor the implications of that result. The big bus lie probably contributed to an awful lot of people voting leave expecting something they were never going to get, the disingenuous implication that the vote was binding probably also influenced voters into believing they would receive something they still have no more legal right to than they did in June 22nd.

As I have said, morally it’s a lot more murky, but legally it’s crystal clear.

And I’ll settle for deliberate obtuseness.