Brexit #2

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Raggytash
Date: 17 Aug 18 - 06:46 AM

A report today on Buzzfeed relates to various aspects of leaving the EU without a deal and apparently government papers will be released over the next few weeks.

I wonder if any of the pro-brexit lobby on here even consider one of the items on the list. I somehow doubt it.

Before I am asked did I consider them I will say they would not be issues had we voted to remain within the EU and this the question is negated.

Link

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 08:51 PM

There are various facets to your logical fallacy, Nigel, but the main one is that we haven't had brexit yet, as far as I know. :-)

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: j0_77
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 08:30 PM

My gears are squealing again!

CIPD is picking and choosing which jobs it claims lack applicants. Typically these sort of numpty professions lack applicants EVERYWHERE, including China, Russia, Africa, oh and the rest of the world. It's a BS call, again sourced in the fake news sphere resting somewhere in the east ... hint hint.

I will not let #LyingUKIP sugar coat their lies onto unsuspecting good people, and I shall at every opportunity debunk the St Petersburg Russian lie factory whenever I see it.

Including here on Mudcat.

Because I have dozens of close family living in the UK and the ROI.

Now! as BrokesIt is the Law there is nothing that can be done, this side of Parliamentary action, to stop it. Best I can hope for is that Britain survives the outcome whole and undamaged, even if it results in Ire-brokesIt as well.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 07:20 PM

Not a logical fallacy at all. Although there may be a phrase which might describe the possibility of it being one.

Yet another unintended consequence of Brexit has been raised (again) today.
"The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) said the number of applicants per vacancy had fallen since last summer across all levels of skilled jobs, and said shortages were forcing many companies to raise wages."

If Brexit is causing a rise in wages, how do you square that with the insistence that membership of the EU, and EU immigration was not supressing wages?

The only logic required is the logic of the marketplace, of supply and demand.
Looking at available labour being the commodity supplied, if there is a shortage of available labour, and demand is constant, the cost of the labour will rise.
If there is a glut of available labour, and demand is constant, the cost of labour will fall (Although it can be propped up by 'minimum wage' rules).

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 12:52 PM

Propter hoc. My iPad "corrected" propter to an English word and I didn't have my reading specs on. There is no obligation to put Latin phrases in italics. That's one hundred percent my choice. Anyway, logical fallacy, Nigel. You're not getting away with it.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 10:29 AM

Logical fallacy, Nigel. Post hoc ergo proper hoc.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 10:10 AM

From: Raggytash
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 08:07 AM
Yet another unintended consequence of Brexit has been raised (again) today.
"The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) said the number of applicants per vacancy had fallen since last summer across all levels of skilled jobs, and said shortages were forcing many companies to raise wages."

If Brexit is causing a rise in wages, how do you square that with the insistence that membership of the EU, and EU immigration was not supressing wages?

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Raggytash
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 08:12 AM

It would seem that more and more people are having such serious concerns about Brexit that they are no changing their minds on which way they would vote if a referendum was held today.

This is not at all surprising as we learn more and more about the potential negative impacts that Brexit may have.

The report suggests that up to 100 constituencies have now changed.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/11/more-than-100-pro-leave-constituencies-switch-to-remain

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Raggytash
Date: 13 Aug 18 - 08:07 AM

Yet another unintended consequence of Brexit has been raised (again) today.

"The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) said the number of applicants per vacancy had fallen since last summer across all levels of skilled jobs, and said shortages were forcing many companies to raise wages."

Any good news yet?

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/aug/13/companies-brexit-supply-shock-fewer-eu-citizens-arrive-uk

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: j0_77
Date: 12 Aug 18 - 11:23 AM

From Quora

https://www.quora.com/Why-are-British-politicians-slow-in-completing-Brexit-as-the-GBP-is-suffering

"Why are British politicians slow in completing Brexit, as the GBP is suffering?


Answered Fri

Because a small cadre of the #LyingUKIP, the news group “The Exres", “The Telegraph” etc are heavily invested in shorting the British pound. It will continue to fall until March 19th 2019. Then on the next day it well rebound and those #LyingUKIP and their chums will be making a killing on the backs of the chumps that actually have to pay them for #BrokesIt, IOW the average person in the UK is PAYING for the whole self destructive catastrophe.

Hope that helps"

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 12 Aug 18 - 04:50 AM

Thanks Dave, I thought so too.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Aug 18 - 03:07 AM

Very good article, BWM. Thanks for the link.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 11 Aug 18 - 05:22 PM

It's been pointed out to me that I mis-read the opening paragraph in Gavin Esler's piece - he was not. Leave supporter, he was a Remainer but, following the referendum, he accepted the result without demur. However, he has now changed his mind and no longer accepts the result - his piece sets out the reasons for this change.

Just thought I'd put this admission of my own error 'out there' in order to 'head off at the pass' anyone who might come along being a smart-arse and pointing it out

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Aug 18 - 12:52 PM

"And Saudi are bankrolling us by buying our fighter jets by the dozen"
All to help the SAUDIS the BRITS AND ISRAEL keep the peace
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 11 Aug 18 - 12:18 PM

A very interesting article here from Gavin Esler, a former Leave supporter, on why he's now changed his mind and supports Remain.

I'm sure even the most rabid Brexiteer should be able to understand the incontestable logic and truth of Mr. Esler's piece.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Aug 18 - 07:08 PM

And Saudi are bankrolling us by buying our fighter jets by the dozen. Unfortunately, that trade doesn't civilise them into not chopping off people's heads by the hundred per annum in public squares, or bombing the living shite out of Yemeni civilians. Oh, and a couple of dozen kids were legit targets because those damn rebels "used them as human shields..." Yes, we know how to bankroll all the wrong things. Whatever we bankroll in the EU is chicken feed in comparison, and at least it does some good...

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: peteglasgow
Date: 10 Aug 18 - 03:08 PM

scotland is in the same as yersel' david. forced to pay for things they never vote for. hopefully, they will soon have a chance to absent themselves from the madness of tory rule. unless we move, we don't have that opportunity

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 10 Aug 18 - 02:20 PM

I am bankrolling Trident, HS2, the damned military adventures abroad that politicians of all stripes seem to keen on. Where is my referendum on that?

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Aug 18 - 01:32 PM

"No, we would continue bankrolling the EU. The 'it' referred to the EU."
If leaving, with all its pitfalls, was something that was fit for the electorate to decide, why shouldn't "bankrolling the E.U." be equally a voting matter
Maybe you are afraid that that is not the way the electorate will see it?
It seems to me that you now want to decide on behalf of the people
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Aug 18 - 01:28 PM

Oh well.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 10 Aug 18 - 12:38 PM

No, we would continue bankrolling the EU. The 'it' referred to the EU.
Maybe I should have said "EU" instead of "it", but I thought the context would make that clear.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Aug 18 - 12:22 PM

Er, Nigel, you said that we'd be able to bankroll the forty billion, etc. That does appear to assume that the forty billion pot is actually there to bankroll. You appear to have misconstrued your own post. :-)

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 10 Aug 18 - 10:11 AM

The Brexiters would never agree to another vote because, as I pointed out elsewhere, they're bricking it that, now everyone can see the complete donkey's breakfast that the government are making of the negotiations, they'd lose. For god's sake, they don't even like parliament being given debate and a vote!

When the Cowardly Bullingdon Boy abandoned his responsibilities and ran away, and was replaced by Theresa May - a leading member of the Remain campaign - I told my wife that I didn't believe Brexit would ever happen, that she would engineer a situation whereby we would remain in the EU. The closer and closer we get to 29/3/19, the more I think my prediction could come true.

Please God, make it happen and save us from The Insanity.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Aug 18 - 09:59 AM

Surely, now the implications of Brexit have now becom obvious, it would be the democratic thing to ask the minority of the population to ask to vote again thereby not only giving them a chance to decide whether they had made a mistake, but possibly encouraging those who didn't vote to decide whether they would like a second chance to do so.
That way, the Brexiteers really could claim that this is the will of the people rather than dragging a dead horse over the finishing line
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 10 Aug 18 - 09:52 AM

From: Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 10 Aug 18 - 09:17 AM

So Nigel thinks that there's a forty billion pot sitting around waiting to be reallocated when we crash out in economic disarray. Well I really have heard it all now.

No, I didn't say that. I only stated that we wouldn't be paying out forty billion pounds, but we would pay much more due to our continued membership, if we do not leave.

My response was to a comment (which I quoted) about the results if we ditched Brexit (so NOT crashing out).

Please try to read what I say before giving your own totally misconstrued view of it.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 10 Aug 18 - 09:47 AM

What really irks me about Nigel's position, and that of similar people, is his use of "we". By "we" he means British people, all British people, and no other people. But this is a wholly artificial grouping. No possible "we" includes both me and Nigel. I pay money in taxes, and some is reallocated by the UK government, and a much smaller amount goes to the EU. The EU allocates a far higher proportion to people I have an affinity with than the UK government. And those people have various nationalities, the thing they have in common with me is that they have, or they aspire to, an education. Nationality doesn't come into it. In my view people should be able to choose their own nationalities on the basis of shared values.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Aug 18 - 09:17 AM

So Nigel thinks that there's a forty billion pot sitting around waiting to be reallocated when we crash out in economic disarray. Well I really have heard it all now.

DMcG, I really do think that most leavers would be, if not deliriously happy, deliriously secretly relieved if brexit failed to happen, but they'd never admit it, of course. They know deep down how bad things are going to be. All they currently have is Project Pie-In-The-Sky. We're going to reach a point in the next few months at which we'll be able to conclude that only the truly insane still support brexit.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Raggytash
Date: 10 Aug 18 - 06:42 AM

An interesting article on the BBC webpages today showing how the Brexit vote varied between the differing age groups. Well worth a read.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45098550

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Aug 18 - 06:16 AM

Interesting piece of information from this morning’s Iris Times
Bexit at any price eh?
Jim Carroll

UK URGED GOVERNMENT NOT TO FOCUS ON BREXIT RISK TO PEACE
London asked Dublin to reduce emphasis on potential threat to Belfast Agreement
Request came in meeting between figures from the two governments
FIACH KELLY
Deputy Political Editor

The British government asked Ireland to ease off on its emphasis on peace in Northern Ireland as one of the main issues at stake in the Brexit talks.
The request, from representatives of the UK administration, was made in recent months because British prime minister Theresa May was said to be hurt and concerned her credentials as a guarantor of the Belfast Agreement were not being taken seriously, sources disclosed.
However, Dublin did not accede to the call because of a view that the peace process should remain central to the Brexit negotiations.
The revelation comes as Ms May steps up preparations for the UK leaving the bloc without a deal. She is reported to have instructed her officials to make contingencies in such a scenario to ensure the Border is free of customs checks and police.
It is understood the request came in meetings between figures from the Irish and UK governments as Ms May was preparing to secure the backing of her Cabinet for her vision of a future relationship with the European Union after Brexit.

PREFERRED RELATIONSHIP
The UK government published its White Paper on its preferred future relationship last month, which set out a common customs area between the EU and UK, as well as Britain remaining aligned to the European single market for goods.
However, its key measures have been met with opposition from the EU. Michel Barnier, the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator, has also said that
the integrity of the EU single market - and the accompanying commitment to the free movement of goods, services, people and capital - must be respected.
On the message from the British government on the emphasis on peace and the Irish Border, a source said: “Successive Irish and British governments have protected a hard-won peace in Northern Ireland and we need to make sure that continues, regardless of Brexit.” This includes a need for no hard border.
Another Dublin figure said the UK government felt that the peace process and Irish Border were being seen as mostly of concern to “nationalists, Dublin and the EU”, but were equally a concern of unionists and Ms May’s minority Conservative administration, which has a confidence-and-supply agreement with the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP).
Stepping up preparations
In a letter to members of the Conservative Party in recent days, Ms May said she “remained clear that no deal is better than a bad deal - and we are stepping up our ‘no deal’ preparations”.
Among her commitments, Ms May said: “There will be no hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland. We will remain one United Kingdom with a single internal market.”
She said the two options on offer from the EU - a “standard” free trade agreement “with Northern Ireland staying in the customs union and parts of the single market” or UK membership of the customs union and. single market - are “unacceptable”.
The wording of the so-called backstop arrangement - which would guarantee no hard border even in a no deal Brexit scenario - is one of the main sticking points in EU-UK talks, which Ms May said have reached an “im-passe”.
The EU has said that without a backstop, there can be no withdrawal agreement.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Aug 18 - 05:46 AM

" we would be bankrolling it "
We certainly wouldn't be using it to replace our lost industries necessery for our "standing on our own two feet"
There is no plan whatever to forge a new Britain, just a scrabble around to find who were will depend on next
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 10 Aug 18 - 05:20 AM

Why would it cost us anything if we ditched brexit right now? Everybody would be happy, we wouldn't have to pay the forty billion, there'd be no fines to pay... OK, all that backslapping and the consequent redness of skin could mean increased expenditure on pots of E45...

But then we wouldn't be paying the 40 billion to EU, instead we would be bankrolling it (or a large part of it) for evermore.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 10 Aug 18 - 02:06 AM

Everybody would be happy, Steve? You may be forgetting one or two people, there.

Joking aside, I think the biggest costs would be due to civil unrest, financially and more important politically.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Aug 18 - 04:19 PM

Why would it cost us anything if we ditched brexit right now? Everybody would be happy, we wouldn't have to pay the forty billion, there'd be no fines to pay... OK, all that backslapping and the consequent redness of skin could mean increased expenditure on pots of E45...

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 09 Aug 18 - 04:17 PM

So, now it seems that Russia funded the LeaveEU campaign.

Russian deal offered to Arron Banks in Brexit run-up

Happy with that chaps? Or we going see spin the likes of which has not been seen before?

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Raggytash
Date: 09 Aug 18 - 03:10 PM

MikeL re your post

"Has anyone investigated what it will cost us if we decide to stay at this late hour?? I suspect that it could cost us more than if we walk away?."

This is the first time I have heard this mentioned and to be honest not something I had considered.

I am curious to know why you think this situation may arise.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Aug 18 - 01:45 PM

There's a bit of a difference between deciding to stay in at this late stage (very desirable and a solution the EU would be certain to happily embrace) and trying to get back in once we're out. For a start it would take years, if not decades, of bureaucratic wrangling and extremely divisive domestic politics. Second, the UK would have rapidly become severely damaged goods by dint of our disastrous exit and would be a far less attractive addition. The new Greece. In other words, once we're out, we're out.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Aug 18 - 01:36 PM

Correction: lowest level THIS year. I misread a headline. Sorry!

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Aug 18 - 11:28 AM

Then of course the the cost of cleaning the egg of the faces of the Brexiteers!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: j0_77
Date: 09 Aug 18 - 11:19 AM

Well MikeL2 since #LyingNigelFartage with his nasty filthy mouth peed off mostly everybody in the EU, they are unlikely to want the UK back in. And that is quite a shame. How could one POS get away with what he did/still does, while most people in the UK are neutral towards it?

Then there is the #LyingUKIP and its minions to consider. On Quora Russian trolls pretend to be those and continue the nastiness with more new lies.

When I reflect on the needless murder of MP Cox, I think it best the UK and the EU to part ways in order that #LyingNigelFartage gets what's coming to him. A more despicable dirt bag there isn't this side of hell.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: MikeL2
Date: 09 Aug 18 - 10:08 AM

hi

Has anyone investigated what it will cost us if we decide to stay at this late hour?? I suspect that it could cost us more than if we walk away?.

Just thinking...

Cheers

Mike

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Aug 18 - 06:24 AM

I see that the pound has soared down to its lowest level against the euro and dollar in a year over fears of a no-deal Brexit.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Aug 18 - 06:41 PM

"I am voting for him to be the next Prime Minister of everything!"

Why, that's very grapefruit of you and you'll never see what I'll buy you!

"Steve Shaw Mudcat August 18 2018."

Unfortunately, you may have to wait a while for my thoughts on the 18th. You never know, I may have become a rampant Nigelesque or Keefie clone by then. We all have our nightmares, you know... ;-)

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: j0_77
Date: 07 Aug 18 - 12:09 PM

Well because Steve Shaw has again hit the nail on the head, I am voting for him to be the next Prime Minister of everything!

'"Sacred shitless" sounds like the deification of a bad bout of constipation. Actually I think I'd be scared shitless of a bout of sacred shitlessness. I'll have a rethink and let you know.' Steve Shaw Mudcat August 18 2018.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Aug 18 - 10:58 AM

A friend crossing with us from Stranraer to Larne with a boatload of raucous Welsh Rugby supporters commented wryly and loudly "The feller who did most damage to British culture was the one who persuaded the Welsh that they could sing"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: peteglasgow
Date: 07 Aug 18 - 10:56 AM

we don't need another referendum, we need another general election with a labour party showing as much commitment to remaining as they , quite rightly, do to the destruction of our country's public services. for me , the latter is much more important to our future. if we looked after everyone in our countries and not just the wealthy, then we wouldn't be in this ridiculous brexit mess

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 07 Aug 18 - 10:30 AM

Wales, now there is somewhere to talk about

We already are. See the music section for Eisteddfod

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: The Sandman
Date: 07 Aug 18 - 10:13 AM

Wales, now there is somewhere to talk about

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Aug 18 - 06:32 AM

"You seem to forget we've recently had just that. "
No I do not
Scotland acquiesced to British rule - Ireland never has - the Scots Gaelic culture was more or less killed off - the Irish never has been
Acceptance of English domination has been a part of Scottish life for many centuries - Irish history is full of wars for independence
Scotland became part of Britain via the deliberate and extremely brutal destruction of its national and cultural identity
I believe Scotland to be equally a separate country won by conquest and I should hope that one day it will decide to break with England but that will take more time and will depend on something more than a referendum
There are signs that Brexit has made enormous steps to doing that
You might have mentioned Wales of course
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 07 Aug 18 - 05:51 AM

Correct, the EU, as in many instances, was fighting our corner.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Aug 18 - 05:51 AM

"So, as the leavers have had to wait forty years for a reconsideration, why do remainers expect one almost immediately?"

Two things. Remain won by miles in the seventies, effectively putting the thing to bed. But you lot just wouldn't shut up (as is your right, of course, a right that some of you leavers would now deny the rest of us). By dint of that you've caused discontent both in this country and in the EU for decades, refusing to become a constructive partner. You won by a sliver in 2016, splitting the country down the middle in the most divisive political manoeuvre this country has seen since the war. I'd call that a significant difference. Second, as I've said, more has changed in the last two years than in the last forty. China now has a dictator for life, Putin is a hooligan and a protectionist moron has been installed in the White House. I can't think of a better time to reaffirm our membership of the EU. David Carter has the best solution. We need a coalition of the willing to restore sanity and ditch this bloody stupid and suicidal project. Sod referendums.