Brexit #2

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Aug 18 - 05:13 AM

BWM has expressed his opinions on why Leavers voted Leave.
I do not think any of that is true. Apparantly I am not allowed to say that, but it remains my opinion.

It is a sad day for the forum if one side can request that opinions from the other side are deleted.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 30 Aug 18 - 11:07 AM

May seems to be rattling her begging bowl in places like Nigeria, asking for a share of their finance industry. Which seems as I remember to consist of people running 419 scams.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 30 Aug 18 - 09:46 AM

"We have conflicting predictions of the outcome of leaving. We do not even know what deal we will get."

And there, gentlemen, in two short sentences, is the admission of the Brexiter's stupidity - they voted for something without the faintest idea about what they were voting for. Not a clue about what the outcome would be. Gullible fools sucked in by sound bites, slogans on buses, and blond Bullingdon-Boy buffoons parroting "Take Are Cuntry Back" at the end of every sentence he uttered.

And, as the whole debacle crashes around their ears, with the PM and her ministers scuttling around the world rattling their begging-bowls, more and more businesses indicating their intention to desert the U.K. in favour of EU Member-States, they continue to defend the indefensible. You couldn't make it up!

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Aug 18 - 05:02 AM

"That sounds like disastrous news "
Wellll!
Do you honestly believe any political party could survive a dream-team leadership like that
Not only digging their own grave but also making their wn funeral arrangements
Bring 'm on I say
Mind you - I believe Moggie's Nanny still packs a lethal punch
Jim

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Aug 18 - 04:56 AM

It could, but no-one took it that way and certainly not the markets.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Raggytash
Date: 30 Aug 18 - 04:51 AM

"You may not have been told of possible 'negative effects' by the Leave campaign..................."

You are quite correct Nigel I should have made myself clearer. I forgot that I am dealing with pedants.

Today Michael Barnier has suggested that the UK could get a bespoke deal with the EU unlike any other. On the face of it that sounds like a positive note ............ however it could also mean that a deal we were offered is worse than any other deal.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Aug 18 - 04:31 AM

I don't know about anyone else but I cannot recall being informed, prior to the referendum, that leaving the EU would have a negative financial effect on me or any other person in the UK.

I do. That was the main focus of the Remain case.

when no-one denies that there would be costs, especially to us, are our politicians, and for the current government I do think BWM's description is apposite, do the dumbfuck's persist in doing it??

It is a medium to long term thing, not a short term hit.

We have conflicting predictions of the outcome of leaving . We do not even know what deal we will get. The predictions from Remain about the immediate effect of a Leave vote have all proved wrong, and that damages the credibility of those same people making dire predictios now.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 30 Aug 18 - 04:12 AM

That sounds like disastrous news AFAIC (and I'd guess, AFAMOUAC), Jim. And of course Jacob ("Call me Jake") Rich-Mong would back Bozo the Brexit-Buffoon against The Praying Mantis - anything to ensure a no-deal Brexit so that he and his immensely wealthy kind can continue their offshoring and other tax-avoidance/evasion schemes. Why should they pay UK taxes - isn't that what the plebs are for? :-(

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Aug 18 - 03:41 AM

Ah but David, the pound soaring downwards is merely a "correction!" Nigel said so!

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Aug 18 - 03:37 AM

Ah - c'mon lads - IT'S NOT ALL BAD NEWS
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 30 Aug 18 - 03:22 AM

But, but, but...'taking are cuntry back', unicorns...?? ;-)

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 30 Aug 18 - 02:50 AM

Nigel, still peddling the brexiter lies are you? The negative effects are real and serious, and for a start we have not left yet, if we do they will kick in big time. If no deal on the customs union then there will be shortages of foodstuffs and medicines. We have already seen a massive drop in the value of the pound. Today we see car sales down, and major manufacturers will leave. The effects are dire indeed.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 30 Aug 18 - 02:24 AM

(Must put my glasses on before typing)

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 30 Aug 18 - 02:22 AM


You may not have been told of possible 'negative effects' by the Leave campaign

I *know* it is a valid English construct, bu5 that 'may' is still rather weaselly. The poibt Raggy was making, surely, was that Leave did not acknowlege any financial impact of leaving. They did not day, for example, that there would be an impact but Remain were greatly exaggerating it: the leave campaign admitted no impact at all.

Of course, I may have missed such a more nuanced statement, so feel free to link to offical campaign documents from 'Leave' dates before the vote accepting there would be a finacial impact on the ordinary citizen.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 07:34 PM

By the way, Nigel:

"Feel free to ask the mods to delete my previous comment, as you clearly have issues with any contrary opinions expressed in this discussion."

Don't be so bloody stupid.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 07:18 PM

But you said it had been proved wrong. I want to know how this amazing prescience of yours mIght be justified.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 07:09 PM

How has it been "proved wrong," Nigel? Shouldn't we await brexit before we conclude that?
The scare stories about what would happen if we voted to leave the EU have already been proved wrong.
If you care to believe similar scare stories about what will happen when we leave the EU, that is, of course, up to you.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 07:02 PM

How has it been "proved wrong," Nigel? Shouldn't we await brexit before we conclude that?

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 06:45 PM

Yes, it's consistent, (even if Raggytash says he hasn't heard it).
But being consistent isn't the same as being accurate.
It's been proved wrong once, why believe it the second time?

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 06:45 PM

Yes, it's consistent, (even if Raggytash says he hasn't heard it).
But being consistent isn't the same as being accurate.
It's been proved wrong once, why believe it the second time?

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 06:42 PM

"...you were told most clearly (if inaccurately) that following a vote to leave the EU there would be a massive black hole in the economy..."

Well your Tory chancellor is saying the same thing right now. Eighty billion. Seems to be a fairly persistent worry, doesn't it, Nigel...

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 06:29 PM

Feel free to ask the mods to delete my previous comment, as you clearly have issues with any contrary opinions expressed in this discussion.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 06:18 PM

From: Raggytash - PM
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 03:56 PM
I don't know about anyone else but I cannot recall being informed, prior to the referendum, that leaving the EU would have a negative financial effect on me or any other person in the UK.

No, you were told most clearly (if inaccurately) that following a vote to leave the EU there would be a massive black hole in the economy, there would be massive unemployment, and there would be an immediate punitive budget. Those were clearly expected 'negative effects'.

You may not have been told of possible 'negative effects' by the Leave campaign, but you were certainly told about them by the remainers.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 04:15 PM

Me neither, Raggy.

I do, however, recall being told countless times that we would all be much better-off if we leave the EU, how the NHS would get an extra £350 million a week, that there would be far fewer immigrants claiming benefits (or stealing our jobs, depending on which lie you fell for), how we will be 'taking are cuntry back', and many lies and exaggerations. And, not long after the referendum, I recall one particular Tory Brexiteer-dumbfuck announcing that the Exit Agreement would be 'the easiest Agreement ever' to negotiate.

All this, for no other reason than to ensure that the likes of Rees-Mogg, the Rothermeres, Rupert Murdoch, et al can continue their dodgy tax-avoidance/evasion schemes, while the plebs pay for the entire debacle.

And the resident troll objects to me referring to Brexiters as 'dumbfucks'? Obviously hit a nerve there.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Raggytash
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 03:56 PM

I don't know about anyone else but I cannot recall being informed, prior to the referendum, that leaving the EU would have a negative financial effect on me or any other person in the UK.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 03:40 PM

Keith, no-one denies that there would be costs to both sides if I stepped in front of a bus. Mostly to me. So I don't do it. So why the hell, when no-one denies that there would be costs, especially to us, are our politicians, and for the current government I do think BWM's description is apposite, do the dumbfuck's persist in doing it??

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 03:31 PM

Yeah, you're right Jim. What on Earth was I thinking of? He can GFH.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 02:57 PM

" it is not acceptable to call people names"
"Pathetic non-response" when nobody wants to talk to you doesn't count I suppose
Stop feeding the chimps Baccy
Jim

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 01:50 PM

Are you a Moderator?

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 01:49 PM

No David, but no-one denies that there would be costs to both sides from a no deal Brexit.

BWM, it is not acceptable to call people names like "Dumbfucks" just because they disagree with you.
Try to discuss reasonably and not be abusive please.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 08:31 AM

Some costs Keith?? You mean we won't be able to eat??

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 07:51 AM

With you on that, John. I need to knock meself into line...

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 07:49 AM

Steve, I should have made it clear that my post was in response to yours of 05:46 AM - nobody else's.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 07:44 AM

I'm still pretty athletic for a septuagenarian, Steve - ask Mrs. Backwoodsperson! :-)

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 07:42 AM

Grr, you just beat me to the send button, John!

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 07:41 AM

Don't tell him, Pike. :-)

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 07:40 AM

I find the spectacle of the Prime Minister of this country and her senior ministers scuttling around the world holding out their begging-bowls utterly appalling and shameful - that this once-powerful nation should be reduced to the kind of behaviour that would embarrass even a third-world country is beneath contempt.

The Brexiteer Dumbfucks should hang their heads in shame that their gullibility, stupidity, and xenophobia has dumped this pile of crap on, not only our senior politicians, but also the entire population of the UK, the vast majority of whom did not express a desire to leave the EU in that ludicrously flawed referendum.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 06:44 AM

There will be no need for stockpiling if we get a deal.
There will be some costs to leaving without a deal.
What is your point?

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 05:46 AM

I wonder whether there'll be a bus with the Chancellor's "80 billion brexit black hole" on the side. It may not come true but it's a damn sight more likely than £350 million per week for the NHS. Actually, we could do with a whole fleet of buses to adequately cover the various aspects of the brexit disaster to come. I note that the PM is going round African nations trying stiffly to twerk deals out of countries that smile sweetly but who aren't really interested. Pity she didn't take Boris with her. Those "piccaninnies" are all grown up now and they might have found somewhere useful to shove those flags of theirs.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Raggytash
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 05:10 AM

Meanwhile back with Brexit a report today suggests the cost of stockpiling medical supplies could be £2 billion.

"Owen Smith, the former shadow Northern Ireland secretary and a supporter of Best for Britain, said: “I don’t remember anyone warning that Brexit would mean we’d have to stockpile drugs or that this would cost the NHS and taxpayers up to £2bn. Maybe they should have slapped that on the side of the bus"

“Every day it seems as though there is another hidden cost being revealed.”

The last statement is something I, and others, have stated on here on numerable occasions.

No deal medical costs?

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 04:57 AM

Quick. Bury your heads.
Pathetic non-response Steve.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 04:48 AM

That's been fully addressed but he's ignoring it. Let's ignore HIM, chaps, until he decides to play nice. Dead right, John.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 04:42 AM

"Referenda have no place in a representative democracy. "

But the representatives from all parties in this representative democracy all voted that this issue should be decided by referendum, and it was.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Aug 18 - 04:10 AM

"Referenda have no place in a representative democracy. "
That depends surely
In the recent past Ireland has had two nation-shattering referenda to correct past evils that have been instilled in Irish society due to uncontrolled religious influences - one on same-sex marriages . the other on pregnancy termination
Before either of those could be changed it needed to be established whether Ireland had moved on enough - in both cases it had

Brexit is different is that it was deliberately driven through on the basis of Xenophobia - sheet populist agenda-driving
Even then, there is no indication that that is what the majority of the British peope want and all the indications are that many of those who voted for it then would no longer do so
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 28 Aug 18 - 03:40 PM

Referenda have no place in a representative democracy. We elect representatives on the basis that they might know a bit more than the general populace about the issues they are deciding. If some of them had a bit more backbone then they might be able to avoid the catastrophe towards which a flawed referendum is propelling us.

You are the elite Keith in the sense that you have a great deal. Virtually everyone in the UK is elite in this sense. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to make them intelligent.

Bingo!

Steve et al, ignore the troll. Please.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 28 Aug 18 - 02:49 PM

Referenda have no place in a representative democracy. We elect representatives on the basis that they might know a bit more than the general populace about the issues they are deciding. If some of them had a bit more backbone then they might be able to avoid the catastrophe towards which a flawed referendum is propelling us.

You are the elite Keith in the sense that you have a great deal. Virtually everyone in the UK is elite in this sense. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to make them intelligent.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Aug 18 - 02:25 PM

Talk about revisionism. We had a referendum because a feckless Tory leader, running scared of his backbenchers and of UKIP, brought it to a vote of MPs, most of whom were scared of a backlash if they voted against holding it and most of whom thought that there'd be no harm done anyway as we were sure to vote remain. Your analysis is pure confection. Is there any point any more trying to persuade you to get honest? Anyway, that's all you're getting from me. It was nice when you were away. I'm going to pretend you still are.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Raggytash
Date: 28 Aug 18 - 02:23 PM

Hoops gentlemen hoops.

The FACT remains that our democratically elected representatives may be asked to vote on a matter which they may not have full access to the facts regarding the subject that they are being asked to vote on.

Utterly ludricous.

A fine example of the Mushroom system of government.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Aug 18 - 02:03 PM

Thanks David, but an elite of just one I think.
BWM, would you like a link about referendums?
Your link is all about representative democracy. We had a referendum because on that issue many did not believe they were being represented.
That is why we needed a referendum.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 28 Aug 18 - 01:10 PM

Of course you are the elite Keith, don't try to pretend you are not.