Cable Forum - Brexit discussion

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)

- Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)

- - Brexit discussion (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33705369)

Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carth (Post 35939745)

:LOL: staking our reputations on . . . really?

You seem to find it extremely difficult to grasp that many of us wanted OUT of the European club that many of us think have no reputation left at all :p:

Not the reputations of esteemed but anonymous posters but people like Liam Fox who promised it would be easy. http://uk.businessinsider.com/liam-f...brexit-2017-10

Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35939752)

Not the reputations of esteemed but anonymous posters but people like Liam Fox who promised it would be easy. http://uk.businessinsider.com/liam-f...brexit-2017-10

Oh, people like him, I see :)

well to be perfectly honest, I don't listen to people like him anyway. He doesn't know me, has no idea where I live and work, and probably has very little understanding of us commoners at all.

which can also be said for 99.9999% of the UK population, and I don't listen to them either :D

Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35939704)

Ianch, plenty of anomalies in your above post.

Corbyn didn’t ‘nearly’ win the election at all, he was thankfully, about 60 seats short.

This 37 % is a Fake figure because people ineligible to vote or could not be bothered, cannot be included in any so called percentage of the population of the UK of a total vote, either way, it does not matter. Leave won and it is a closed book, we are leaving.

---------- Post added at 09:44 ---------- Previous post was at 09:33 ----------

Agreed. They certainly did. 17.4 Million out of about 33 Million.

Leave had a over a Million more votes. Those who bothered to register to vote and actually voted, made their voice heard. Remain came up short. Those who were not eligible or could not be bothered to vote do not count in any so called percentage. This is just another weak attempt by Remainers to delegitimise a very legit and legal, democratic process.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 35939710)

W

So the fact that Labour left a financial mess for the Conservatives (as they did in 1979) isn't relevant to where we are now? I'm sorry, but that is the whole reason for the austerity measures that had to be taken. You may wish to ignore facts that are inconvenient to you, but really!

Once again, I am not blaming Labour for the sub prime issue that caused the financial crisis, of course not. But Labour with their financial mismanagement of our economy raided every budget and spent their way through every financial device they could think of. They raided our pensions, created more debt and didn't think of the consequences. When the financial crash came, there was no money available to protect us against the full impact, and the rest is history. You may try to ignore that little inconvenient truth, but this is a gentle reminder that non-Labour voters have not forgotten.

Similarly, you want to ignore the referendum, for reasons best known to yourself. It happened, and the electorate voted to leave, so get over it. I understand you might have misgivings, but throwing your toys out of the pram because it didn't go your way is not going to help and cuts no ice with me. The government are simply implementing the will of the electorate, even though some started off with a heavy heart. That is democracy in action. The EU would have had us call another referendum because it was not 'the right result', which of course would have been for 'More Europe'. :rolleyes:

In case you haven't noticed, Theresa May is going all out to get more houses built and is now putting pressure on those developers who are holding onto land. Where I live, there are huge housing developments going on all around, and sadly destroying our countryside. This, together with lower immigration levels, will tackle house inflation, so I don't know why you can't see that.

As for the free market system, this is what brings the wealth into the country that enables us to pay for the services we receive. Imperfect it may be, but it works, unlike Communism, which has failed everywhere it has been practised. Again, Labour never tackled the abuses such as tax evasion, so they are in no position to criticise the Conservatives for their considerable efforts in trying to put this right.

Whatever you may say, Theresa May has done her best to make the Brexit decision work and she has achieved unity in her party on this issue, which is no mean feat. Which is more than Labour has done.

OB, less of the emotive windups: "throwing your toys out of the pram", "get over it" :) We just have different views, don't take it personally.

You seem to fall into the same debating style as the Daily Mail: if you criticise unregulated, free market economics, you must be a Communist! In the real world, outside of the right wing media bubble, there are choices in between these two endpoints. One example is the Nordic Model but it may be too sensible for some :)

Again, you cite Labour again. If you criticise the Tories, you are not then automatically suggesting that the Labour solution is appropriate.

Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35939754)

We disagree on what constitutes "legit" so let's agree to differ :)

Happy to do so, but I do have to say this, shall we go back over past elections and see how much the whole of the UK population had their say or just those registered to vote, i.e the electorate against those who actually voted?

Not every person in the UK bothers to register to vote, who are eligible to do so, so that's their loss and so is the case for those who are registered, but still don't bother to cast their vote. They cannot complain after the vote took place because it did not go the way they wanted.

It's those registered to vote which matters, you're trying to undermine what was a high voter turnout for the referendum at 72% of the total people registered to vote.

46,500,001 people were eligible to vote in the referendum, only 33,577,342 of those actually voted. That's 72% turnout, that is very high. You cannot include the entire UK populace to try somehow lower the total voter tally to try and invalidate the result, IMO, you wouldn't be having this discussion at all, if Remain had won.

Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35939754)

No anomalies, just uncomfortable reading :)

If Labour had won seven seats narrowly taken by the Conservatives, he would have had the opportunity to form a “progressive alliance” with all other smaller parties excluding the DUP. So as I said he was very nearly in Government .. scary, right?

Please, 37% of Electorate voted Leave is fake? Really ..

We disagree on what constitutes "legit" so let's agree to differ :)

---------- Post added at 15:57 ---------- Previous post was at 15:47 ----------

OB, less of the emotive windups: "throwing your toys out of the pram", "get over it" :) We just have different views, don't take it personally.

You seem to fall into the same debating style as the Daily Mail: if you criticise unregulated, free market economics, you must be a Communist! In the real world, outside of the right wing media bubble, there are choices in between these two endpoints. One example is the Nordic Model but it may be too sensible for some :)

Again, you cite Labour again. If you criticise the Tories, you are not then automatically suggesting that the Labour solution is appropriate.

Well, sorry, launch, but it does make me curious as to why so many people expect democracy but don't accept the referendum result! This continual resistence to what people have voted for is a bit wearing.

I think that many who criticise the free market do, in fact, want Communism, but if that is not your position, I accept that, of course. However it would be good if when people criticise, they should set out what they would do instead. That would certainly help understanding.

Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 35939760)

Many politicians and individuals criticise the current free market. For some, it's not free enough and for others, it's too free. But I wouldn't call all people who criticise it Communists, that's a very small number of people.
Have you made any progress on locating the underlying date for your country growth rates?;)

Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35939761)

I cannot remember which site I was on at the time, but you should be able to Google the information. You're not disputing the fact that those other advanced economies are doing better than the EU in terms of growth, are you? I accept that I stated incorrectly that the US was one of them, that was my bad.

Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 35939766)

Ah, I see now, you were comparing advanced economies while I was comparing the G7 and G20. So the EU was 1.9% in 2017 and advanced economies 2.0%. Source - https://www.gfmag.com/global-data/ec...owth-by-region

Funnily enough, when I googled advanced economies growth, one of the first hits I got was https://www.politico.eu/article/imf-...ced-economies/

Re: Brexit discussion

Well worth a read in full via the below link. Short of time? Skip to the last sentence to discover Robert's take on what will happen. Bookmark this for the future.

Quote:

Per Robert Peston
She can negotiate in the knowledge that the tariff-free and frictionless access to the single market she seeks will require her to sacrifice her red lines - most notably the supremacy of British law over European law, the future right to negotiate free trade deals with third-party countries like the US and China, and the end of meaningful payments into the EU’s budget.

But if she moves thither, she would have to appeal for support in Parliament above the heads of her Brexiter ministers and MPs - and that might well destroy her party.

So that it isn’t going to happen.

Or she could face up to reality and publicly acknowledge that the UK won’t get better than a Canada-style free trade deal, for as long as she insists on her red lines.

But parliament would never vote for such a limited deal. And as and when Parliament rejected such a deal, or it became clear that it would, she would be forced to reconsider the sanctity of her red lines - which would (obvs) also split her party.

So that isn’t going to happen either.

What is going to happen is that the conceit will be sustained by her and her colleagues that her speech is a rational basis for negotiation.
She will kick the can down the road in the Micawberish hope that something will turn up.

As a result, Brexit negotiations will continue to suck all the energy and initiative out of this government, and for many months and years they will continue to crowd out all other sensible government business.

Arguably the tragedy of Brexit is not Brexit itself, but the opportunity cost it represents, the way that it is preventing the UK mend itself.

The PM ended her important Brexit address on Friday by saying “let’s get in with it”. But those words will remain hollow until she is prepared to choose between what parliament would support and what would keep her party whole.

https://www.facebook.com/pestonitv/p...=244+289476616

Re: Brexit discussion

Robert Peston, definitely a voice worth listening to . . for a giggle

Robert Peston forgot who he works for in a hilarious gaffe during a press conference at Theresa May's Brexit speech.

All the debate about leaving or staying in a customs union may have confused the respected journalist so much that he introduced himself as working for the BBC, which he left a few years ago for ITV.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-new...eston-12115564

See how easy it is to post selective articles?

Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carth (Post 35939786)

So clearly that funny incident :D means that nothing he writes is of value anymore. Apologies, my bad.

Re: Brexit discussion

Merely pointing out that what a reporter writes about is his opinion, nothing more

Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carth (Post 35939796)

Merely pointing out that what a reporter writes about is his opinion, nothing more

In Robert Peston's case, it's a widely respected and informed opinion; informed by contacts, experience and knowledge.

Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carth (Post 35939786)

As it has been for 20 months on both sides...

---------- Post added at 05:43 ---------- Previous post was at 05:42 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carth (Post 35939796)

Merely pointing out that what a reporter writes about is his opinion, nothing more

No different to the great and the good and the ugly on here..;)

Re: Brexit discussion

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carth (Post 35939786)

I find it amusing that this man actually seems to believe that Theresa May is aware that her Brexit stance will never be accepted but is just 'kicking the can down the road', with only one more year to go before it will happen.

Such nonsense. If she knew for sure she was not getting a deal from Europe, she would be preparing now for a no-deal Brexit, and she would be going all out to prepare industry for that as well.

These were silly comments and I would expect better from a half competent journalist.