Cable Forum
Page 51 of 89 « First 4147484950 51 5253545561 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)
-   Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   Brexit (Old) (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33706539)

ianch99 14-12-2018 07:16
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35975257)
Good article here on Brexit: https://www.spectator.co.uk/2018/12/...of-our-nation/ (open in private/incognito mode if you've hit the read limit)

I disagree with some of it but think this bit is very true:



Governments shouldn't hold referendums into decisions where they disagree with the 'change' option.
The real origin of the mess we are now in is that Cameron did not mandate a Supermajority for the referendum.

Insisting on a simple, arithmetic majority for such a significant structural & economic change was always doomed to be divisive and as such could never have delivered a compelling mandate, as we can clearly see.

Chris Patten had a strong argument against the use of referenda:

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Referendum#/Patten's_criticism

Quote:
British politician Chris Patten summarized many of the arguments used by those who oppose the referendum in an interview in 2003, when discussing the possibility of a referendum in the United Kingdom on the European Union Constitution:

I think referendums are awful. The late and great Julian Critchley used to say that, not very surprisingly, they were the favourite form of plebiscitary democracy of Mussolini and Hitler. They undermine Westminster. What they ensure, as we saw in the last election, is that if you have a referendum on an issue, politicians during an election campaign say: "Oh, we're not going to talk about that, we don't need to talk about that, that's all for the referendum." So during the last election campaign, the euro was hardly debated. I think referendums are fundamentally anti-democratic in our system, and I wouldn't have anything to do with them. On the whole, governments only concede them when governments are weak.


---------- Post added at 06:16 ---------- Previous post was at 06:06 ----------

I think a second vote had inched a step closer:

Brexit: EU says no to May on renegotiating deal

Quote:
European Union leaders have said the Brexit withdrawal agreement is "not open for renegotiation", despite appeals from Theresa May.

She wanted legal assurances on the Irish backstop to help her deal get through Parliament, after she delayed a Commons vote in anticipation of defeat.

The PM said the deal was "at risk" if MPs' concerns could not be addressed.

European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker said there could be clarifications but no renegotiation.
It will all now play out as a game of brinkmanship. Who is better prepared for No Deal and so who will therefore blink first. I would put money on the EU being more prepared than the UK.

The vote will be lost in Jan, the clock rapidly running down with a No Deal as the only option so Parliament will force the Government to extend the A50 deadline to allow more consideration of "all possible options".

denphone 14-12-2018 08:10
Re: Brexit
 
A pretty damning assessment from the Former UK ambassador to the EU.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...ns-ivan-rogers

Quote:
In an excoriating denunciation of the British political class that goes to the top of government, Ivan Rogers said the Brexit debate had suffered from “opacity, delusion-mongering and mendacity on all sides” and predicted the public would not forgive politicians.
Quote:
Without naming May, he said the country required “leadership which is far more honest in setting out the fundamental choices still ahead, the difficult trade-offs between sovereignty and national control”.
Quote:
Since leaving the civil service, he has maintained a low profile, but has offered occasional scathing reviews of British political debate on Brexit in a series of lectures. In October he took aim at the “pinstriped Robespierres” of the anti-EU European Research Group, led by Jacob Rees-Mogg. He has also argued that British delusions and the EU’s technocratic approach mean both sides risk “sleepwalking into a major crisis”.
Quote:
Criticising some of Labour’s promises on Brexit as implausible, he concludes “too much of our political debate just insults people’s intelligence”.
Quote:
The next stage of Brexit will be “whether Brexit proponents like it or not, a much longer process”.

jfman 14-12-2018 08:26
Re: Brexit
 
I’m not sure May is being dishonest.

Politicians who would be perceived as leaders of the Leave campaign undoubtedly yes they have been dishonest.

ntluser 14-12-2018 08:47
Re: Brexit
 
All of us are now finding out what the EU is really like.

It is a spider's web from which it is extremely difficult to escape.

This is a deal we should reject. The EU still has to sell its goods but if not to us to whom will they sell them? No deal is just as bad for them as it is for us. Maybe a rejection of the deal will increase their willingness to renegotiate.

Instead of going for a deal with the whole EU, we should have gone for a deal that protects our banking rights and which protects our trading rights with EU countries currently trading with us now. This protects our current trade and frees us from the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. Other individual EU countries wanting to trade could set up their own deals in the future.

The backstop only really affects Ireland and the UK and should be left to them to sort out without EU interference. Goods can be flown in to Northern Ireland and Ireland without the need for a hard border. Technology can take care of the rest.

Given that the EU is planning to form a European Army and the recent aggressive Russian moves, will our young people who voted to stay in the EU still be as keen if they receive call-up papers from the EU?

It will be very interesting to see how this all pans out.

Damien 14-12-2018 09:34
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntluser (Post 35975329)
This is a deal we should reject. The EU still has to sell its goods but if not to us to whom will they sell them? No deal is just as bad for them as it is for us. Maybe a rejection of the deal will increase their willingness to renegotiate.
Yes but they don't want no deal either. However it's not 'just as bad' for them. They're a much bigger bloc, with a much bigger economy, and have both each other and their existing trade deals whereas we'll have precisely zilch trade agreements.

Just before Brexit they'll complete the EU-Japan trade deal and become the biggest economic trading bloc in the world: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-e...-idUSKBN1OB1EN

We need to be realistic about the cards we hold.

Pierre 14-12-2018 09:53
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35975328)
I’m not sure May is being dishonest.
She is. in so far as she is trying to deliver something she does not believe in. She doesn't have a passion for Brexit therefore she is willing to ridden roughshod by all sides.

Quote:
Politicians who would be perceived as leaders of the Leave campaign undoubtedly yes they have been dishonest.
All politicians in this debate on all sides of all parties have been dishonest.

jonbxx 14-12-2018 10:13
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntluser (Post 35975329)
The EU still has to sell its goods but if not to us to whom will they sell them? No deal is just as bad for them as it is for us. Maybe a rejection of the deal will increase their willingness to renegotiate.
You sure about that?

UK exports to EU in 2017 - £274b or 44% of all exports
UK imports from EU in 2017 - £341b or 8% of all exports

Quote:
Originally Posted by ntluser (Post 35975329)
Instead of going for a deal with the whole EU, we should have gone for a deal that protects our banking rights and which protects our trading rights with EU countries currently trading with us now. This protects our current trade and frees us from the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. Other individual EU countries wanting to trade could set up their own deals in the future.
I am sure you know individual EU countries can't make their own trade deals being part of a customs union.

jfman 14-12-2018 10:36
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35975331)
She is. in so far as she is trying to deliver something she does not believe in. She doesn't have a passion for Brexit therefore she is willing to ridden roughshod by all sides.

All politicians in this debate on all sides of all parties have been dishonest.
I’m not sure a passion for Brexit has a greater value than bureaucratic pragmatism.

Feeling strongly that your perception of reality is correct against all the reasonable evidence is more likely to be a sign of mental illness than a politician capable of delivering a positive outcome.

Mr K 14-12-2018 12:20
Re: Brexit
 
Weak leader for a weak negotiating position, we're on a hiding to nothing.

Something has to happen now, not just wait till the New Year hoping something might change. It won't. Except we'll have less of a chance to do anything about it.

pip08456 14-12-2018 12:30
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35975339)
Weak leader for a weak negotiating position, we're on a hiding to nothing.

Something has to happen now, not just wait till the New Year hoping something might change. It won't. Except we'll have less of a chance to do anything about it.
Nothing has to happen Mr K, we'll just leave with no deal in March 2019.

Mr K 14-12-2018 12:36
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 35975342)
Nothing has to happen Mr K, we'll just leave with no deal in March 2019.
Don't think that will happen, parliament won't let it, the law can be changed at the drop of a hat if they want.

Think you'll find the a No Deal Bexit wouldn't be as wonderful as you think .
In fact, Richard Branson says we'd go Bankrupt.... https://www.independent.co.uk/news/b...-a8683171.html. VM could fold, then what would we post or watch? ;)

jfman 14-12-2018 12:46
Re: Brexit
 
We also need to pass around 800 pieces of secondary legislation to support the EU Withdrawal Act. Without these many areas would be left in a legal and regulatory minefield.

Usually these are not controversial, and pass committees or unopposed. If someone were to force votes on these in the chamber...

Sephiroth 14-12-2018 13:07
Re: Brexit
 
The EU has announced that from 2021, UK citizens wishing to visit the EU must pay 7 Euros. True colours. Why do we want to have anything to do with those nasty people?

Mr K 14-12-2018 13:13
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35975348)
The EU has announced that from 2021, UK citizens wishing to visit the EU must pay 7 Euros. True colours. Why do we want to have anything to do with those nasty people?
Economic and financial stability? free movement of goods and labour ? But we don't want any of that as we're bonkers. ...
p.s. most of the people I've met in Europe are very nice :) However we have lots of 'nasty' people here.

The 2nd world war is over, move on old chap, the rest of the World has ;)

Stephen 14-12-2018 13:14
Re: Brexit
 
No different than having to pay $14 to get a US ESTA.

denphone 14-12-2018 13:17
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35975348)
The EU has announced that from 2021, UK citizens wishing to visit the EU must pay 7 Euros. True colours. Why do we want to have anything to do with those nasty people?
So you won't be visiting a EU country then Sephiroth?.

Dave42 14-12-2018 13:22
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35975348)
The EU has announced that from 2021, UK citizens wishing to visit the EU must pay 7 Euros. True colours. Why do we want to have anything to do with those nasty people?
we are ones that leaving but they are nasty how you make that out as said by other we got to pay to go visit USA ect are USA nasty people too?

Damien 14-12-2018 13:29
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35975348)
The EU has announced that from 2021, UK citizens wishing to visit the EU must pay 7 Euros. True colours. Why do we want to have anything to do with those nasty people?
This is the default if no exemption to negotiated in a future. As Stephen says it's often in other countries too.

The EU applies this fee to all countries that have nothing to do with it and no visa-waiver.

People here have been quite clear they want 'nothing to do with the EU' so this is the relationship people voted for and continue to advocate for then get angry when it's announced :rolleyes:

Sephiroth 14-12-2018 13:32
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen (Post 35975351)
No different than having to pay $14 to get a US ESTA.
You lot don’t get it. They are nasty. Why should we want to have anything to do with them? True colours.

---------- Post added at 12:32 ---------- Previous post was at 12:30 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35975352)
So you won't be visiting a EU country then Sephiroth?.
What’s the matter with you? They are being nasty. We should have very little to do with them.

Dave42 14-12-2018 13:32
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35975355)
You lot don’t get it. They are nasty. Why should we want to have anything to do with them? True colours.
so are USA nasty people too as need to pay for visa to enter and are all the other countries nasty people too that do the same and should we have nothing to do with them countries?

Sephiroth 14-12-2018 13:34
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave42 (Post 35975353)
we are ones that leaving but they are nasty how you make that out as said by other we got to pay to go visit USA ect are USA nasty people too?
What’s wrong with you? USA visitor policy is unrelated to us leaving the EU. We are supposed to be having a close relationship with them post-Brexit. Slapping a visitor tariff on us, which brings administrative overheads, is downright nasty and unnecessary.

Damien 14-12-2018 13:34
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35975355)
You lot don’t get it. They are nasty. Why should we want to have anything to do with them? True colours.

---------- Post added at 12:32 ---------- Previous post was at 12:30 ----------



What’s the matter with you? They are being nasty. We should have very little to do with them.
Grow up. You want to leave the EU entirely, you pay the fee the other people do.

denphone 14-12-2018 13:35
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35975355)

What’s the matter with you? They are being nasty. We should have very little to do with them.
There is nothing a matter with me as its you who have the problem with the EU as l asked a simple question which you still have not answered.

Dave42 14-12-2018 13:36
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35975358)
What’s wrong with you? USA visitor policy is unrelated to us leaving the EU. We are supposed to be having a close relationship with them post-Brexit. Slapping a visitor tariff on us, which brings administrative overheads, is downright nasty and unnecessary.
what wrong with you as your the ones that saying EU are nasty for having visa that's costs exacty same process as USA and all other countries that have them are all them nasty people too

Hugh 14-12-2018 13:36
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35975348)
The EU has announced that from 2021, UK citizens wishing to visit the EU must pay 7 Euros. True colours. Why do we want to have anything to do with those nasty people?
Well, since we don’t want Freedom of Movement, there will be additional administration required to check travellers, which will cost - just like the USA ESTA.

No nastiness, just pragmatic capitalism.

Update - in fact, it’s just like the ESTA.

From April this year...

https://euobserver.com/justice/141705
Quote:
The reference to a "European visa" was misleading, but the new European Travel Information and Authorisation System (Etias), agreed on Wednesday, will impose "a travel authorisation fee of €7" on all "visa-exempt third country nationals" when it enters into life.

Etias, which is modelled on the US visa-waiver system, is designed to increase border security in times of mass migration and a heightened terrorist threat.

Visitors to the EU, including from the US, will have to file an online application, which will be cross-checked against EU states' crime databases and those of Interpol, the international police agency.

Most will get a travel permit "automatically and quickly" and the €7 fee will keep them covered for three years.

But if the databases scored a "hit", or if there were "doubts" or "elements requiring further analysis" they would be told, within 96 hours, that they had been denied entry into Europe's so-called Schengen travel zone, which includes 26 countries.

That was the deal agreed by EU member states' ambassadors in Brussels on Wednesday.

Sephiroth 14-12-2018 13:38
Re: Brexit
 
TM doesn’t know how to negotiate and they are taking full advantage of that. I can’t blame them for doing that, but when they pile on the nasty stuff, and particularly pretend that they must protect theGF when what they really want is to keep us trapped so that we can’t compete with them properly, then we shouldn’t have too much more to do with them.

---------- Post added at 12:38 ---------- Previous post was at 12:37 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35975359)
Grow up. You want to leave the EU entirely, you pay the fee the other people do.
While that’s ultimately true, what you lot don’t do is accept how nasty they are.

Damien 14-12-2018 13:41
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35975364)
While that’s ultimately true, what you lot don’t do is accept how nasty they are.
What is actually nasty about it?

We are leaving 'entirely' under this assumption which makes us no different to the United States or Hong Kong to the EU who have to go though the same process with the same fee: https://www.schengenvisainfo.com/eti...ies-need-etias

So what's 'nasty' about them treating as the same as everybody else?

This is what leaving the EU is. You don't get to leave, have no deal, but have special treatment.

https://news.sky.com/story/revealed-...rexit-11580454

Quote:
The EU has already begun to implement the system which preauthorises the entry of citizens from a special list of countries, who do not require full visas.

"Once ETIAS enters into operation, all visa-exempt non-EU nationals who plan to travel to the Schengen area will have to apply via ETIAS," a European Commission source told Sky News.

1andrew1 14-12-2018 14:03
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35975367)
This is what leaving the EU is. You don't get to leave, have no deal, but have special treatment.
Exactly. Otherwise, you're a Schrödinger's Brexiter - wanting to leave the EU and its institutions entirely whilst at the same time keeping all the benefits of membership. Aka, BoJo's infamous cake-and-eat-it speech.

Damien 14-12-2018 14:07
Re: Brexit
 
I personally don't think it will actually happen. I think we'll come to some arrangement that maintains the travel circumstances we have now, maybe even let us use the EU passport control.

jfman 14-12-2018 14:14
Re: Brexit
 
“Brussels Bureaucrats introduce small administrative charge to facilitiate Visa free travel from non-Member States”

Don’t see that being a surprise to anyone somehow.

“Nasty Europeans have audacity to charge us - in EUROS!”

Might make the Daily Mail I suppose.

ianch99 14-12-2018 15:26
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35975363)
Well, since we don’t want Freedom of Movement, there will be additional administration required to check travellers, which will cost - just like the USA ESTA.

No nastiness, just pragmatic capitalism.

Update - in fact, it’s just like the ESTA.

From April this year...

https://euobserver.com/justice/141705
So the nice EU is giving us a discounted price then? The USA charges around 12 euro (equivalent) ..

Carth 14-12-2018 17:03
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35975375)
“Brussels Bureaucrats introduce small administrative charge to facilitiate Visa free travel from non-Member States”

Don’t see that being a surprise to anyone somehow.

“Nasty Europeans have audacity to charge us - in EUROS!”

Might make the Daily Mail I suppose.
Made me chuckle :D

oh, and the price of a London pint in order to travel to the EU is nothing to get upset about, comes as no surprise to me either :Yes:

papa smurf 14-12-2018 17:04
Re: Brexit
 
EU explained:

enjoy

https://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...nion-explained

pip08456 14-12-2018 18:09
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 35975389)
I thought this one was better.

Stuart 14-12-2018 18:26
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35974982)
More bollocks. Brexiteers cannot be blamed when they have not been steering the ship. :rolleyes:
Raab, Davis, Gove, Johnson.. All Brexiters. All are, or have been in a position to influence the negotiations, therefore arguably steering the ship.

So, yes, they can be blamed.

Mr K 14-12-2018 18:35
Re: Brexit
 
Personally, I think it's all getting rather 'nebulous'... ;)

https://www.cableforum.uk/images/local/2018/12/6.jpg

Hugh 14-12-2018 18:43
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuart (Post 35975399)
Raab, Davis, Gove, Johnson.. All Brexiters. All are, or have been in a position to influence the negotiations, therefore arguably steering the ship.

So, yes, they can be blamed.
You forgot Gove, Grayling, McVey, Leadsom, Mordaunt, Javid, Hunt, Williamson, Hancock, Truss - all in the Cabinet, all pro-Brexit.

Mick 14-12-2018 18:49
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuart (Post 35975399)
Raab, Davis, Gove, Johnson.. All Brexiters. All are, or have been in a position to influence the negotiations, therefore arguably steering the ship.

So, yes, they can be blamed.
Stop talking bollocks Stuart - No they cannot. I repeat, the Remainers in government and civil service are totally to blame and nothing YOU say, changes that!!! :dozey:

---------- Post added at 17:49 ---------- Previous post was at 17:48 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35975403)
You forgot Gove, Grayling, McVey, Leadsom, Mordaunt, Javid, Hunt, Williamson, Hancock, Truss - all in the Cabinet, all pro-Brexit.
Or you! :dozey: :rolleyes:

Mr K 14-12-2018 19:01
Re: Brexit
 
The ship is rudderless anyway, no one's steering, everyone is in the lifeboats.

Don't worry Jezza will come to the rescue :)

Damien 14-12-2018 19:13
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35975404)
Stop talking bollocks Stuart - No they cannot. I repeat, the Remainers in government and civil service are totally to blame and nothing YOU say, changes that!!! :dozey:

---------- Post added at 17:49 ---------- Previous post was at 17:48 ----------



Or you! :dozey: :rolleyes:
Well it’s just their opinion on it as the idea they’re not is yours. My opinion is they were part of cabinet, part of government, people who campaigned for it and in some cases involved with the process so they share some blame.

jfman 14-12-2018 19:17
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35975407)
The ship is rudderless anyway, no one's steering, everyone is in the lifeboats.

Don't worry Jezza will come to the rescue :)
Oh I’d contest it is being steered...

Carth 14-12-2018 19:20
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35975409)
Oh I’d contest it is being steered...
I'd agree with you there . . . someone seems to be attempting to steer the boat in the direction others seem to not want to go :D

Gavin78 14-12-2018 19:21
Re: Brexit
 
I blame the 47.6m that didnt vote leave it's all their fault

Mick 14-12-2018 19:26
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35975408)
Well it’s just their opinion on it as the idea they’re not is yours. My opinion is they were part of cabinet, part of government, people who campaigned for it and in some cases involved with the process so they share some blame.
Well they don't - as I have said - they were not steering the ship - they have said after leaving their positions they were overruled by the PM or they were bypassed in most of the behind the scene negotiations.

Like Jeremy Corbyn said and I happen to agree with him on this one thing and that is rare - the Brexit Secretary is a Ceremonial role only.

denphone 14-12-2018 19:29
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gavin78 (Post 35975411)
I blame the 47.6m that didnt vote leave it's all their fault
Well l am one of them so there you are...:)

Carth 14-12-2018 19:32
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35975413)
Well l am one of them so there you are...:)

so is my missus, she has no interest in it, quite happy as long as the TV keeps showing crap :D

Pierre 14-12-2018 20:10
Re: Brexit
 
Not very often you see a European advocating Brexit.

https://www.facebook.com/DemocraziaV...5977272757274/

---------- Post added at 19:06 ---------- Previous post was at 19:05 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35975409)
Oh I’d contest it is being steered...
You got that right.

---------- Post added at 19:08 ---------- Previous post was at 19:06 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35975359)
Grow up. You want to leave the EU entirely, you pay the fee the other people do.
I have absolutely no issue with that, what should we charge EU nationals to enter the U.K.?

I think £10 has a nice round feel to it.

---------- Post added at 19:10 ---------- Previous post was at 19:08 ----------

No deal Brexit is the only way forward now.

I look forward to it.

Damien 14-12-2018 20:22
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35975420)
I have absolutely no issue with that, what should we charge EU nationals to enter the U.K.?

I think £10 has a nice round feel to it.
For most countries we do not have a such a program. For a few select countries the fee is £15.

I don't think we would introduce it specifically for the EU but if we did do such a program then I imagine it would be £15 for everyone.

Pierre 14-12-2018 20:27
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35975425)
For most countries we do not have a such a program. For a few select countries the fee is £15.

I don't think we would introduce it specifically for the EU but if we did do such a program then I imagine it would be £15 for everyone.
What good for the goose and all that. We should treat other blocs reciprocally to how they treat us. simple as.

1andrew1 14-12-2018 20:45
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35975425)
For most countries we do not have a such a program. For a few select countries the fee is £15.

I don't think we would introduce it specifically for the EU but if we did do such a program then I imagine it would be £15 for everyone.
£15 would probably be worth €7 in the case of a no-deal Brexit so about right. ;)

Pierre 14-12-2018 20:59
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35975428)
£15 would probably be worth €7 in the case of a no-deal Brexit so about right. ;)
Will boost our exports then.

1andrew1 14-12-2018 21:08
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35975430)
Will boost our exports then.
The post-Brexit drop in the £ hasn't achieved this, it's just led to some of our crown jewel companies like ARM being taken over by overseas companies.

Hugh 14-12-2018 21:11
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35975430)
Will boost our exports then.
But make the 50% of our food that we import more expensive, though.

Pierre 14-12-2018 21:33
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35975433)
But make the 50% of our food that we import more expensive, though.
Are you going to back that statement with any evidence?

Indeed, we could make food less expensive, by importing food and not having to impose EU tariffs

https://iea.org.uk/the-eus-thousands...nish-the-poor/


https://fullfact.org/europe/will-get...fs-help-worst/

jfman 14-12-2018 21:48
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35975435)
Are you going to back that statement with any evidence?

Indeed, we could make food less expensive, by importing food and not having to impose EU tariffs

https://iea.org.uk/the-eus-thousands...nish-the-poor/


https://fullfact.org/europe/will-get...fs-help-worst/
The irony of a leave voter asking for evidence of post-Brexit reality.

Pierre 14-12-2018 21:58
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35975439)
The irony of a leave voter asking for evidence of post-Brexit reality.
Irrelevant.

I’m in a discussion forum, someone has made a claim, i’m Asking them to support that claim with evidence.

I would do this regardless of the subject of the discussion.


No irony move on, i’ll Entertain another pithy comment.

Hugh 14-12-2018 22:30
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35975435)
Are you going to back that statement with any evidence?

Indeed, we could make food less expensive, by importing food and not having to impose EU tariffs

https://iea.org.uk/the-eus-thousands...nish-the-poor/


https://fullfact.org/europe/will-get...fs-help-worst/
From your second link
Quote:
The value of the pound has fallen since the referendum, and that has increased pressure on food and drink prices for everyone.

Pierre 14-12-2018 22:33
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35975443)
From your second link
You don’t get off that easy.

Show me evidence of 50% of the food we import will be more expensive.

jfman 14-12-2018 22:40
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35975440)
Irrelevant.

I’m in a discussion forum, someone has made a claim, i’m Asking them to support that claim with evidence.

I would do this regardless of the subject of the discussion.


No irony move on, i’ll Entertain another pithy comment.
I challenge anyone to prove via any quantifiable means a projection using recognised economic models that the United Kingdom will be better off leaving the European Union than remaining?

Sephiroth 14-12-2018 22:44
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35975445)
I challenge anyone to prove via any quantifiable means a projection using recognised economic models that the United Kingdom will be better off leaving the European Union than remaining?
You still don’t get it. Leaving the nasty EU frees us from their shackles. Releases us from the French dominated CAP. Frees us from Germany hegemony. Sticks two fingers up to the perfidious Varadkar. Their food may cost us more if we import it; other people’s same food would cost us the same or less tariff free.

Sodding economic models mean very little given the variables and in many cases flawed assumptions.

Hugh 14-12-2018 22:46
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35975444)
You don’t get off that easy.

Show me evidence of 50% of the food we import will be more expensive.
Past history...

https://www.ft.com/content/84807466-...8-7a9fb7d6163e
Quote:
Britain imports about half of its food, mostly from the EU, and the supermarkets have passed on higher costs to shoppers after initially absorbing the fall in the pound to maintain market share.

Vegetable prices have risen by 5.7 per cent during the past year. Coffee, tea and cocoa prices were 8.5 per cent higher in October than the same time last year, while meat was 3.9 per cent more expensive.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a7176156.html
Quote:
The price of pasta and other groceries has increased since the vote to leave the European Union, new data has shown.

The hikes are because of a weaker pound, which has made imported products - which the UK is highly dependent on - more expensive.

Price comparison website mysupermarket.co.uk, which compares all major UK stores, found the price of a shop rose by one per cent in July. In June, the price of 35 products was £82.83. However, following the Brexit vote, the same items cost £83.44...

..."A weaker pound will mean higher imported food value. I would say to government … [it] could easily be held to ransom by other parts of the world if there is a climatic disaster or if currency is weak.”
https://www.theweek.co.uk/77592/cost...blown/page/0/4
Quote:
Consumer prices rose on average by 1.6 per cent year-on-year, says the Office for National Statistics, up from 1.2 per cent in November and above a consensus forecast for a 1.4 per cent increase.

The figures show that the "fall in the pound since the Brexit vote was starting to feed into the economy", said the BBC.

Increasing food prices were a major contributor to the headline rate, an "ominous" sign that "years of falling food prices appear to be coming to an end"
Your links were forecasts/hypotheses/predictions*, my links are to actual events that happened.

*forecasts/hypotheses/predictions, when used by Government/BoE/economists, are rubbished by Brexiters**...

**including the poster quoted below

---------- Post added at 21:46 ---------- Previous post was at 21:45 ----------

[/COLOR]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35975446)
You still don’t get it. Leaving the EU frees us from their shackles. Releases us from the French dominated CAP. Frees us from Germany hegemony. Their food may cost us more if we import it; other people’s same food would cost us the same or less tariff free.

Sodding economic models mean very little given the variables and in many cases flawed assumptions.
You missed out "nasty" and "perfidious"... ;)

Pierre 14-12-2018 22:54
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35975447)
Past history...
Congratulations on your google search that couldn’t Back up your claim.

Sephiroth 14-12-2018 22:56
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35975447)
Past history...

https://www.ft.com/content/84807466-...8-7a9fb7d6163e

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a7176156.html

https://www.theweek.co.uk/77592/cost...blown/page/0/4

Your links were forecasts/hypotheses/predictions*, my links are to actual events that happened.

*forecasts/hypotheses/predictions, when used by Government/BoE/economists, are rubbished by Brexiters**...

**including the poster quoted below

---------- Post added at 21:46 ---------- Previous post was at 21:45 ----------

[/COLOR]You missed out "nasty" and "perfidious"... ;)
Oops. Corrected now.

jfman 14-12-2018 22:57
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35975446)
You still don’t get it. Leaving the nasty EU frees us from their shackles. Releases us from the French dominated CAP. Frees us from Germany hegemony. Sticks two fingers up to the perfidious Varadkar. Their food may cost us more if we import it; other people’s same food would cost us the same or less tariff free.

Sodding economic models mean very little given the variables and in many cases flawed assumptions.
So there’s no recognised model?

Hom3r 14-12-2018 23:00
Re: Brexit
 
Europe couldn't pay me £100 to go there.

Sephiroth 14-12-2018 23:04
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35975451)
So there’s no recognised model?
I’m not going to fall for that one. You don’t get what Brexit is about and what it means to the majority that won the Referendum. Not you nor the other Remainers in this thread. You seem to value the economy as per status quo higher than our release from shackles, after which we will have no problem with continued economic development. Wobbles on the way -sure. But free from that perfidious bunch of federalists.

1andrew1 14-12-2018 23:13
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35975453)
I’m not going to fall for that one. You don’t get what Brexit is about and what it means to the majority that won the Referendum. Not you nor the other Remainers in this thread. You seem to value the economy as per status quo higher than our release from shackles, after which we will have no problem with continued economic development. Wobbles on the way -sure. But free from that perfidious bunch of federalists.
In French, I translate the above paragraph into "non". :D

---------- Post added at 22:13 ---------- Previous post was at 22:09 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hom3r (Post 35975452)
Europe couldn't pay me £100 to go there.
No need to - you're currently in Europe. :D

Dave42 14-12-2018 23:40
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35975454)
In French, I translate the above paragraph into "non". :D

---------- Post added at 22:13 ---------- Previous post was at 22:09 ----------


No need to - you're currently in Europe. :D
and he will still be we just leaving EU not continent of Europe ;);)

Carth 15-12-2018 00:15
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave42 (Post 35975456)
and he will still be we just leaving EU not continent of Europe ;);)

although it would be nice to 'up anchor' and drift down to the Canaries :D

Sephiroth 15-12-2018 09:44
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35975451)
So there’s no recognised model?
Looks like some people want me address this stupid question.
I do a lot of statistical work and have a decent understanding of the maths and methods. Of course I’m no economist (though I have a modest understanding of economic modelling from a year’s workmI did in the 1980s).

The essence of economic modelling is for the variables that combine to form economic output to be rationally applied. Rationally is important because these variables are highly dependent on psychological assessment of human behaviour in many dimensions. How that is applied is never explained. So, when every rational combination has been applied, the various outcomes are predicted.

What we never see is the result of each case; we only see whatever someone wants us to see. The variables are never explained to us - all we see is headlines, particularly if they are dramatic.

I expect a certain contributor to spend time picking holes in the above.

The real thing about Brexit is to get away from the EU shackles and build on that.

heero_yuy 15-12-2018 10:24
Re: Brexit
 
Indeed. There are those who, for their own political reasons, cynically adjust each of the input parameters to their model (BoE and treasury) to produce the worst possible outcome and then tout this as what is going to happen then the media lap it up and spit it out across their biased networks (BBC)

I wonder why we never hear what might happen when all the parameters are set for the best possible outcome?

Mr K 15-12-2018 10:45
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by heero_yuy (Post 35975466)
Indeed. There are those who, for their own political reasons, cynically adjust each of the input parameters to their model (BoE and treasury) to produce the worst possible outcome and then tout this as what is going to happen then the media lap it up and spit it out across their biased networks (BBC)

I wonder why we never hear what might happen when all the parameters are set for the best possible outcome?
Or it could be worse than they're predicting ....

All Brexit scenario's will have a negative impact, that I'm afraid is the reality.

Sephiroth 15-12-2018 10:52
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35975469)
Or it could be worse than they're predicting ....

All Brexit scenario's will have a negative impact, that I'm afraid is the reality.
But there will be no negative impact on our freedom from Brussels and we can build economically on that.

denphone 15-12-2018 11:04
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35975469)
Or it could be worse than they're predicting ....

All Brexit scenario's will have a negative impact, that I'm afraid is the reality.
Strange how the Independent Bank Of England is accused of bias because it does not agree with the economic views of others Its the same with the so called political bias of the BBC where News, Current Affairs and Factual Output has to be in whatever form it entails must be treated with due impartiality.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguide...s/impartiality

ianch99 15-12-2018 11:09
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35975470)
But there will be no negative impact on our freedom from Brussels and we can build economically on that.
If you lose your job as a result, "freedom" does not pay the mortgage.

Sephiroth 15-12-2018 11:12
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35975475)
If you lose your job as a result, "freedom" does not pay the mortgage.
So being under the Brussels yoke pays the mortgage?


Mick 15-12-2018 11:45
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35975475)
If you lose your job as a result, "freedom" does not pay the mortgage.
He won’t have to pay a mortgage if the bank, he’s lent from pisses off in to the EU with all this fear mongering bullshit, that banks will cease operations in U.K. and jobs will be lost under a no deal scenario. Honestly. :rolleyes:

ianch99 15-12-2018 12:20
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35975477)
So being under the Brussels yoke pays the mortgage?
There's no "yoke" here. It is only in your perception ..

There are 100,000's if not millions of people who did not vote in 2016 to be poorer. There is no mandate for this calamity.

denphone 15-12-2018 12:25
Re: Brexit
 
l thought this was a excellent balanced speech from Sir Ivan Rogers on Brexit.

https://news.liverpool.ac.uk/2018/12...ers-on-brexit/

1andrew1 15-12-2018 12:31
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35975483)
He won’t have to pay a mortgage if the bank, he’s lent from pisses off in to the EU with all this fear mongering bullshit, that banks will cease operations in U.K. and jobs will be lost under a no deal scenario. Honestly. :rolleyes:
It's the investment banks which are having to move some operations to the EU. Not the retail banks which provide current accounts and household mortgages.

Mick 15-12-2018 12:47
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35975485)
There's no "yoke" here. It is only in your perception ..

There are 100,000's if not millions of people who did not vote in 2016 to be poorer. There is no mandate for this calamity.
The calamity is non-existent, it is a made up negative fantasy by Remainers who oppose leaving a cancerous dictatorship organisation, AKA EU.

There is a mandate for leaving the EU and there was two official votes backing it should happen. Nothing you say, will factually alter that whatsoever.

---------- Post added at 11:47 ---------- Previous post was at 11:33 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35975487)
It's the investment banks which are having to move some operations to the EU. Not the retail banks which provide current accounts and household mortgages.
No - banks which have threatened to move ALL their operations to the EU, will have to move all their Corporate Assets to another Jurisdiction, once that occurs, banks have no legal avenue to pursue debts with UK customers, (because they are in another country, under their laws, not UK).

Once they move their entire operations out of UK jurisdictions, all contractual obligations that customers have, become null and void.

Of course it will never happen because it is made up fictional nonsense and the banks themselves have substantial lending contractual obligations that they cannot afford to just write if they leave the UK for good.

1andrew1 15-12-2018 13:26
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35975486)
l thought this was a excellent balanced speech from Sir Ivan Rogers on Brexit.

https://news.liverpool.ac.uk/2018/12...ers-on-brexit/
Thanks for posting. It may be a bit long for the time-pressured but worth reading. Thanks for sharing.

---------- Post added at 12:26 ---------- Previous post was at 12:22 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35975488)
No - banks which have threatened to move ALL their operations to the EU, will have to move all their Corporate Assets to another Jurisdiction, once that occurs, banks have no legal avenue to pursue debts with UK customers, (because they are in another country, under their laws, not UK).

Once they move their entire operations out of UK jurisdictions, all contractual obligations that customers have, become null and void.

Of course it will never happen because it is made up fictional nonsense and the banks themselves have substantial lending contractual obligations that they cannot afford to just write if they leave the UK for good.
Not sure which website you've been reading but no retail banks are moving overseas as their customers are in the UK.

Carth 15-12-2018 13:30
Re: Brexit
 
Investment banks . . . are they the ones who employ people to throw other peoples money into grand schemes hoping for a nice little earner?

Serious question because I'm not the gambling type, so have no idea about how investing in Carilion, HSL, the 'peoples pension' or a 6 trillion sq ft office block in Southwall benefits me.

Hugh 15-12-2018 13:38
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 35975492)
Investment banks . . . are they the ones who employ people to throw other peoples money into grand schemes hoping for a nice little earner?

Serious question because I'm not the gambling type, so have no idea about how investing in Carilion, HSL, the 'peoples pension' or a 6 trillion sq ft office block in Southwall benefits me.
No...

Investment bankers help their clients (businesses, not individuals) raise money in the capital markets, provide various financial advisory services, and assist with mergers and acquisition activity (and they have a nice little earner from these activities).

Sephiroth 15-12-2018 13:46
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35975485)
There's no "yoke" here. It is only in your perception ..

There are 100,000's if not millions of people who did not vote in 2016 to be poorer. There is no mandate for this calamity.
As I said, you don’t get it. There is a mandate to leave the EU. That the guvmin mucked the process up is not a reason to invalidate the Referendum.

Chris 15-12-2018 16:19
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35975485)
There's no "yoke" here. It is only in your perception ..

There are 100,000's if not millions of people who did not vote in 2016 to be poorer. There is no mandate for this calamity.
This is a fairly nonsensical piece of remainer spin.

The question on the ballot paper was do you think the U.K. should leave the EU, or remain in the EU. Matters of process and consequence were discussed at length on TV and in other media during the campaign.

Ultimately, every one of the more than 30 million people who voted in the referendum will have made their own judgment based on a balance of factors. The likely state of the economy will have been one of those factors.

As with so many remainer objections, “nobody voted to be poorer” is a canard that is fundamentally disrespectful to the intelligence of British voters. I’d love it if you could just accept that everyone weighed up the same evidence as you, but when it came to it, more people came to a different conclusion than agreed with you. That really is all there is to it.

Sephiroth 15-12-2018 17:46
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35975485)
There's no "yoke" here. It is only in your perception ..

There are 100,000's if not millions of people who did not vote in 2016 to be poorer. There is no mandate for this calamity.
Me and 17.4 million others who voted to leave the EU.

You just don't get it. The ballot paper said nothing about getting poorer or richer.

djfunkdup 15-12-2018 17:59
Re: Brexit
 
Onwards and upwards . Another week passes and the Brexit Express still aint been derailed by the needy traitors ;)

Hi Santa and the Elfs .. Merry Xmass :D:D

ianch99 15-12-2018 18:32
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35975494)
As I said, you don’t get it. There is a mandate to leave the EU. That the guvmin mucked the process up is not a reason to invalidate the Referendum.
No, I totally get. The "mandate" as you perceive it does not exist. This is demonstrated by the refusal of the House to countenance a Hard Brexit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35975497)
This is a fairly nonsensical piece of remainer spin.

The question on the ballot paper was do you think the U.K. should leave the EU, or remain in the EU. Matters of process and consequence were discussed at length on TV and in other media during the campaign.

Ultimately, every one of the more than 30 million people who voted in the referendum will have made their own judgment based on a balance of factors. The likely state of the economy will have been one of those factors.

As with so many remainer objections, “nobody voted to be poorer” is a canard that is fundamentally disrespectful to the intelligence of British voters. I’d love it if you could just accept that everyone weighed up the same evidence as you, but when it came to it, more people came to a different conclusion than agreed with you. That really is all there is to it.
More denial. No spin, just substance. You are just transposing your interpretation onto the entire 17.4 million. Too simplistic I am afraid. The voters who voted Leave did so for many reasons, with different priorities.

Many would not accept the significant financial consequences of a Hard Brexit. This is just the reality that you (and Parliament) have to deal with.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35975501)
Me and 17.4 million others who voted to leave the EU.

You just don't get it. The ballot paper said nothing about getting poorer or richer.
Finally, we agree: "The ballot paper said nothing about getting poorer or richer"

---------- Post added at 17:32 ---------- Previous post was at 17:30 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by djfunkdup (Post 35975503)
Onwards and upwards . Another week passes and the Brexit Express still aint been derailed by the needy traitors ;)

Hi Santa and the Elfs .. Merry Xmass :D:D
:nono: now, now, play nice ... there are no traitors around here unless you disagree of course?

Sephiroth 15-12-2018 19:22
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35975506)
No, I totally get. The "mandate" as you perceive it does not exist. This is demonstrated by the refusal of the House to countenance a Hard Brexit.
[SEPH]: The House of Commons was mandated by the Referendum to leave the EU. They passed that into law. What Parliament doesn't like is TM's awful deal. True, they don't like No Deal either. But Leave means Leave.

More denial. No spin, just substance. You are just transposing your interpretation onto the entire 17.4 million. Too simplistic I am afraid. The voters who voted Leave did so for many reasons, with different priorities.
[SEPH]: This is just your perception. They understood the English word "LEAVE".

Many would not accept the significant financial consequences of a Hard Brexit. This is just the reality that you (and Parliament) have to deal with.



Finally, we agree: "The ballot paper said nothing about getting poorer or richer"
[SEPH]: What was not on the ballot paper was touted by the two sides. The Leave voters heard what the Remain side were saying and decided to vote Leave.

---------- Post added at 17:32 ---------- Previous post was at 17:30 ----------



:nono: now, now, play nice ... there are no traitors around here unless you disagree of course?
[SEPH]: You do not get it. The Referendum result was LEAVE.

Stephen 15-12-2018 20:35
Re: Brexit
 
But what if they had another final referendum in Feb and the result changed to remain, due to all the issues and terrible leave package?

I certainly know a few people that changed their mind.

Sephiroth 15-12-2018 20:58
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen (Post 35975519)
But what if they had another final referendum in Feb and the result changed to remain, due to all the issues and terrible leave package?

I certainly know a few people that changed their mind.
You don't get it either. You are a Remainer who wishes to thwart the result of the Referendum. You'll support any means to thwart Brexit and cheat the Referendum result.

Your suggestion is exactly what the EU are playing for. You should not be wanting to have anything to do with those undemocratic so-and-sos.

Stephen 15-12-2018 21:02
Re: Brexit
 
What's undemocratic about giving people a final choice in what happens?

No one is thwarting anything.

Brexit is a mess and a total joke right now.

Sephiroth 15-12-2018 21:27
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen (Post 35975522)
What's undemocratic about giving people a final choice in what happens?

No one is thwarting anything.

Brexit is a mess and a total joke right now.
It is undemocratic to return to a referendum question because the losers don't like the original result. This is particularly so because the EU has engineered this outcome due to the non-existent negotiating abilities of TM.

We should now leave on a no-deal basis unless the EU changes its stand at the last hour.

You Remainers are trying to use democracy to usurp democracy. I get that.

Pierre 15-12-2018 21:53
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35975493)
No.....
You still can’t back up your claim that food will be 50% more expensive in a no deal Brexit.

So until you do, or accept that what you posted was project fear bollocks, anything you post will be treated with the upmost cynicism.

---------- Post added at 20:53 ---------- Previous post was at 20:50 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35975506)
You are just transposing your interpretation onto the entire 17.4 million
And just what are you doing?

The irony is simply eyewatering.

jfman 15-12-2018 21:54
Re: Brexit
 
We should have arranged a Brexit thread Christmas night out.

Pierre 15-12-2018 21:56
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen (Post 35975522)
What's undemocratic about giving people a final choice in what happens.
How about implementing the result of the first referendum?


Then we can discuss other things

---------- Post added at 20:56 ---------- Previous post was at 20:54 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35975531)
We should have arranged a Brexit thread Christmas night out.
Yes, sorry but i’m Picking fluff out of my belly button that night.

Mick 15-12-2018 22:09
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen (Post 35975522)
What's undemocratic about giving people a final choice in what happens?

No one is thwarting anything.

Brexit is a mess and a total joke right now.
Brexit has not flaming well happened yet, so how the hell can it be a mess? :rolleyes:

As I have said prior to this and "ignorant" people, (they know who they are ;) ) are side stepping the real issue here and that is Remainers in government and parliament are steering the ship and are trying to turn back and make us stay in a dictatorship, corrupted empire that now wants an army and has a drunken hair feeling pervert as one of it's presidents.

Democracy must prevail and that means implementing the first referendum result, a second referendum is a losers vote, for the democracy abusers trying to thwart the first.

Dave42 15-12-2018 22:16
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35975535)
Brexit has not flaming well happened yet, so how the hell can it be a mess? :rolleyes:

As I have said prior to this and "ignorant" people, (they know who they are ;) ) are side stepping the real issue here and that is Remainers in government and parliament are steering the ship and are trying to turn back and make us stay in a dictatorship, corrupted empire that now wants an army and has a drunken hair feeling pervert as one of it's presidents.

Democracy must prevail and that means implementing the first referendum result, a second referendum is a losers vote, for the democracy abusers trying to thwart the first.
and the people voted for mp's that's vast majority for remain in parliament after the referendum just saying a fact

Mick 15-12-2018 22:27
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave42 (Post 35975537)
and the people voted for mp's that's vast majority for remain in parliament after the referendum just saying a fact
That is manifestly absurd - MPs ran on Mandates and have these so called Manifestos that were committed to leave the EU. Go figure. :rolleyes:


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 22:16.
Page 51 of 89 « First 4147484950 51 5253545561 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum