Cable Forum
Page 70 of 89 « First 206066676869 70 7172737480 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)

Sephiroth 25-01-2019 10:35
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35980748)
This I agree - there have been elements on both sides that have been equally divisive - I won't be one sided here and say my side has behaved - they have not but neither has the Remain side, we've played the same silly games with absolutely no rules and ran campaigns exactly the same way.

But for one side to totally blame the other side is wrong and uncalled for and just instils division even further. This has to end.
Mr K's value is that he almost accurately reflects the Terry Thomas I remember.

mrmistoffelees 25-01-2019 10:35
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 35980751)
I wasn't the one that initiated the term "hate" in this context. I used it to provide continuity with the other posts that did.
I wasn't implying you did? I just picked up on the use of the word thats all

denphone 25-01-2019 10:37
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 35980749)
Bloody hell, scuse me whilst i faint ;)

It has to stop you're right, but, with stakes so high, and feelings so passionate the question that begs is how?
Examples are supposed to be set from up high but sadly the examples they have set thus so far to put it bluntly have been utterly appalling.

mrmistoffelees 25-01-2019 10:44
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35980754)
Examples are supposed to be set from up high but sadly the examples they have set thus so far to put it bluntly have been utterly appalling.
I think i mentioned this in a previous post, but Brexit is just the tip of the iceberg. it's allowed what may have previously been bubbling under the surface social and political tensions to burst through to the fore.

The people of this country have never been more divided, there are deep wounds that have to heal somehow. Leavers telling remainers to 'get over it' is antagonistic and does nothing to help. Remainers taunting leavers with how they're going to get Brexit delayed or cancelled again does nothing to help. It's just going to cause further resentment.

Sephiroth 25-01-2019 10:51
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 35980756)
I think i mentioned this in a previous post, but Brexit is just the tip of the iceberg. it's allowed what may have previously been bubbling under the surface social and political tensions to burst through to the fore.

The people of this country have never been more divided, there are deep wounds that have to heal somehow. Leavers telling remainers to 'get over it' is antagonistic and does nothing to help. Remainers taunting leavers with how they're going to get Brexit delayed or cancelled again does nothing to help. It's just going to cause further resentment.
The answer to it all is to implement the Referendum result. If there is to be a 2nd Referendum, then it should be on No Deal or the final TM Deal. An extension to A50 so that the Rerendum can be arranged would not then be out of order.

mrmistoffelees 25-01-2019 10:53
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35980757)
The answer to it all is to implement the Referendum result. If there is to be a 2nd Referendum, then it should be on No Deal or the final TM Deal. An extension to A50 so that the Rerendum can be arranged would not then be out of order.
It's not an answer to anything at all. Implementation of the referendum will do nothing to cure the divisions of society. Nor will the holding of a 2nd referendum.

Mr K 25-01-2019 11:14
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 35980751)
I wasn't the one that initiated the term "hate" in this context. I used it to provide continuity with the other posts that did.
Have a look at the Torygraph comments posts . It's full of language like ' traitors' and 'quislings', language that is almost laughable/archaic. The Guardian by comparison is much more civilized ! Maybe it's all Russian bots, but I suspect not. Or the abuse Tory MP Anna Soubry got outside the HOC. We all need to be careful or we'll end up with another Jo Cox situation.

mrmistoffelees 25-01-2019 11:22
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35980762)
Have a look at the Torygraph comments posts . It's full of language like ' traitors' and 'quislings', language that is almost laughable/archaic. The Guardian by comparison is much more civilized ! Maybe it's all Russian bots, but I suspect not. Or the abuse Tory MP Anna Soubry got outside the HOC. We all need to be careful or we'll end up with another Jo Cox situation.

Hang on a minute.... I'm a staunch remainer but that's so one sided it's unbelievable. take a look at HYS on the BBC there's the above & then leavers threatening riots, calling all Brexiteers bigots, racists and xenophobes. whilst a degree are, not all of them however

If Brexit happens do you not think there will be some remainers doing the same things to MP's? Let's not paint the remain side whiter than white.

Mr K 25-01-2019 11:32
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 35980763)
Hang on a minute.... I'm a staunch remainer but that's so one sided it's unbelievable. take a look at HYS on the BBC there's the above & then leavers threatening riots, calling all Brexiteers bigots, racists and xenophobes. whilst a degree are, not all of them however

If Brexit happens do you not think there will be some remainers doing the same things to MP's? Let's not paint the remain side whiter than white.
Of course there's been abuse from both sides, but I wouldn't put it at 50:50.

mrmistoffelees 25-01-2019 11:34
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35980766)
Of course there's been abuse from both sides, but I wouldn't put it at 50:50.
You need to have some level of evidence to support that.......

Mr K 25-01-2019 11:36
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 35980767)
You need to have some level of evidence to support that.......
Just given it.

mrmistoffelees 25-01-2019 11:39
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35980768)
Just given it.
Come on man, you're better than that

Mr K 25-01-2019 11:48
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 35980769)
Come on man, you're better than that
Think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one, but I won't retract the word 'hate' for some of the stuff that has gone on. Doubtless some of the groups that were that way inclined anyway have used Brexit as a cover.

Sephiroth 25-01-2019 11:52
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 35980758)
It's not an answer to anything at all. Implementation of the referendum will do nothing to cure the divisions of society. Nor will the holding of a 2nd referendum.
See what I mean, everybody?

Mr M nicely equivocates on the divisions but won't accept the Referendum result. He ignores my comparison of a vote in Parliament with a majority of 1 to a Referendum result to which the guvmin commits, which Mr M doesn't like with a 4% majority.


That is perpetuating divisions and has to stop.

mrmistoffelees 25-01-2019 12:22
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35980771)
See what I mean, everybody?

Mr M nicely equivocates on the divisions but won't accept the Referendum result. He ignores my comparison of a vote in Parliament with a majority of 1 to a Referendum result to which the guvmin commits, which Mr M doesn't like with a 4% majority.


That is perpetuating divisions and has to stop.

I quite clearly said that neither of the options that you provided will satisfy a fractured society as a whole based on quite clear evidence of whats available to read

I said nothing about my views whatsoever in the above post.

Hugh 25-01-2019 12:24
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35980771)
See what I mean, everybody?

Mr M nicely equivocates on the divisions but won't accept the Referendum result. He ignores my comparison of a vote in Parliament with a majority of 1 to a Referendum result to which the guvmin commits, which Mr M doesn't like with a 4% majority.


That is perpetuating divisions and has to stop.
Disagreeing with your premise is not perpetuating divisions, no matter how many times you say it - "perpetuating divisions" is using hateful language and refusing to accept that other peoples' views, if backed up by evidence, are allowed to to be voiced.

ymmv

ianch99 25-01-2019 12:42
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35980752)
Mr K's value is that he almost accurately reflects the Terry Thomas I remember.
Ridiculing member's like this just adds fuel to the fire. I suggest you debate the points he raises instead?

---------- Post added at 12:42 ---------- Previous post was at 12:32 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35980771)
See what I mean, everybody?

Mr M nicely equivocates on the divisions but won't accept the Referendum result. He ignores my comparison of a vote in Parliament with a majority of 1 to a Referendum result to which the guvmin commits, which Mr M doesn't like with a 4% majority.

That is perpetuating divisions and has to stop.
You really need to accept that, in this country, people are allowed to hold different views and importantly, allowed to voice them.

You believe that Germany, France and Ireland are in an evil EU conspiracy, etc. You are wrong of course but you are quite entitled to repeat such nonsense .. as you due ... regularly .. :)

What may possibly help to bring the two sides together are two things:

1. some honesty in admitting that there is no mandate for No Deal per the Leave campaign "manifesto"
2. stop treating Brexit as a "Winner Takes All" game. The vote was so close that imposing an extreme implementation of Brexit would be a severe mistake. History tells us this ..

Angua 25-01-2019 14:14
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 35980767)
You need to have some level of evidence to support that.......
To be fair, remain whilst vocal has not attracted the yellow vest style of supporter.

Leave has support from both left and right, just not so much from the middle, with a small section of the right using leave to bolster their racism.

Either way, threats of violence should not be allowed to stifle debate or as an excuse to carry on as we are.



---------- Post added at 15:14 ---------- Previous post was at 15:12 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35980780)
Ridiculing member's like this just adds fuel to the fire. I suggest you debate the points he raises instead?

---------- Post added at 12:42 ---------- Previous post was at 12:32 ----------



You really need to accept that, in this country, people are allowed to hold different views and importantly, allowed to voice them.

You believe that Germany, France and Ireland are in an evil EU conspiracy, etc. You are wrong of course but you are quite entitled to repeat such nonsense .. as you due ... regularly .. :)

What may possibly help to bring the two sides together are two things:

1. some honesty in admitting that there is no mandate for No Deal per the Leave campaign "manifesto"
2. stop treating Brexit as a "Winner Takes All" game. The vote was so close that imposing an extreme implementation of Brexit would be a severe mistake. History tells us this ..
It was the Remain side of the referendum said No Deal was an option. So it seems doubly ironic that the Leave side are trying to take ownership of the claim.

mrmistoffelees 25-01-2019 15:01
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Angua (Post 35980784)
To be fair, remain whilst vocal has not attracted the yellow vest style of supporter.

Leave has support from both left and right, just not so much from the middle, with a small section of the right using leave to bolster their racism.

Either way, threats of violence should not be allowed to stifle debate or as an excuse to carry on as we are.



---------- Post added at 15:14 ---------- Previous post was at 15:12 ----------



It was the Remain side of the referendum said No Deal was an option. So it seems doubly ironic that the Leave side are trying to take ownership of the claim.

Which is why I asked in an earlier post if it was not possible that remain protests would become more violent if/when Brexit passes. The only reason we're not seeing more of it is because we haven't actually left yet.

Let's not assume that all remainers are above that sort of behaviour it's a dangerous precedent to set.

Carth 25-01-2019 15:02
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35980780)

What may possibly help to bring the two sides together are two things:

1. some honesty in admitting that there is no mandate for No Deal per the Leave campaign "manifesto"
2. stop treating Brexit as a "Winner Takes All" game. The vote was so close that imposing an extreme implementation of Brexit would be a severe mistake. History tells us this ..
point (1) . . mandate or not, it's getting closer to it every day ;)

point (2) . . doesn't matter how 'close' the vote was, one side won, one lost.

If a horse wins a race by 10 mm they don't ask for a re-run because it was too close to be a result. If you avoid a car crash by 6 inches, nobody suggests having another try :D

mrmistoffelees 25-01-2019 15:05
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 35980790)
point (1) . . mandate or not, it's getting closer to it every day ;)

point (2) . . doesn't matter how 'close' the vote was, one side one, one lost.

If a horse wins a race by 10 mm they don't ask for a re-run because it was too close to be a result. If you avoid a car crash by 6 inches, nobody suggests having another try :D
If they find out the loser of the horse race gets shot, they might

Carth 25-01-2019 15:07
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 35980791)
If they find out the loser of the horse race gets shot, they might
You're confusing horse racing with that 'I'm a celebrity' stuff . . admittedly it would probably increase the viewing figures though :D

mrmistoffelees 25-01-2019 15:10
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 35980792)
You're confusing horse racing with that 'I'm a celebrity' stuff . . admittedly it would probably increase the viewing figures though :D
Am I? Thank's for clearing that up.

djfunkdup 25-01-2019 15:24
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 35980792)
You're confusing horse racing with that 'I'm a celebrity' stuff . . admittedly it would probably increase the viewing figures though :D

Totally agree.Reality is somewhat different lol :D:D

Angua 25-01-2019 15:48
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 35980790)
point (1) . . mandate or not, it's getting closer to it every day ;)

point (2) . . doesn't matter how 'close' the vote was, one side won, one lost.

If a horse wins a race by 10 mm they don't ask for a re-run because it was too close to be a result. If you avoid a car crash by 6 inches, nobody suggests having another try :D
For me a mandate = a majority of those who can vote. Not a majority of those who did vote.

Anything else is no more than slightly larger percentage of those who voted chose one particular option over another. Not a resounding approval of any one option.

This is, and always has been the problem with a binary vote referendum with a non binary answer.

Please tell me who, of either leave or remain, chose the option to leave with an open ended agreement with the EU?

Carth 25-01-2019 16:12
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Angua (Post 35980798)
For me a mandate = a majority of those who can vote. Not a majority of those who did vote.

Anything else is no more than slightly larger percentage of those who voted chose one particular option over another. Not a resounding approval of any one option.

This is, and always has been the problem with a binary vote referendum with a non binary answer.
would it help matters if we said that those who didn't vote (but could do so) actually abstained?

Does this alter anything now we've given it a posh word?

Any vote has 3 possible answers yes - no - abstain

Angua 25-01-2019 16:49
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 35980800)
would it help matters if we said that those who didn't vote (but could do so) actually abstained?

Does this alter anything now we've given it a posh word?

Any vote has 3 possible answers yes - no - abstain
No government since the 1930s has had over 50% of the vote, but they all claim a mandate.

Comparing the result to a race is a bad analogy. Whichever way the result is spun, the majority did not vote in a positive way for either leave or remain.

63% did not vote leave. 66% did not vote remain.

In other words a majority did not vote positively for either option. Nor was there any opportunity to vote for the deal May is trying to get.

And none of this now matters as we had a general election in which no party got a mandate for their particular version of Leave.

Pierre 25-01-2019 19:32
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35980735)
Hope Brexiteers are listening as most of the vitriol/hate has come from that side.
FFS

Sephiroth 25-01-2019 19:36
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35980780)
Ridiculing member's like this just adds fuel to the fire. I suggest you debate the points he raises instead?[COLOR="Silver"]

<SNIP>
It was intended as a compliment to Mr. K. Not back-handed but absolutely benign and well meant.

Pierre 25-01-2019 19:37
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 35980769)
Come on man, you're better than that
All together now......

"Oh no he isn't"

ianch99 25-01-2019 19:41
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35980825)
It was intended as a compliment to Mr. K. Not back-handed but absolutely benign and well meant.
In that case, I apologise ..

Unfortunately, I am old enough to remember Terry Thomas :(

Sephiroth 25-01-2019 19:43
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35980780)
<SNIP>

You really need to accept that, in this country, people are allowed to hold different views and importantly, allowed to voice them.
[SEPH]: Oh please. What a ridiculous thing to say and to accuse me of.

You believe that Germany, France and Ireland are in an evil EU conspiracy, etc. You are wrong of course but you are quite entitled to repeat such nonsense .. as you due ... regularly .. :)
[SEPH]: What's wrong with you? I never said any of that. I simply reinforced my point about hegemony, domination. "Evil" doesn't come into it. Just the steps towards federalisation and so on.

What may possibly help to bring the two sides together are two things:

1. some honesty in admitting that there is no mandate for No Deal per the Leave campaign "manifesto"
[SEPH]: A Remainer's mantra in the face of the Referendum result.

2. stop treating Brexit as a "Winner Takes All" game. The vote was so close that imposing an extreme implementation of Brexit would be a severe mistake. History tells us this ..
[SEPH]: Hence my valid point about a margin of 1 in Parliament being all that's needed to pass a law. A margin >1m in a Referendum shouldn't be argued about. Again, Remainer nonsense.
Sorry, whilst you are perfectly entitled to your view, your polarised interpretation of democracy is the problem that many Remainers have and it is they who are causing the division in the face of a clear Referendum result.

ianch99 25-01-2019 19:47
Re: Brexit
 
Found on Twitter:

Quote:
Oh this is just incredible. Are you ready for this? We’ve been trawling Hansard for examples of hypocrisy by our Brexit overlords & found this👇. In the debate on Scottish/Welsh devolution, Iain Duncan Smith tabled a Commons amendment pushing the option of… A SECOND REFERENDUM
Are there two Iain Duncan Smith's? :)

https://www.cableforum.uk/images/local/2019/01/19.jpg

Sephiroth 25-01-2019 19:51
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35980829)
In that case, I apologise ..

Unfortunately, I am old enough to remember Terry Thomas :(
So am I. TT was hilarious. A pity we differ on that too!


---------- Post added at 19:51 ---------- Previous post was at 19:48 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35980831)
Found on Twitter:



Are there two Iain Duncan Smith's? :)

https://www.cableforum.uk/images/local/2019/01/19.jpg
A gem indeed. I'm rather enjoying this Brexit stuff because it is making havoc with the politicians who have always been a self-interested bunch of incompetents (except Maggie's lot).

But I'd still rather the Referendum result was honoured and if we end up remaining, that'll be fun too.

Mr K 25-01-2019 22:01
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35980832)
TT was hilarious. A pity we differ on that too!
Came to a sad end Terry Thomas, died in poverty :(
Suspect he would have been a Brexiteer and called the EU an 'absolute shower', top bloke all the same :)

Sephiroth 26-01-2019 10:04
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 35980776)
I quite clearly said that neither of the options that you provided will satisfy a fractured society as a whole based on quite clear evidence of whats available to read

I said nothing about my views whatsoever in the above post.
Society isn't yet fractured - at least not down to Brexit.
There are differences of opinion, but "fracture" is too strong a word for now.

If Brexit is thwarted, then a fracture may well occur as previously peaceful people take to the street, then to be exploited by the violent types.

The Referendum must be honored; the Remainers won't take to the streets in the "fractured" sense.

Mr K 26-01-2019 10:29
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35980865)
Society isn't yet fractured - at least not down to Brexit.
There are differences of opinion, but "fracture" is too strong a word for now.

If Brexit is thwarted, then a fracture may well occur as previously peaceful people take to the street, then to be exploited by the violent types.

The Referendum must be honored; the Remainers won't take to the streets in the "fractured" sense.
Society is fractured, but it's not just down to Brexit, been that way since the 1980s and a certain PM who claimed ' there's no such thing as society'. We certainly haven't 'all been in it together' as another crap PM claimed 9 years ago.

The real issue will not be Remainers post Brexit, it will be the ' just about managing' working class Leavers, who realise they've been conned big time by those rich career politicians who will be relatively unaffected.

Sephiroth 26-01-2019 10:32
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35980867)
Society is fractured, but it's not just down to Brexit, been that way since the 1980s and a certain PM who claimed ' there's no such thing as society'. We certainly haven't 'all been in it together' as another crap PM claimed 9 years ago.

The real issue will not be Remainers post Brexit, it will be the ' just about managing' working class Leavers, who realise they've been conned big time by those rich career politicians who will be relatively unaffected.
It won't be just the Leavers. I did say "yet" with what you've said in mind.

pip08456 26-01-2019 11:28
Re: Brexit
 
1 Attachment(s)
I found this rather a humourous solution.:D:D:D

papa smurf 26-01-2019 12:42
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 35980872)
I found this rather a humourous solution.:D:D:D
Plan B

RichardCoulter 26-01-2019 12:47
Re: Brexit
 
Watched a history programme last night; didn't know that we had tried to join the EU in 1963 and were rejected because of France.

I understand that it was the Heath Government that finally took us into the EU in 1974 (what changed to appease France?), so was the actual referendum held afterwards to allow us to decide whether to stay in it or not?

From what I gather, the result was 'No'. Was this honoured in any way?

papa smurf 26-01-2019 13:44
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 35980877)
Watched a history programme last night; didn't know that we had tried to join the EU in 1963 and were rejected because of France.

I understand that it was the Heath Government that finally took us into the EU in 1974 (what changed to appease France?), so was the actual referendum held afterwards to allow us to decide whether to stay in it or not?

From what I gather, the result was 'No'. Was this honoured in any way?
“ The Government has announced the results of the renegotiation of the United Kingdom's terms of membership of the European Community.

Do you think the United Kingdom should stay in the European Community (the Common Market)? ”
Location United Kingdom (pop. 56.225m)
Date 5 June 1975

Results
Votes %
Yes 17,378,581 67.23%
No 8,470,073 32.77%
Valid votes 25,848,654 99.79%





https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_U...hip_referendum













Invalid or blank votes 54,540 0.21%
Total votes 25,903,194 100.00%
Registered voters/turnout 40,086,677 64.62%

Between 21 and 28 October 1971 the House of Commons debated whether or not the UK should become a member of the EC, with then Prime Minister Edward Heath commenting just before the vote:

“ But tonight when this House endorses this Motion many millions of people right across the world will rejoice that we have taken our rightful place in a truly United Europe! ”
The House of Commons voted 356-244 in favour of the motion, with the Prime Minister commenting straight afterwards on behalf of the house.

“ Resolved, That this House approves Her Majesty's Government's decision of principle to join the European Communities on the basis of the arrangements which have been negotiated. ”
No referendum was held when Britain agreed to an accession treaty on 22 January 1972 or when the European Communities Act 1972 went through the legislative process, on the grounds that to hold one would be unconstitutional. The United Kingdom joined the European Communities on 1 January 1973, along with Denmark and the Republic of Ireland. The EC would later become the European Union.

Hugh 26-01-2019 13:55
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35980867)
Society is fractured, but it's not just down to Brexit, been that way since the 1980s and a certain PM who claimed ' there's no such thing as society'. We certainly haven't 'all been in it together' as another crap PM claimed 9 years ago.

The real issue will not be Remainers post Brexit, it will be the ' just about managing' working class Leavers, who realise they've been conned big time by those rich career politicians who will be relatively unaffected.
Context is all...
Quote:
And, you know, there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women and there are families. And no governments can do anything except through people, and people must look to themselves first. It is our duty to look after ourselves and then, also, to look after our neighbours.

pip08456 26-01-2019 14:43
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 35980877)
Watched a history programme last night; didn't know that we had tried to join the EU in 1963 and were rejected because of France.

I understand that it was the Heath Government that finally took us into the EU in 1974 (what changed to appease France?), so was the actual referendum held afterwards to allow us to decide whether to stay in it or not?

From what I gather, the result was 'No'. Was this honoured in any way?
The rejections of France to Britain were mainly because of De Gaulle being a 100% anglophobe. After his death in 1970 tthe door was opened.

papa smurf 26-01-2019 15:31
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 35980885)
The rejections of France to Britain were mainly because of De Gaulle being a 100% anglophobe. After his death in 1970 tthe door was opened.
If only he had lived we would all be happy.

Hugh 26-01-2019 15:41
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 35980889)
If only he had lived we would all be happy.
He did - from 1890 until 1970.

RichardCoulter 26-01-2019 15:56
Re: Brexit
 
Thanks for the info everyone.

If a referendum to join wasn't held because if was deemed to be unconstitutional (why?), why wasn't this seen as a problem with the Brexit referendum?

Sephiroth 26-01-2019 16:10
Re: Brexit
 
I remember it well. Business loved it.

It was exciting to join the EC - a trading bloc, edging towards some common practices such a freedom of labour movement. This never became a problem for some (not a problem for me) until the Eastern European countries joined what had become the EU; of course they were all taught English not French or German so here they came. Again, not a problem for me, but many people didn't like this immigration; they may have liked it more had the UK guvmin behaved responsibly by putting money and incentives into infrastructure and housing and health - though the financial crisis did nothing to help the guvmin.

As for De Gaulle, the yesterday's man - an ungrateful soab who could never live down that the UK came to his country's rescue twice in as many decades - from the hegemonic Germans, of course.

Now Macron's buckling under to the Germans by signing a treaty that uses German strength to keep his stupid chest out as their running dog. Remember, Macron, the man who wants to keep us in the Backstop unless we give him our fishing rights.

All that the Remainers can say about Macron's stance is that he is looking after his own and that's natural. Doesn't mean we need to be in bed with him by remaining in the EU.




---------- Post added at 16:10 ---------- Previous post was at 16:07 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 35980891)
Thanks for the info everyone.

If a referendum to join wasn't held because if was deemed to be unconstitutional (why?), why wasn't this seen as a problem with the Brexit referendum?
Because the Remainers are trying to bend constitutional norms.

Maggy 26-01-2019 17:56
Re: Brexit
 
De Gaulle was an ungrateful so and so.

papa smurf 26-01-2019 18:13
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggy J (Post 35980907)
De Gaulle was an ungrateful so and so.
That's the French for you.

Sephiroth 26-01-2019 18:28
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggy J (Post 35980907)
De Gaulle was an ungrateful so and so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 35980908)
That's the French for you.
Nah - just De Gaulle & Macron!

Pierre 26-01-2019 19:38
Re: Brexit
 
https://www.facebook.com/12961787376...3308445396067/

Chris 26-01-2019 23:11
Re: Brexit
 
De Gaulle understood the British better than most. He knew we would be a disruptive influence to le projet, and he was right. The EU is not nearly the creature the French have always dreamed of, because we were there, holding them back.

Of course, it is also still far too French for our liking (principally, in the working of the European Commission, which the British tabloids love to hate for its activism and regulatory zeal, but which is actually just behaving exactly as the French civil service does).

I reckon he would also not be surprised at our eventual departure, nor that the process has caused such disruption. Hey Bobby, what’s the French for I told you so? :D

Sephiroth 26-01-2019 23:41
Re: Brexit
 
Je vous l'avais bien dit.

Hom3r 27-01-2019 09:47
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 35980925)
Je vous l'avais bien dit.

To paraphrase Blackadder.


No speak deigo?:D

jfman 27-01-2019 17:31
Re: Brexit
 
It’s not Brexit specific but I found this article quite interesting about global population growth.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-rates-decline

Hugh 28-01-2019 10:50
Re: Brexit
 
1 Attachment(s)
From yesterday’s Sunday Times (it was also in the Independent, Mail, Express, Sky News, and other outlets).

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/u...haos-bfqgzzlrw

papa smurf 28-01-2019 11:14
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35981021)
From yesterday’s Sunday Times (it was also in the Independent, Mail, Express, Sky News, and other outlets).

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/u...haos-bfqgzzlrw
Are they expecting remainers to turn into terrorists?

Hugh 28-01-2019 11:38
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 35981022)
Are they expecting remainers to turn into terrorists?
As stated in the article
Quote:
“The overriding theme in all the no-deal planning is civil disobedience and the fear that it will lead to death in the event of food and medical shortages,”
If it does happen (which I think is highly unlikely, but there have to be contingency plans in place), any "food and medical shortages" will affect people no matter how they voted.

ianch99 28-01-2019 12:15
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35981021)
From yesterday’s Sunday Times (it was also in the Independent, Mail, Express, Sky News, and other outlets).

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/u...haos-bfqgzzlrw
Just ignore it, we all know civil servants just make stuff up ..

papa smurf 28-01-2019 12:21
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35981025)
Just ignore it, we all know civil servants just make stuff up ..
It's serious stuff, the armed forces in tesco rationing potatoes and kingsmill to quell food riots.

Pierre 28-01-2019 12:49
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35981025)
Just ignore it, we all know civil servants just make stuff up ..
I will ignore it, as it is total bollocks.

pip08456 28-01-2019 13:05
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35981025)
Just ignore it, we all know civil servants just make stuff up ..
I'd ignore the media reports as they always act on their own agenda whatever it may be.

Contingency planning has always been based on a worst case scenario. It has to be for it to be effective. If you don't plan for the worst and cover all possible scearios you may as well just "play it by ear".

denphone 28-01-2019 13:28
Re: Brexit
 
No-deal Brexit 'to leave shelves empty' warn retailers

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47028748

Quote:
M&S, Sainsbury's and Waitrose are among those warning stockpiling fresh food is impossible and that the UK is very reliant on the EU for produce.
Quote:
The letter, seen by the BBC, uses the government's own estimate that freight through Calais may fall 87% from current levels, threatening the availability and shelf life of many products.
Quote:
Their letter says that stockpiling fresh food is impossible and that the complex, 'just in time' supply chain through which food is imported into the UK will be "significantly disrupted" in the event of a no-deal Brexit.

Mr K 28-01-2019 13:43
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35981023)
As stated in the article

If it does happen (which I think is highly unlikely, but there have to be contingency plans in place), any "food and medical shortages" will affect people no matter how they voted.
Well that certainly is a surprise, there won't be 'winners' and 'losers'? How disappointing !

In the event of rioting from Brexiteers we can always did what we did in the miners strike and send out the police on horseback to club them down. Shouldn't take too much to knock away their zimmer frames and confiscate their Daily Fails ;)

papa smurf 28-01-2019 13:46
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35981032)
Well that certainly is a surprise, there won't be 'winners' and 'losers'? How disappointing !

In the event of rioting from Brexiteers we can always did what we did in the miners strike and send out the police on horseback to club them down. Shouldn't take too much to knock away their zimmer frames and confiscate their Daily Fails ;)
We'll all be celebrating and laughing at the panicked remainers looking for the avocado.

denphone 28-01-2019 14:03
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 35981033)
We'll all be celebrating and laughing at the panicked remainers looking for the avocado.
Well we won't be panicking l can assure you...

mrmistoffelees 28-01-2019 14:49
Re: Brexit
 
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...it-say-experts

Some interesting thoughts in here

Mick 28-01-2019 15:30
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35981023)
As stated in the article

If it does happen (which I think is highly unlikely, but there have to be contingency plans in place), any "food and medical shortages" will affect people no matter how they voted.
The Remainers wonderful EU, (heavens knows why they think they are wonderful) would not put lives at risk and if they did threaten this bullshit, who the hell wants to stay in such a corrupted EU that wants to punish us for making a Democratic decision with such pathetic threats?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

It's beggers belief all this bollocks and nonsense. It just strengthens the Brexiteers cause to leave such a disgusting and cancerous and corrupted EU.

But as predicted, it was always going to get this crazy with the scare mongering nonsense. I Just ignore it, it's noise and nothing else.

BenMcr 28-01-2019 16:38
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35981041)
that wants to punish us for making a Democratic decision with such pathetic threats?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
They aren't threats. The risks mentioned are if we leave with no-deal so cannot have any the trade arrangements required to keep supplies coming in with minimum disruption.
Quote:
It's beggers belief all this bollocks and nonsense. It just strengthens the Brexiteers cause to leave such a disgusting and cancerous and corrupted EU.
This isn't the EU's doing. This is we leave without a deal with them. No different than if stopped a having a existing trade deal with anyone else in world - it would disrupt the existing trade between us and that country.

What happens after that is then purely down to us.

The 2011 riots started over a very local reason and spread to areas not directly connected to it. The disruption a no-deal exit could cause will be UK wide.

papa smurf 28-01-2019 16:58
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenMcr (Post 35981045)
They aren't threats. The risks mentioned are if we leave with no-deal so cannot have any the trade arrangements required to keep supplies coming in with minimum disruption.
This isn't the EU's doing. This is we leave without a deal with them. No different than if stopped a having a existing trade deal with anyone else in world - it would disrupt the existing trade between us and that country.

What happens after that is then purely down to us.

The 2011 riots started over a very local reason and spread to areas not directly connected to it. The disruption a no-deal exit could cause will be UK wide.
I just don't understand why remainers want to riot over leaving on wto rules,maybe it's time to round them up and get them into internment camps so the rest of us can be safe.

Gavin78 28-01-2019 17:06
Re: Brexit
 
In the event of a food shortage and riots start I'll just bypass the food shops and put some retail shop windows through instead and rob a couple of TV's and designer clothes. Maybe smash some cars up.

Because lets face it, it won't be about Brexit it will be the nationwide criminals, teenagers and dole **** that will come out robbing anything but food.

Hugh 28-01-2019 17:42
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 35981047)
I just don't understand why remainers want to riot over leaving on wto rules,maybe it's time to round them up and get them into internment camps so the rest of us can be safe.
They don’t - you’re making stuff up to be provocative.

Maggy 28-01-2019 17:53
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 35981047)
I just don't understand why remainers want to riot over leaving on wto rules,maybe it's time to round them up and get them into internment camps so the rest of us can be safe.
Seriously? Now who is scaremongering?

mrmistoffelees 28-01-2019 19:11
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 35981047)
I just don't understand why remainers want to riot over leaving on wto rules,maybe it's time to round them up and get them into internment camps so the rest of us can be safe.


From the link above


‘It has been claimed that the UK could simply move to WTO terms if there is no deal with the EU. But Anneli Howard, a specialist in EU and competition law at Monckton Chambers and a member of the bar’s Brexit working group, believes this isn’t true.

“No deal means leaving with nothing,” ’

richard s 28-01-2019 19:18
Re: Brexit
 
So a third of are food imports come from Europe... all sides will loose out then, e.g. European suppliers will get no cash for their goods... O dear... As for Tesco making 9000 people redundant about half could be reasigned, loyalty means crap all.

RichardCoulter 28-01-2019 19:25
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gavin78 (Post 35981048)
In the event of a food shortage and riots start I'll just bypass the food shops and put some retail shop windows through instead and rob a couple of TV's and designer clothes. Maybe smash some cars up.

Because lets face it, it won't be about Brexit it will be the nationwide criminals, teenagers and dole **** that will come out robbing anything but food.
What's your definition of 'dole ****'?

One of the amendments is for the creation of a 250 strong citizens assembly to put forward the views of the public regarding this mess. Would anyone here be interested in joining it if it comes to fruition?

There have been calls for the Queen to intervene, but I doubt she would want to be overtly political in public.

Pierre 28-01-2019 19:40
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 35981060)
From the link above


‘It has been claimed that the UK could simply move to WTO terms if there is no deal with the EU. But Anneli Howard, a specialist in EU and competition law at Monckton Chambers and a member of the bar’s Brexit working group, believes this isn’t true.

“No deal means leaving with nothing,” ’
What is she talking about then? Trading on WTO terms is the default baseline, is she proposing that we will have less than that? If so she’s no specialist.

This debate really brings out the thickos.

---------- Post added at 19:40 ---------- Previous post was at 19:38 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 35981062)
What's your definition of 'dole ****'?

One of the amendments is for the creation of a 250 strong citizens assembly to put forward the views of the public regarding this mess. Would anyone here be interested in joining it if it comes to fruition?

There have been calls for the Queen to intervene, but I doubt she would want to be overtly political in public.
No because a 250 assembly would be about as representative as kick in the balls. One of the worst ideas ever.

nomadking 28-01-2019 19:41
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenMcr (Post 35981045)
They aren't threats. The risks mentioned are if we leave with no-deal so cannot have any the trade arrangements required to keep supplies coming in with minimum disruption.
This isn't the EU's doing. This is we leave without a deal with them. No different than if stopped a having a existing trade deal with anyone else in world - it would disrupt the existing trade between us and that country.

What happens after that is then purely down to us.

The 2011 riots started over a very local reason and spread to areas not directly connected to it. The disruption a no-deal exit could cause will be UK wide.
There is no deal on offer. All that is on "offer" is to continue with freedom of movement, having to obey EU rules (even any new ones), and obey the ECJ. It's just a delaying tactic in order not to do any real deal, and expect us to give in to whatever they say. Which we have done repeatedly.



Until the Remain side stop trying to block the democratic vote by backhanded means, the EU won't take us seriously.


The flip side of the alleged shortage of goods from the EU, is the lack of money earned by those EU suppliers. Eg EU fruit and veg suppliers will go bankrupt.

Carth 28-01-2019 19:48
Re: Brexit
 
I'm sitting here patiently waiting for the next 'revelation' from big business that will be revealed in an in depth 17 hour 'sky special'


oh and
Quote:
"In March, the situation becomes more acute as UK produce is out of season," the letter says.

At that time of year, 90% of lettuces, 80% of tomatoes and 70% of soft fruit sold in the UK is grown in the EU, the letter says.

"As this produce is fresh and perishable, it needs to be moved quickly from farms to our stores," the retailers say.
does this mean that growing season in many EU countries with a climate similar (or worse) than ours can still grow this stuff?

. . . over wool eyes big pulling business . . re-arrange ;)

RichardCoulter 28-01-2019 20:15
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35981064)
What is she talking about then? Trading on WTO terms is the default baseline, is she proposing that we will have less than that? If so she’s no specialist.

This debate really brings out the thickos.

---------- Post added at 19:40 ---------- Previous post was at 19:38 ----------



No because a 250 assembly would be about as representative as kick in the balls. One of the worst ideas ever.
The same could be said about our MP's! I think it could be useful, but there would have to be safeguards to ensure that each group of views was represented fairly.

Hugh 28-01-2019 20:17
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35981064)
What is she talking about then? Trading on WTO terms is the default baseline, is she proposing that we will have less than that? If so she’s no specialist.

This debate really brings out the thickos.

---------- Post added at 19:40 ---------- Previous post was at 19:38 ----------



No because a 250 assembly would be about as representative as kick in the balls. One of the worst ideas ever.
You must have missed this bit in the article...
Quote:
There are two apparently insurmountable hurdles to the UK trading on current WTO tariffs in the event of Britain crashing out in March, said Howard.

Firstly, the UK must produce its own schedule covering both services and each of the 5,000-plus product lines covered in the WTO agreement and get it agreed by all the 163 WTO states in the 32 remaining parliamentary sitting days until 29 March 2019. A number of states have already raised objections to the UK’s draft schedule: 20 over goods and three over services.

To make it more complicated, there are no “default terms” Britain can crash out on, Howard said, while at the same time, the UK has been blocked by WTO members from simply relying on the EU’s “schedule” – its existing tariffs and tariff-free trade quotas.

The second hurdle is the sheer volume of domestic legislation that would need to be passed before being able to trade under WTO rules: there are nine statutes and 600 statutory instruments that would need to be adopted.

The government cannot simply cut and paste the 120,000 EU statutes into UK law and then make changes to them gradually, Howard said. “The UK will need to set up new enforcement bodies and transfer new powers to regulators to create our own domestic regimes,” she said.
I think she might know a bit more than you on Trade and Competition Law
Quote:
Anneli is a senior junior with extensive experience in EU and UK competition law. In 2018 she was recognized as the Legal 500 “Junior Barrister of the Year” for EU/Competition, having been nominated as “Junior of the Year” in the 2014 Chambers Bar Awards. She is Standing Counsel to the Civil Aviation Authority on competition, regulatory and EU matters.

She advises both commercial clients and regulators on a wide range of domestic and EU antitrust, competition and regulatory issues, including cartels, leniency, complaints,commitments and settlement procedures,abuse of dominant position, exclusivity, online restrictions,distribution agreements and state aid. Anneli also acts for private parties in injunction and competition damages claims under Articles 101 and 102 in the CAT, Chancery Division and Commercial Court.

She has a sound grasp of economic concepts across the breadth of competition law, from market definition to market power assessments, theory of harm, counterfactual analysis and objective. She has in depth familiarity with UK and EU competition law practice and procedure as shown by her contributions to the leading text book Bellamy & Child European Community Law of Competition (Co-Author of Chapter 16 “Litigating Infringements in National Courts”), Competition Litigation in the UK (Sweet & Maxwell) and Judicial Control in the EU (OUP 2004). She is Co-editor of UK Competition Procedure: the Modernised Regime (OUP 2007) and has contributed various articles on the forthcoming Damages Directive.

Anneli has appeared on behalf of private clients and regulators before the Competition Appeal Tribunal, Commercial Court, Chancery Division and Court of Appeal as well as the European Commission in Brussels and the General Court and Court of Justice in Luxembourg. She has defended large corporations such as Visa, Orange and BT as well as acted for commercial operators seeking stand-alone or follow-on damages and/or injunctive relief.

denphone 28-01-2019 20:21
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 35981062)
What's your definition of 'dole ****'?

One of the amendments is for the creation of a 250 strong citizens assembly to put forward the views of the public regarding this mess. Would anyone here be interested in joining it if it comes to fruition?

There have been calls for the Queen to intervene, but I doubt she would want to be overtly political in public.
So someone loses their job and such is the demonization of people on the dole in this country that some have to resort to bigoted prejudiced name calling.:rolleyes:

1andrew1 28-01-2019 20:35
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35981041)
The Remainers wonderful EU, (heavens knows why they think they are wonderful).
I thought you voted to Remain, therefore you're a Remainer. There's been no subsequent vote so surely everyone's vote still stands?

Dave42 28-01-2019 20:52
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 35981060)
From the link above


‘It has been claimed that the UK could simply move to WTO terms if there is no deal with the EU. But Anneli Howard, a specialist in EU and competition law at Monckton Chambers and a member of the bar’s Brexit working group, believes this isn’t true.

“No deal means leaving with nothing,” ’
the brexiteers forget we part of WTO because of our EU membership at this very moment

Pierre 28-01-2019 21:45
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35981074)
You must have missed this bit in the article...

I think she might know a bit more than you on Trade and Competition Law
I didn’t miss anything, I just didn’t read any of the article and i’m Not going to.

So then we the fifth or sixth biggest economy in the world will be cut adrift unable to trade with anyone.................

Yeah alright.......

Total bull bollocks, anyone that falls for this crap is sub-normal.

Do you want to know what will happen March 29th? Nothing.

I will wake up March 30th and go to work, i may pop in the shop and buy some food - there will be plenty. People will fly to the continent, people will fly from the continent to here.

Ships will arrive and depart as will ferries and trains, carrying lorries.

The internet and global communications will continue to work. Banks ands businesses will continue to communicate and do business.

No everyone just pee off and stop all the crap

---------- Post added at 21:45 ---------- Previous post was at 21:35 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave42 (Post 35981084)
the brexiteers forget we part of WTO because of our EU membership at this very moment
No we’re not, we’re part of the “world” trade organisation because we’re part of the “world”

We’re a sovereign nation, we ceded our seat on the WTO when the EU became a political entity. When we leave the EU we will regain our seat.

Ffs, sick of the ignorant BS on here.

Damien 28-01-2019 21:57
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35981091)

So then we the fifth or sixth biggest economy in the world will be cut adrift unable to trade with anyone.................
We will be able to trade with people but the fifth or sixth economy in the world would suddenly find itself without any of the agreements the other larger, and smaller, economies have to remove tariffs, standardise regulations, ease customs check and regulatory barriers and so on. This is what no deal is advocating.

We will probably sort out some basic ones quite quickly but we would still be adding a lot of barriers to a lot of our current trade overnight.

I don't know what will actually happen. I don't actually think we would go though with a complete no deal Brexit because that seems mad to me. I also think a lot of people assume that because things rarely go wrong in the UK that people think it can't. It seems logical to me that industries which have sold freely into Europe and factories which operate with parts moving back and forth across borders as if it were the same nation suddenly having a bunch of restrictions, extra charges and paper work will have an impact.

I hope you are right.

jfman 28-01-2019 22:36
Re: Brexit
 
We can’t even stage a traffic jam and people expect this to go smoothly with no negative consequences...

It’s guaranteed there will be shortages now because of the inevitable panic buying. Think of people going shopping on Christmas Eve: shops run out of everyday things even though everyone knows shops are open in a few days. Nobody know when shops can guarantee getting anything in (that isn’t to say they won’t, but a panic buyer is very unlikely to be rational).

Shops will be under more pressure to restock at the exact same time supply slows and tariffs get slapped on. It’s essentially a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Pierre 28-01-2019 22:47
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35981096)
We can’t even stage a traffic jam and people expect this to go smoothly with no negative consequences...

It’s guaranteed there will be shortages now because of the inevitable panic buying. Think of people going shopping on Christmas Eve: shops run out of everyday things even though everyone knows shops are open in a few days. Nobody know when shops can guarantee getting anything in (that isn’t to say they won’t, but a panic buyer is very unlikely to be rational).

Shops will be under more pressure to restock at the exact same time supply slows and tariffs get slapped on. It’s essentially a self-fulfilling prophecy.
It’s not Christmas

jfman 28-01-2019 23:28
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35981098)
It’s not Christmas
Despite the promises of a Brexit dividend I’m sure we can all agree it’s not Christmas.

The principle of panic buying applies if people believe they have limited time or opportunity to buy the same items in the near future. It becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

If i head out to do my weekly shop and buy an extra item here or there, an extra loaf and milk “just in case”. If a few dozen people do the same each day at the same store it won’t take very long until it’s all over social media that X supermarket in Y town is out of loaves and milk. Then every other “rational person” heads out to buy the same items elsewhere and it’s a domino effect. 24 hour news channels will probably be as irresponsible as ever and interview anyone who says the right thing for the camera. “PANIC! PANIC! PANIC!”. Of course anyone who says everything is fine will be suitably boring to be edited out.

Carth 28-01-2019 23:41
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35981101)

The principle of panic buying applies if people believe they have limited time or opportunity to buy the same items in the near future.
Which IMO is why it's being banded about so freely in the media, certain 'groups' want people panicking in order for everything to fit in with the latest doomsday scenario

Seen it all before in various guises

jfman 28-01-2019 23:55
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 35981102)
Which IMO is why it's being banded about so freely in the media, certain 'groups' want people panicking in order for everything to fit in with the latest doomsday scenario

Seen it all before in various guises
The problem for Leave though is their lack of a consistent view has allowed opponents of Brexit to enter the gap. Nobody has, or perhaps even can, explained the strategy for March 30th.

Is the optimal position to continue with existing suppliers on new tariffs? Move to other suppliers (non-EU, or where the EU doesn’t have an FTA) on revised tariff such. Are we unilaterally not going to impose tariffs? That’s not a sustainable position. You’d be forgiven for thinking someone influencing it has a political or financial interests for as much chaos as possible to happen in the interim.

Nobody has made any attempt to quantify the supply side problems. They either don’t exist (which isn’t credible) or it’ll be the end of the world as we know it (slightly more credible, attracts more readers/viewers).

Mick 29-01-2019 00:48
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35981078)
I thought you voted to Remain, therefore you're a Remainer. There's been no subsequent vote so surely everyone's vote still stands?
Um, Have you been drinking?

I voted to leave. So no idea what you're on about.

TheDaddy 29-01-2019 08:47
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35981064)
What is she talking about then? Trading on WTO terms is the default baseline, is she proposing that we will have less than that? If so she’s no specialist.

This debate really brings out the thickos.
We can't all be as smart as you, who clearly had the foresight to go to Switzerland and see their border with the EU for yourself, how long the lorries queue to service that tiny country with it's tiny population or speak to a Romanian about what it was like before they joined, the shortages etc

Quote:
Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35981076)
So someone loses their job and such is the demonization of people on the dole in this country that some have to resort to bigoted prejudiced name calling.:rolleyes:
Wouldn't that make them a job seeker rather than dole **** who treat benefits as a lifestyle choice much the same as they do crime and anti social behaviour, not really sure why you rushed to demonize that post, it's meaning seemed clear to me as did it's lack of generalisation 're the unemployed

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35981091)
I didn’t miss anything, I just didn’t read any of the article and i’m Not going to.

So then we the fifth or sixth biggest economy in the world will be cut adrift unable to trade with anyone.................

Yeah alright.......

Total bull bollocks, anyone that falls for this crap is sub-normal.

Do you want to know what will happen March 29th? Nothing.

I will wake up March 30th and go to work, i may pop in the shop and buy some food - there will be plenty. People will fly to the continent, people will fly from the continent to here.

Ships will arrive and depart as will ferries and trains, carrying lorries.

The internet and global communications will continue to work. Banks ands businesses will continue to communicate and do business.

No everyone just pee off and stop all the crap

---------- Post added at 21:45 ---------- Previous post was at 21:35 ----------



No we’re not, we’re part of the “world” trade organisation because we’re part of the “world”

We’re a sovereign nation, we ceded our seat on the WTO when the EU became a political entity. When we leave the EU we will regain our seat.

Ffs, sick of the ignorant BS on here.
I've been saying that for months, that for the vast, vast majority of us nothing will change, I'm bored of the whole thing tbh

jfman 29-01-2019 10:41
Re: Brexit
 
Switzerland is in Schengen, largely accepts freedom of movement and has had trading agreements with the European project in one form or other since the 70s.

Romania was surrounded by non-EU states until 2004, joining the EU itself in 2007. It’s trading arrangements aren’t really comparable with ours I’d suspect.

Damien 29-01-2019 12:26
Re: Brexit
 
Labour have said they will back the Cooper-Boles amendment which 'instructs' the PM to delay Article 50 is a deal is not agreed.

The Government meanwhile is trying to get Brexiters onboard with the Brady amendment which I think is just May's deal without the backstop on the understanding we'll pass it and tell the EU no backstop.

There is now a rival plan, the Malthouse amendement, but I've lost the will to read any further.

The fun begins if Bercow decides not to choose one of these....

denphone 29-01-2019 12:40
Re: Brexit
 
British retirees in EU will lose free healthcare under no-deal Brexit.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...no-deal-brexit

Quote:
British nationals who have retired to EU countries including Spain and France will no longer have their healthcare covered by the NHS in the event of no deal, the government has said.

jfman 29-01-2019 12:53
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by denphone (Post 35981132)
British retirees in EU will lose free healthcare under no-deal Brexit.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...no-deal-brexit
We’re not a world health service.

denphone 29-01-2019 12:56
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35981133)
We’re not a world health service.
l never said we was..

BenMcr 29-01-2019 13:00
Re: Brexit
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 35981133)
We’re not a world health service.
However (from the Guardian article):

Quote:
A senior civil servant in the Department of Health told a select committee in 2017 that “one of the advantages of the current arrangements was that it was cheaper for the government to reimburse Spain for treatment of pensioners there than have them return to the NHS for care”.

Spain charges an average of €3,500 per pensioner signed up to the S1, Ireland charges an average of €7,500 and the UK charges about €5,000, he said.

In total, the government paid out around £500m – or £2,300 per pensioner – which he pointed out “was significantly lower than the cost of treating pensioners in the UK”.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:02.
Page 70 of 89 « First 206066676869 70 7172737480 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