Politics
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
If the (impossible) just leave option was voted for the day after we would then be back in negations with the EU the only difference would be that we wold be in an infinitely weaker position.
WHY. Because we have to trade with Europe we cannont simply not trade with Europe. But having thrown away any negotiations we will simply be dictated to by Europe. How in control is that.
But we will vote for soft Brexit they now you say. Fine. But what happens when brexiteers finally it into their thick heads that this is just the divorce document. All the who gets" the kids the car the house " and thousands of other essential bits and bobs with take another 10 years to deal. And could all unravel at any point. (see above).
Just get it over with. End it effin now!!!!!!!! Sick of it are you?? Well you will love this...…...The only way of ending it is ….TO REVOKE ARTICLE 50
Ever think you have been conned.
WHY. Because we have to trade with Europe we cannont simply not trade with Europe. But having thrown away any negotiations we will simply be dictated to by Europe. How in control is that.
But we will vote for soft Brexit they now you say. Fine. But what happens when brexiteers finally it into their thick heads that this is just the divorce document. All the who gets" the kids the car the house " and thousands of other essential bits and bobs with take another 10 years to deal. And could all unravel at any point. (see above).
Just get it over with. End it effin now!!!!!!!! Sick of it are you?? Well you will love this...…...The only way of ending it is ….TO REVOKE ARTICLE 50
Ever think you have been conned.
Show More
It's amazing how many MPs get away with an idea of just pass the WA so we can move on to other stuff like that has any chance of happening. We will be bogged down in Brexit for years if the WA passes, the idea you pass it and that's it all over is fallacy and I assume a game from those trying to pass it because in reality this is the "easy" bit, there is nothing decided in the future relationship in the WA.
Losers always want a re-run, These are the same people that said it would be a disaster if we didn't join the Euro, now universally recognised as something that would have been a big mistake.
The difference is, Leavers always have another go in mind if they lose; but if we Leave, it is irreversible. As Melv says, it wouldn’t be over - the process would be just beginning - but there would be no way back . The over-arching aim of Brexit is to destroy the EU, so it won’t be pleasant. If you are still undecided, or just “want it over”, or imagine we can reverse our exit at a later date, you need to give your head a shake . You can see a train when it’s coming.
The immediate aim for Leavers is to hustle the country out of the EU before everybody can see it is a bad idea, and damn the consequences.
The immediate aim for Leavers is to hustle the country out of the EU before everybody can see it is a bad idea, and damn the consequences.
the idea is for leavers to hustle the country out of the EU before the EU implodes,which it will
unitedbiscuits
12 Apr 19 08:13
Joined: 27 Jan 02
| Topic/replies: 11,220 | Blogger: unitedbiscuits's blog
The difference is, Leavers always have another go in mind if they lose; but if we Leave, it is irreversible.
^
It is almost irreversible to leave. Look how hard the remainers are claiming it is to get out of 40 years of being run by unelected bureaucrats. So many regulations and laws tied to them.
12 Apr 19 08:13
Joined: 27 Jan 02
| Topic/replies: 11,220 | Blogger: unitedbiscuits's blog
The difference is, Leavers always have another go in mind if they lose; but if we Leave, it is irreversible.
^
It is almost irreversible to leave. Look how hard the remainers are claiming it is to get out of 40 years of being run by unelected bureaucrats. So many regulations and laws tied to them.
The longer we stay in the harder it will be to unpick ourselves from them.
GAZO - You don't know that. God willing it doesn't. But if it does - and the UK would bear a heavy responsibility - even then the pact between France, Germany and the Low countries would survive, and together they will always be more powerful than the UK alone.
IT - You mean "impossible." I disagree. Leavers have had control for three years. They have failed utterly to articulate, let alone enact Brexit. Time for them to step down.
IT - You mean "impossible." I disagree. Leavers have had control for three years. They have failed utterly to articulate, let alone enact Brexit. Time for them to step down.
Apr 12, 2019 -- 12:58AM, lord skywalker wrote:
Losers always want a re-run, These are the same people that said it would be a disaster if we didn't join the Euro, now universally recognised as something that would have been a big mistake.
Do you have a list of these people and an accurate record of their individual views on these issues?
It really is quite remarkable to hear so many people claim to know what huge numbers of other people think at any given point in time on a wide range of issues.
unitedbiscuits
12 Apr 19 09:36
Joined: 27 Jan 02
| Topic/replies: 11,221 | Blogger: unitedbiscuits's blog
IT - You mean "impossible." I disagree. Leavers have had control for three years. They have failed utterly to articulate, let alone enact Brexit. Time for them to step down.
^
Leavers have not had any control of brexit.
Mrs May and her little cabal of civil servants have controlled it as a damage limitation exercise. They dont want the benefits.
12 Apr 19 09:36
Joined: 27 Jan 02
| Topic/replies: 11,221 | Blogger: unitedbiscuits's blog
IT - You mean "impossible." I disagree. Leavers have had control for three years. They have failed utterly to articulate, let alone enact Brexit. Time for them to step down.
^
Leavers have not had any control of brexit.
Mrs May and her little cabal of civil servants have controlled it as a damage limitation exercise. They dont want the benefits.
Always someone else's fault.
Let us applaud Govt for finally putting a stop to all the money wasted on behalf of the infantilised Leave voter. They have been indulged too long.
Sky Sources say civil servants have been told to stand down no deal Brexit operational planning with immediate effect
Let us applaud Govt for finally putting a stop to all the money wasted on behalf of the infantilised Leave voter. They have been indulged too long.
Sky Sources say civil servants have been told to stand down no deal Brexit operational planning with immediate effect
I can see how the news above may rather upset Leaver-screamers. My advice? Suck it up.
What benefits are those btw, IT? Liam Fox has failed, failed and failed again in his mission to set up any sort of framework for trade deals with any 3rd entity superior to what we would have as EU members. We has been told time out of number what was always obvious, that the UK has less bargaining power than the EU. The USA has just negotiated what Trump hails as "the deal of the century" to cement the Special relationship, with Israel.
What benefits are those btw, IT? Liam Fox has failed, failed and failed again in his mission to set up any sort of framework for trade deals with any 3rd entity superior to what we would have as EU members. We has been told time out of number what was always obvious, that the UK has less bargaining power than the EU. The USA has just negotiated what Trump hails as "the deal of the century" to cement the Special relationship, with Israel.
is that Trump who is telling everybody how well america is doing and then tweets they should cut interest rates and restart QE,which we have always been led to believe you only do in a crisis,looks like he can see or more likely been told what is coming
You are right of course Melv because any "referendum" will ask which form of remain we want. A second vote on Brexit will not be held for another generation. The only sensible referendum to hold now is to accept or reject Mrs May's deal but it will be put beside remain so the Brexit supporters won't vote for either.
unitedbiscuits
12 Apr 19 10:21
Joined: 27 Jan 02
| Topic/replies: 11,261 | Blogger: unitedbiscuits's blog
I can see how the news above may rather upset Leaver-screamers. My advice? Suck it up.
What benefits are those btw, IT? Liam Fox has failed, failed and failed again in his mission to set up any sort of framework for trade deals with any 3rd entity superior to what we would have as EU members. We has been told time out of number what was always obvious, that the UK has less bargaining power than the EU. The USA has just negotiated what Trump hails as "the deal of the century" to cement the Special relationship, with Israel.
^
Cannot do any trade deals until the MPs and government get on with doing what they have been paid to do and get us out of the single market and customs union.
Our friends in the world's largest economy are ready and waiting to do a trade deal once we are free from the control of the old white men in Brussels.
12 Apr 19 10:21
Joined: 27 Jan 02
| Topic/replies: 11,261 | Blogger: unitedbiscuits's blog
I can see how the news above may rather upset Leaver-screamers. My advice? Suck it up.
What benefits are those btw, IT? Liam Fox has failed, failed and failed again in his mission to set up any sort of framework for trade deals with any 3rd entity superior to what we would have as EU members. We has been told time out of number what was always obvious, that the UK has less bargaining power than the EU. The USA has just negotiated what Trump hails as "the deal of the century" to cement the Special relationship, with Israel.
^
Cannot do any trade deals until the MPs and government get on with doing what they have been paid to do and get us out of the single market and customs union.
Our friends in the world's largest economy are ready and waiting to do a trade deal once we are free from the control of the old white men in Brussels.
You got that right, IT. We may find we need twice as many Trident missiles as we thought we did before talks begin though.
USA has one special relationship, it’s with Israel.
USA has one special relationship, it’s with Israel.
Apr 12, 2019 -- 9:54AM, Angoose wrote:
Apr 12, 2019 -- 12:58AM, lord skywalker wrote:Losers always want a re-run, These are the same people that said it would be a disaster if we didn't join the Euro, now universally recognised as something that would have been a big mistake.Do you have a list of these people and an accurate record of their individual views on these issues?It really is quite remarkable to hear so many people claim to know what huge numbers of other people think at any given point in time on a wide range of issues.
Are you seriously doubting what Lord S is saying here 
That the same cast of characters that said it would be a disaster for Britain to stay out of the euro are reheating their arguments of 20 years ago ? Too young to remember euro issue ?
Ken Clarke 2000
"Former Tory chancellor Kenneth Clarke has warned that "having a fit of nervous doubt" over joining the European single currency would be "disastrous" for the UK.
Mr Clarke believes national currencies will be considered "quaint" in 50 years time, and said the UK could suffer economically by rejecting financial globalisation."
Richard Branson 2001
"To me, and most of the British people, it seems pretty obvious that when the conditions are right we will end up in the euro.
"The alternative might be a horrible situation where we are squeezed between the dollar and the euro and have a long period of instability."
Nick Clegg 2001
"If we remain outside the euro, we will simply continue to subside into a position of relative poverty and inefficiency compared to our more prosperous European neighbours"
Peter Mandleson 2003
"The cabinet should adopt a medium-term road map which provides a target date for entry in 2007. The UK must aim to join the euro by 2007 - we can't afford not to"
"Former Tory chancellor Kenneth Clarke has warned that "having a fit of nervous doubt" over joining the European single currency would be "disastrous" for the UK.
Mr Clarke believes national currencies will be considered "quaint" in 50 years time, and said the UK could suffer economically by rejecting financial globalisation."
Richard Branson 2001
"To me, and most of the British people, it seems pretty obvious that when the conditions are right we will end up in the euro.
"The alternative might be a horrible situation where we are squeezed between the dollar and the euro and have a long period of instability."
Nick Clegg 2001
"If we remain outside the euro, we will simply continue to subside into a position of relative poverty and inefficiency compared to our more prosperous European neighbours"
Peter Mandleson 2003
"The cabinet should adopt a medium-term road map which provides a target date for entry in 2007. The UK must aim to join the euro by 2007 - we can't afford not to"
A 2nd Referendum will impinge on the value, legality and purpose of democracy which is sacrosanct - accept the result as it is. And, any attempt to thinker injudiciously with democracy is dangerous given time, I firmly believe.
Might be to you,..but in modern society democracy is paramount; interference = disabling. The UK result of the EU Election will no doubt reflect the mood of the citizens of the UK towards the EU and/or its politicians and directions.
To make out all remainers were for joining the Euro though would be really disingenuous. I was still at school at the time of the Euro debate, and it was studied in Economics at the time, the conclusions there were generally that we shouldn't join the Euro, and virtually 100% of the people from that class went on to be remainers (I'm not aware of any of them that voted leave).
The Euro never actually met all of the UK's 5 tests anyway so was never going to happen.
The Euro never actually met all of the UK's 5 tests anyway so was never going to happen.
Democracy by definition is meant to be fluid, the idea of a 2nd referendum being undemocratic is just nonsense.
Brexit itself is a special case because it's pretty clear what a lot of people want out of Brexit will clearly not happen if it happens, albeit I would agree a lot of those won't accept that this.
The other day I was watching a Labour Leave video which was meant to showcase why the Labour working class heartlands voted leave, the problem was 90% of the video was moaning about the government and had nothing to do with the EU, the only real gripe they had that linked back to the EU was immigration deflating wages, everything else was to do with government not investing in UK manufacturing, industry and town centres. None of which has anything to do with the EU, they had this idea that Brexit would allow us to invest in these things, but why? If anything Brexit will cause the total collapse of these things as the talk is of cutting tariffs, that equals cheap imports flooding our market, it would solve issues of supply, but would absolutely cripple our own manufacturing and industry.
And therein is the problem that the end result of Brexit won't satisfy most leavers whatever happens because it simply isn't what they envisage it to be (and this of course differs across leavers).
Brexit itself is a special case because it's pretty clear what a lot of people want out of Brexit will clearly not happen if it happens, albeit I would agree a lot of those won't accept that this.
The other day I was watching a Labour Leave video which was meant to showcase why the Labour working class heartlands voted leave, the problem was 90% of the video was moaning about the government and had nothing to do with the EU, the only real gripe they had that linked back to the EU was immigration deflating wages, everything else was to do with government not investing in UK manufacturing, industry and town centres. None of which has anything to do with the EU, they had this idea that Brexit would allow us to invest in these things, but why? If anything Brexit will cause the total collapse of these things as the talk is of cutting tariffs, that equals cheap imports flooding our market, it would solve issues of supply, but would absolutely cripple our own manufacturing and industry.
And therein is the problem that the end result of Brexit won't satisfy most leavers whatever happens because it simply isn't what they envisage it to be (and this of course differs across leavers).
Where is it written that joining the Euro would have been a disaster? E1.40 at launch, now E1.17. What does that mean? Well, our assets are worth in international terms c 18% less than they would be had we joined. Think about the value of your house, pension, savings, salary and betfair balance and add 18%. That's how much you have paid. For what? Trying to keep competitive by selling £5 notes on the street corner for £4.20.
^
Classic from the resident economist.
The Euro has been a total and utter failure economically.
Look at Greece.
Look at youth unemployment in the Southern Europe.
It is a political project that allows the Germans to sell into a single market with an undervalued currency and destroys the economies of the smaller countries who now cannot devalue.
Classic from the resident economist.
The Euro has been a total and utter failure economically.
Look at Greece.
Look at youth unemployment in the Southern Europe.
It is a political project that allows the Germans to sell into a single market with an undervalued currency and destroys the economies of the smaller countries who now cannot devalue.
The Euro has been a total and utter failure economically.
Relative to £ it has appreciated 17%. Do you ever think before copy and pasting Breibart, Insider Trader?
Relative to £ it has appreciated 17%. Do you ever think before copy and pasting Breibart, Insider Trader?
There are so many reasons for the present predicaments of vital economic indicators, but not every one could be attributed to Brexit alone eg the value of Sterling was performing/holding up well for a long while before the present stalemate in the House Of Commons. I believe the prolong uncertainty about Brexit is no good for all concerned including the EU member states as time progresses.
Foreign Exchange is opened to short term fluctuation caused by manipulation by traders so it's not Sterling specific, and accurate economic indicator; housing market is at the crest of a bubble buoyed by low interest rate, buy-to-let wannabes and speculators mainly from abroad - a timely correction is not such a bad thing, I firmly believe, and it time too.
I've little doubt with time the UK will be better off outside The EU given The EU vastly differing economic compositions, stage of developments, diversity in languages, cultures, traditions, religions and individual objectives.
Foreign Exchange is opened to short term fluctuation caused by manipulation by traders so it's not Sterling specific, and accurate economic indicator; housing market is at the crest of a bubble buoyed by low interest rate, buy-to-let wannabes and speculators mainly from abroad - a timely correction is not such a bad thing, I firmly believe, and it time too.
I've little doubt with time the UK will be better off outside The EU given The EU vastly differing economic compositions, stage of developments, diversity in languages, cultures, traditions, religions and individual objectives.
That is just dogma, impossible123.
You have to calculate how much you have lost to Brexit already in the last three years. Obviously, the greater your assets, the greater your loss (unless you took precautions). Someone w/ a house worth 1/2 m and a pension of similar value is probably looking at a shortfall of c £150k since 2016.
You have to calculate how much you have lost to Brexit already in the last three years. Obviously, the greater your assets, the greater your loss (unless you took precautions). Someone w/ a house worth 1/2 m and a pension of similar value is probably looking at a shortfall of c £150k since 2016.
It's only a loss if one cashes in - paper loss at the moment. However, measured by another currency Sterling could have appreciated; a higher interest rate helps too.
Did China and Japan not devalue her currency not so long ago? If so, did it do these two countries any long term damaged?
Did China and Japan not devalue her currency not so long ago? If so, did it do these two countries any long term damaged?
It's only a loss if one cashes in - paper loss at the moment.
A common misconception. Don't know anything of impossible123's circumstances, so I'll paint him into this picture to show how the average UK family has lost to Brexit already:
Say impossible123 was chatting to another forum user in Ireland on the day of the referendum. Both have a house, pension etc - of equal value. Next DAY, the assets of impossible123 are worth c £50,000 less than his counterpart on the forum; and he has never made up the loss. So, there's his contemporary on the forum, who now can buy his house while impossible123 can no longer afford the other guy's, then, or at any time since. Impossible123 became the poor relation with the Leave vote.
It's not a question of sitting it out, you are being acted upon by Brexit whether or not you like it.
A common misconception. Don't know anything of impossible123's circumstances, so I'll paint him into this picture to show how the average UK family has lost to Brexit already:
Say impossible123 was chatting to another forum user in Ireland on the day of the referendum. Both have a house, pension etc - of equal value. Next DAY, the assets of impossible123 are worth c £50,000 less than his counterpart on the forum; and he has never made up the loss. So, there's his contemporary on the forum, who now can buy his house while impossible123 can no longer afford the other guy's, then, or at any time since. Impossible123 became the poor relation with the Leave vote.
It's not a question of sitting it out, you are being acted upon by Brexit whether or not you like it.
^^
That's not necessary...it's showing in the grocery bills. Also, playing the Stock Market has taught me utmost discipline and patience (not laziness) and delegation is not an option either eg never allows one's money to be managed by outsiders/money professionals.
But, I do hope one can be more reliant on local produce and maximise usage; the City and its traders, the expensive real estates are their concerned, not the average Joe or Harriet.
Like most good things: pain at 1st, gratification later, I always believe.
That's not necessary...it's showing in the grocery bills. Also, playing the Stock Market has taught me utmost discipline and patience (not laziness) and delegation is not an option either eg never allows one's money to be managed by outsiders/money professionals.
But, I do hope one can be more reliant on local produce and maximise usage; the City and its traders, the expensive real estates are their concerned, not the average Joe or Harriet.
Like most good things: pain at 1st, gratification later, I always believe.
UB comes up with his Euro is great every few weeks. He has a series of old arguments on a loop.
No, Insider Trader is wrong, actually I have never before mentioned the relative decline of £ since the inception of the EURO, nor its impact on the wealth of people in the UK, in response to his unchallenged assumption that joining the EURO would have been "disastrous" for us.
Please tell me you have something more concrete to back up your assertion than faux-concern for youth-unemployment in Greece.
Please tell me you have something more concrete to back up your assertion than faux-concern for youth-unemployment in Greece.
Like most good things: pain at 1st, gratification later, I always believe.
There was some bullshit on the side of the red bus, but I never saw that.
There was some bullshit on the side of the red bus, but I never saw that.
Take the rough with the smooth, I'd say. And, who can say EU member currencies not under the cosh in the middle term post the European Election esp if Germany and/or France experiencing negative growth? The EU ever-growing annual budget just cannot be sustained esp with the UK out.
The UK could be laughed-at or ridiculed for her present predicament, but a prime example for others in the future if we all pulled-together and graft, and be successful; those not willing could always decamp to other EU member state eg Ireland, France, Germany, etc.
Those who believed the nonsense on the red bus need sectioning; the red bus was nothing but akin to propaganda dished out by some fringe group in society eg jehovahs, vegetarians, vegans, etc.
The UK could be laughed-at or ridiculed for her present predicament, but a prime example for others in the future if we all pulled-together and graft, and be successful; those not willing could always decamp to other EU member state eg Ireland, France, Germany, etc.
Those who believed the nonsense on the red bus need sectioning; the red bus was nothing but akin to propaganda dished out by some fringe group in society eg jehovahs, vegetarians, vegans, etc.
Where to start with the post above?
1) Take the rough with the smooth, - No, finance doesn't work like that. You may have a good spell in future but you will never get back the money you have lost. In other words, you have fallen behind your counterpart over the last three years and no reason why you should start to gain on him in future, whatever the general outlook and your wishing ill on the EU economy.
2) The EU ever-growing annual budget just cannot be sustained esp with the UK out. Yes it can. The vaunted £39b Leavers want us to renege on won't even make a significant difference to the much smaller domestic economy. It's 20% of what we're spending on renewing Trident.
3) a prime example for others in the future if we all pulled-together and graft, What does that mean? Less time on Betfair? Or are essentially talking about "other" people here. Is there some sort of wank-fantasy Brexit-land where the work-shy in the UK are forced back into the labour market. Good luck with that. 90% of unemployables who voted voted to Leave on the assumption that they had little to lose as the state has a safety-net however badly up they f**k.
4) those not willing could always decamp to other EU member state A sentiment that just confirms the Leave wank-fantasy. Not practical for many, but a neat slogan, short-form "Suck it up." Three little words now coming back to haunt arrogant Leavers.
1) Take the rough with the smooth, - No, finance doesn't work like that. You may have a good spell in future but you will never get back the money you have lost. In other words, you have fallen behind your counterpart over the last three years and no reason why you should start to gain on him in future, whatever the general outlook and your wishing ill on the EU economy.
2) The EU ever-growing annual budget just cannot be sustained esp with the UK out. Yes it can. The vaunted £39b Leavers want us to renege on won't even make a significant difference to the much smaller domestic economy. It's 20% of what we're spending on renewing Trident.
3) a prime example for others in the future if we all pulled-together and graft, What does that mean? Less time on Betfair? Or are essentially talking about "other" people here. Is there some sort of wank-fantasy Brexit-land where the work-shy in the UK are forced back into the labour market. Good luck with that. 90% of unemployables who voted voted to Leave on the assumption that they had little to lose as the state has a safety-net however badly up they f**k.
4) those not willing could always decamp to other EU member state A sentiment that just confirms the Leave wank-fantasy. Not practical for many, but a neat slogan, short-form "Suck it up." Three little words now coming back to haunt arrogant Leavers.
3 RE Work shy.you really are some pretintious muppet,
where i'm from lads and lasses were bused in from
old south yorkshire mining villages to work in
farm factories,ie food processing,after 2004 their
jobs were taken by eastern europeans,these people
weren't workshy,just got undecut.
where i'm from lads and lasses were bused in from
old south yorkshire mining villages to work in
farm factories,ie food processing,after 2004 their
jobs were taken by eastern europeans,these people
weren't workshy,just got undecut.
'ub'
With respect if you chose to reply using profanity to another poster with differing views it would be best we did not continue with this discussion or I'd without hesitation put you on ignore as you'd proven incapable of accepting differing, but nit-picking on my previous post as if your views and/or opinions were accurate and/or gospel.
I've been around long enough and dealt with individuals like you in my previous professions so your behaviour and views are not unusual, but water off a duck's back with the exception I no longer need to accept it (professionally) or socially ie your views are just yours alone, not mine; we agree to disagree or we stop replying to each other. But, I'm more than hopeful UK Plc outside The EU will flourish and proper economically and socially.
By the way, my views here are not guided by my presence on 'betfair', period!
With respect if you chose to reply using profanity to another poster with differing views it would be best we did not continue with this discussion or I'd without hesitation put you on ignore as you'd proven incapable of accepting differing, but nit-picking on my previous post as if your views and/or opinions were accurate and/or gospel.
I've been around long enough and dealt with individuals like you in my previous professions so your behaviour and views are not unusual, but water off a duck's back with the exception I no longer need to accept it (professionally) or socially ie your views are just yours alone, not mine; we agree to disagree or we stop replying to each other. But, I'm more than hopeful UK Plc outside The EU will flourish and proper economically and socially.
By the way, my views here are not guided by my presence on 'betfair', period!
Apr 21, 2019 -- 3:22PM, unitedbiscuits wrote:
Democracy didn't stop in 2016, or did it?
It did if the referendum result is not enacted. Democracy = people voting for something to happen and then that thing happening. In the future a different vote could reverse it, but only after what has been voted for takes place. If Labour wins the next election they will form a government. It doesn't mean there would be a Labour government forever, but there would have to be one for 5 years. With remainer democracy Labour would have to stay in opposition for 3 years and then win a 'People's Election' before they could actually take office.
Apr 21, 2019 -- 4:01PM, n88uk wrote:
To make out all remainers were for joining the Euro though would be really disingenuous. I was still at school at the time of the Euro debate, and it was studied in Economics at the time, the conclusions there were generally that we shouldn't join the Euro, and virtually 100% of the people from that class went on to be remainers (I'm not aware of any of them that voted leave).The Euro never actually met all of the UK's 5 tests anyway so was never going to happen.
The '5 tests' were nothing to do with the pros and cons of joining the euro. It was simply something Brown negotiated as part of his power struggle with Blair. It meant he would make the decision and Blair and Mandleson would have to suck it up. The tests were about convergence from what I recall but I don't think they were taken seriously in themselves. Having some temporary alignment with the Eurozone ' the conditions are right' would not mean those same conditions would prevail even 6 months later, or for another 10 years.
Brexit itself is a special case because it's pretty clear what a lot of people want out of Brexit will clearly not happen if it happens, albeit I would agree a lot of those won't accept that this.
n88uk, That is just a purely undemocratic argument. If people think universal suffrage democracy is fatally flawed then you can make a logical case for something else, 'intelligence tests' to be able to vote or whatever.
Your logic here can be applied to all votes
eg OK, people voted for a Labour government but they have totally unrealistic expectations as to what it can achieve. So, rather than see these simpleminded people disappointed let's just have another 5 years of Tory rule.
n88uk, That is just a purely undemocratic argument. If people think universal suffrage democracy is fatally flawed then you can make a logical case for something else, 'intelligence tests' to be able to vote or whatever.
Your logic here can be applied to all votes
eg OK, people voted for a Labour government but they have totally unrealistic expectations as to what it can achieve. So, rather than see these simpleminded people disappointed let's just have another 5 years of Tory rule.
Democracy doesn't mean just blindly doing what the people want. It's a parliamentary democracy, the idea is you are meant to elect people who know better than you to make the decisions for you, because a direct democracy would just be total chaos.
The real problem though is referendums are not like elections, for one they aren't even binding. Yes in an election you might vote someone who doesn't live up to whatever they claimed, but generally you have what you voted for in front of you. The problem here is the referendum question was flawed, one side was definitive, you can say "leave means leave", but it doesn't does it when we've got huge swathes of leavers claiming the only deal on the table isn't actually leave.
There also comes a point you have to do something else. The current stalemate cannot go on forever, for one it's costing the country billions, but it's also absorbing pretty much the entire politics to the neglect of everything else. From what we've seen so far, parliament has no idea how to break the stalemate, the PM's only answer is to bring back the same thing over and over and browbeat it over the line, a strategy that even if it works is totally flawed, after all the current part is the easy part, it's not actually deciding anything of the future, it's just a simple treaty to take us out of the EU.
It's a struggle to even see what options are available, to me it's likely we will be in the exact same position in October as we are now. And the end result even if it gets over the line is not going to be pretty when the end result is nothing like what was promised in the referendum. The idea we'd retain all the benefits effectively for none of the costs was the idea, well that's not going to be happening, indeed if May's deal passes we're retaining most the costs for less of the benefits.
There is precedent in other countries for referendums being re-run, see the recent stuff in Switzerland about voiding a result of a referendum on the basis the people didn't have access to the full information, something which almost certainly applies to Brexit. What has become the sticking point in Brexit was pretty much not even talked about in the referendum, and even now I guarantee the majority see the Irish border as not their problem, even though there's a good chance that it's the bridge that ultimately kills Brexit.
The real problem though is referendums are not like elections, for one they aren't even binding. Yes in an election you might vote someone who doesn't live up to whatever they claimed, but generally you have what you voted for in front of you. The problem here is the referendum question was flawed, one side was definitive, you can say "leave means leave", but it doesn't does it when we've got huge swathes of leavers claiming the only deal on the table isn't actually leave.
There also comes a point you have to do something else. The current stalemate cannot go on forever, for one it's costing the country billions, but it's also absorbing pretty much the entire politics to the neglect of everything else. From what we've seen so far, parliament has no idea how to break the stalemate, the PM's only answer is to bring back the same thing over and over and browbeat it over the line, a strategy that even if it works is totally flawed, after all the current part is the easy part, it's not actually deciding anything of the future, it's just a simple treaty to take us out of the EU.
It's a struggle to even see what options are available, to me it's likely we will be in the exact same position in October as we are now. And the end result even if it gets over the line is not going to be pretty when the end result is nothing like what was promised in the referendum. The idea we'd retain all the benefits effectively for none of the costs was the idea, well that's not going to be happening, indeed if May's deal passes we're retaining most the costs for less of the benefits.
There is precedent in other countries for referendums being re-run, see the recent stuff in Switzerland about voiding a result of a referendum on the basis the people didn't have access to the full information, something which almost certainly applies to Brexit. What has become the sticking point in Brexit was pretty much not even talked about in the referendum, and even now I guarantee the majority see the Irish border as not their problem, even though there's a good chance that it's the bridge that ultimately kills Brexit.
And I'm not even massively pro-another referendum, I more see that as just a necessity in the name of democracy. Because the reality is I'd more just be in favour of revoking altogether to end the madness. It's quite clear Brexit is going to fail even if it happens, and if it does happen it will be way too late to just rescue it too.
Referendums on topics like this generally are not a great idea, I mean really it's the point of representative democracy in the first place that decisions by this are meant to be made by the politicians you elect. What was thought up as a cheap idea to win some quick votes has turned the country into the biggest trouble since WW2. I mean whatever the end result now you are going to create huge issues for many years to come, mainly because it's clear even if Brexit happens that people won't be happy and will blame the implementation for it not being what was promised, and of course the cancelling of Brexit will lead to the rise of extremism that will have to be dealt with in the future.
Referendums on topics like this generally are not a great idea, I mean really it's the point of representative democracy in the first place that decisions by this are meant to be made by the politicians you elect. What was thought up as a cheap idea to win some quick votes has turned the country into the biggest trouble since WW2. I mean whatever the end result now you are going to create huge issues for many years to come, mainly because it's clear even if Brexit happens that people won't be happy and will blame the implementation for it not being what was promised, and of course the cancelling of Brexit will lead to the rise of extremism that will have to be dealt with in the future.
And the end result even if it gets over the line is not going to be pretty when the end result is nothing like what was promised in the referendum.
The end result should be to Leave. The parliamentary democracy made it very clear that the referendum result was going to decide in or out.
'Leave' is what people voted for. Not 'Leave with a customs union', 'Leave with £300M for the NHS' or any of these other things that were apparently on Lammy's ballot paper. It was simply to leave come whatever.
All these Book of Revelations scenarios that will supposedly happen with Brexit, that the leave voters supposedly could never have considered when they were in the polling booth, are things the Remainers were shouting from the rooftops for the entire campaign.
As you say yourself leaving is really only the start of negotiations in a sense. If May's deal goes through and people are not happy with it then a future government can try and change it or repudiate it if further negotiations aren't going well. Or a future government can put the case for rejoining. If May's deal can't go through then we should leave with no deal. The hysteria about No Deal is itself ridiculous. As if it is then impossible to ever have any deal at any point in the future
The end result should be to Leave. The parliamentary democracy made it very clear that the referendum result was going to decide in or out.
'Leave' is what people voted for. Not 'Leave with a customs union', 'Leave with £300M for the NHS' or any of these other things that were apparently on Lammy's ballot paper. It was simply to leave come whatever.
All these Book of Revelations scenarios that will supposedly happen with Brexit, that the leave voters supposedly could never have considered when they were in the polling booth, are things the Remainers were shouting from the rooftops for the entire campaign.
As you say yourself leaving is really only the start of negotiations in a sense. If May's deal goes through and people are not happy with it then a future government can try and change it or repudiate it if further negotiations aren't going well. Or a future government can put the case for rejoining. If May's deal can't go through then we should leave with no deal. The hysteria about No Deal is itself ridiculous. As if it is then impossible to ever have any deal at any point in the future
The 2016 Referendum was succinct and final ie it was a vote to 'Leave' or 'Remain' in The EU with no conditions attached; no ifs or buts ie one or the other, period!
We just like to have full say in what we do, how we do it and how we control who'd come in and who'd go out of the UK ie sovereignty and control of our borders. And, please do not use the message on "that" red bus to claim it was a con - that was irrelevant - as I firmly believe (I'm one) it had no bearing on sovereignty and control of our borders; 'Leavers' did not vote for that message.
If we do get to take part in the impending EU Election (very probable now unless the MPs come to their senses) I hope the votes for the newly formed Brexit Party give an emphatic indication to the country, and The EU the feelings of a huge section of the UK citizens towards The EU, its bureaucracy, its politicians and the directions these politicians are taking The EU in.
I just like the UK to exit The EU hopefully with the 'deal' on the table (for now paying £39bn) or 'no deal', then renegotiate for an absolute and final exit in a few short years' time; I'd not like the UK perpetually contributing a net amount of at least £8bn per annum (this can only rise) given the funds needed to further develop the economies and infrastructures of the new EU member states, and the directions of its politicians are taking The EU eg forming an EU army - I do not want any of this.
We just like to have full say in what we do, how we do it and how we control who'd come in and who'd go out of the UK ie sovereignty and control of our borders. And, please do not use the message on "that" red bus to claim it was a con - that was irrelevant - as I firmly believe (I'm one) it had no bearing on sovereignty and control of our borders; 'Leavers' did not vote for that message.
If we do get to take part in the impending EU Election (very probable now unless the MPs come to their senses) I hope the votes for the newly formed Brexit Party give an emphatic indication to the country, and The EU the feelings of a huge section of the UK citizens towards The EU, its bureaucracy, its politicians and the directions these politicians are taking The EU in.
I just like the UK to exit The EU hopefully with the 'deal' on the table (for now paying £39bn) or 'no deal', then renegotiate for an absolute and final exit in a few short years' time; I'd not like the UK perpetually contributing a net amount of at least £8bn per annum (this can only rise) given the funds needed to further develop the economies and infrastructures of the new EU member states, and the directions of its politicians are taking The EU eg forming an EU army - I do not want any of this.
'Leave' is what people voted for. Not 'Leave with a customs union', 'Leave with £300M for the NHS' or any of these other things that were apparently on Lammy's ballot paper. It was simply to leave come whatever.
Using this logic then you are happy with whatever form of leave happens as long as it physically takes us out the EU. Yer, of course this is possible, but from what I see on forums, it won't leave the majority happy whatever form leave takes. If they leave with a CU style deal which is probably the most likely way out for example it's going to kinda put a mockery on the taking back control idea, which surely we all agree was a big part of what Brexit was about.
Look how many Brexiteers effectively caved last time to supporting May's deal, a deal that doesn't take back control at all and worst of all even a number of Brexiteers realise is clearly worse than just remaining, and this still is the most likely form of Brexit to actually pass eventually.
All these Book of Revelations scenarios that will supposedly happen with Brexit, that the leave voters supposedly could never have considered when they were in the polling booth, are things the Remainers were shouting from the rooftops for the entire campaign.
Really is nonsense. 99% of voters went into the polling booth on all sides totally unaware of the implications on the Irish border, which is now the key issue to the whole thing. It was mentioned very briefly if you went digging in local speeches in NI, which nobody was doing and got zero media coverage at the time.
As you say yourself leaving is really only the start of negotiations in a sense. If May's deal goes through and people are not happy with it then a future government can try and change it or repudiate it if further negotiations aren't going well. Or a future government can put the case for rejoining. If May's deal can't go through then we should leave with no deal. The hysteria about No Deal is itself ridiculous. As if it is then impossible to ever have any deal at any point in the future Crazy
In May's deal this is virtually impossible though. I'm not sure the types who think we should just blindly back May's deal to get us out realise just how bad a shape it will leave us in. We have zero bargaining position in the next stages whatsoever if we sign up to this, it won't be us able to shape our future at all, we will simply be given a bunch of options from the EU and have to pick one, and we will have no choice to say no, because the EU will have as trapped in limbo, so we either take what they offer us or stay stuck in limbo forever.
The real killer for no deal is Northern Ireland. I mean it would probably always be stopped by parliament regardless because of the perceived economic implications. But ultimately Northern Ireland is the final nail for it, the EU are already saying they will impose the backstop in a no deal scenario as prerequisite for any negotiations, we pretty much can't say no to this without violating the GFA, we violate the GFA and we're effectively a rogue state who will be unable to do business anywhere. It's unlikely any PM would want to do this, but even if they did they'd be stopped long before they tried. Even if you had a PM willing to do it anyway, the government would collapse before it was allowed to happen, as so many Conservative MPs say they will resign in the event of no deal, and it wouldn't even take that many to collapse the government. Now what PM realistically is going to want to risk the union, their party and our international status in the community.
Using this logic then you are happy with whatever form of leave happens as long as it physically takes us out the EU. Yer, of course this is possible, but from what I see on forums, it won't leave the majority happy whatever form leave takes. If they leave with a CU style deal which is probably the most likely way out for example it's going to kinda put a mockery on the taking back control idea, which surely we all agree was a big part of what Brexit was about.
Look how many Brexiteers effectively caved last time to supporting May's deal, a deal that doesn't take back control at all and worst of all even a number of Brexiteers realise is clearly worse than just remaining, and this still is the most likely form of Brexit to actually pass eventually.
All these Book of Revelations scenarios that will supposedly happen with Brexit, that the leave voters supposedly could never have considered when they were in the polling booth, are things the Remainers were shouting from the rooftops for the entire campaign.
Really is nonsense. 99% of voters went into the polling booth on all sides totally unaware of the implications on the Irish border, which is now the key issue to the whole thing. It was mentioned very briefly if you went digging in local speeches in NI, which nobody was doing and got zero media coverage at the time.
As you say yourself leaving is really only the start of negotiations in a sense. If May's deal goes through and people are not happy with it then a future government can try and change it or repudiate it if further negotiations aren't going well. Or a future government can put the case for rejoining. If May's deal can't go through then we should leave with no deal. The hysteria about No Deal is itself ridiculous. As if it is then impossible to ever have any deal at any point in the future Crazy
In May's deal this is virtually impossible though. I'm not sure the types who think we should just blindly back May's deal to get us out realise just how bad a shape it will leave us in. We have zero bargaining position in the next stages whatsoever if we sign up to this, it won't be us able to shape our future at all, we will simply be given a bunch of options from the EU and have to pick one, and we will have no choice to say no, because the EU will have as trapped in limbo, so we either take what they offer us or stay stuck in limbo forever.
The real killer for no deal is Northern Ireland. I mean it would probably always be stopped by parliament regardless because of the perceived economic implications. But ultimately Northern Ireland is the final nail for it, the EU are already saying they will impose the backstop in a no deal scenario as prerequisite for any negotiations, we pretty much can't say no to this without violating the GFA, we violate the GFA and we're effectively a rogue state who will be unable to do business anywhere. It's unlikely any PM would want to do this, but even if they did they'd be stopped long before they tried. Even if you had a PM willing to do it anyway, the government would collapse before it was allowed to happen, as so many Conservative MPs say they will resign in the event of no deal, and it wouldn't even take that many to collapse the government. Now what PM realistically is going to want to risk the union, their party and our international status in the community.
Apr 22, 2019 -- 11:08AM, impossible123 wrote:
The 2016 Referendum was succinct and final ie it was a vote to 'Leave' or 'Remain' in The EU with no conditions attached; no ifs or buts ie one or the other, period! We just like to have full say in what we do, how we do it and how we control who'd come in and who'd go out of the UK ie sovereignty and control of our borders. And, please do not use the message on "that" red bus to claim it was a con - that was irrelevant - as I firmly believe (I'm one) it had no bearing on sovereignty and control of our borders; 'Leavers' did not vote for that message.If we do get to take part in the impending EU Election (very probable now unless the MPs come to their senses) I hope the votes for the newly formed Brexit Party give an emphatic indication to the country, and The EU the feelings of a huge section of the UK citizens towards The EU, its bureaucracy, its politicians and the directions these politicians are taking The EU in. I just like the UK to exit The EU hopefully with the 'deal' on the table (for now paying £39bn) or 'no deal', then renegotiate for an absolute and final exit in a few short years' time; I'd not like the UK perpetually contributing a net amount of at least £8bn per annum (this can only rise) given the funds needed to further develop the economies and infrastructures of the new EU member states, and the directions of its politicians are taking The EU eg forming an EU army - I do not want any of this.
The thing is these votes don't solve anything. Premises like this assume leaving the EU is a simple job, but it isn't, not when you've been busy integrating yourself into it 40+ years, trying to undo it is not easy.
Taking the deal on the table would be absolute idiocy, as said above do people actually realise how bad a shape May's deal leaves us in, and saying we can renegotiate it later, no we can't, we're trapped in it unless we can find unicorn solutions to the Irish border for all sides which will never happen.
'n88uk'. thank-you for the info. I'd like to see the UK head-out of that EU exit door 1st. Any thing post this is within the compass of the British public, and hopefully the new breed of visionary MPs. These lot are mainly past-it - and self-serving; the sooner they are history, the better for the country.
I think it's condescending to suggest 'Leavers' expect Brexit would be easy, certainly not with that lot of "EU" MPs in the House Of Commons; there will be pain and uncertainties at the outset, and for a few years to come too. Nevertheless, the future will be brighter than with 27 other diverse communities, and self-serving politicians (Merkel excluded) leading The EU; the formation of an EU army scares the daylight tout of me; its leaders do not inspire confidence given their lack of high offices, and experiences in their own countries.
I think it's condescending to suggest 'Leavers' expect Brexit would be easy, certainly not with that lot of "EU" MPs in the House Of Commons; there will be pain and uncertainties at the outset, and for a few years to come too. Nevertheless, the future will be brighter than with 27 other diverse communities, and self-serving politicians (Merkel excluded) leading The EU; the formation of an EU army scares the daylight tout of me; its leaders do not inspire confidence given their lack of high offices, and experiences in their own countries.
The thing is I only suggest that when I constantly see like the idea of let's just get out or people saying how simple it is. I realise not all Brexiteers are like this but there is an underlying tone from many.
The MPs aren't great but they have been dealt a pretty horrible hand to deal with, the real problem though is political games has been a big part of Brexit from the start. Like I think if from day 1 May had targeted some kind of Norway style proposal, there was a majority for that in the beginning, and you wouldn't have had any of the shambles of the last years which has caused tensions to rise. The delay has just led to hardened attitudes where the majority now either want no deal or remain, at the opposite ends of the spectrum basically.
May has actually failed pretty spectacularly. She effectively gave up Tories majority for nothing, which pretty much buried the idea that Tories would just get what they want there and then. Signed up to a backstop that her coalition was warning against just to make it look like she was making progress (and somehow the media spun it as such at the time), a backstop she and her own party now desperately want out of 16 months later. Trapped herself in her own red lines which were designed to appease the Brexiteer wing of the party, but has just led to a horrendous deal on the table.
The MPs aren't great but they have been dealt a pretty horrible hand to deal with, the real problem though is political games has been a big part of Brexit from the start. Like I think if from day 1 May had targeted some kind of Norway style proposal, there was a majority for that in the beginning, and you wouldn't have had any of the shambles of the last years which has caused tensions to rise. The delay has just led to hardened attitudes where the majority now either want no deal or remain, at the opposite ends of the spectrum basically.
May has actually failed pretty spectacularly. She effectively gave up Tories majority for nothing, which pretty much buried the idea that Tories would just get what they want there and then. Signed up to a backstop that her coalition was warning against just to make it look like she was making progress (and somehow the media spun it as such at the time), a backstop she and her own party now desperately want out of 16 months later. Trapped herself in her own red lines which were designed to appease the Brexiteer wing of the party, but has just led to a horrendous deal on the table.
To add to something I said a few posts ago also. On top of all the other issues, the DUP say they will pull their confidence and supply if May's WA passes, which will also lead to the collapse of government. May really is trapped with no real solutions if she wants to keep the government and party together.
You could say DUP are bluffing, but based on their actions so far, they don't seem the types to bluff. And ultimately you'd expect them to value the union far higher than Brexit (something they've since confirmed).
You could say DUP are bluffing, but based on their actions so far, they don't seem the types to bluff. And ultimately you'd expect them to value the union far higher than Brexit (something they've since confirmed).
n88uk
22 Apr 19 01:50
Joined: 26 May 12
| Topic/replies: 173,556 | Blogger: n88uk's blog
Democracy doesn't mean just blindly doing what the people want. It's a parliamentary democracy, the idea is you are meant to elect people who know better than you to make the decisions for you, because a direct democracy would just be total chaos.
The real problem though is referendums are not like elections, for one they aren't even binding.
^^
I agree with this.
That is why I am so against a second referendum before the first one happens.
If the MPs do not want to carry out the 1st referendum they should just not enact it.
They did enact it so they now need to revoke A50 if that is what they want to do.
A 2nd Referendum by them in the hope the public vote to remain is daft.
We know their goal of asking for one is to revoke A50 so why not just revoke it?
22 Apr 19 01:50
Joined: 26 May 12
| Topic/replies: 173,556 | Blogger: n88uk's blog
Democracy doesn't mean just blindly doing what the people want. It's a parliamentary democracy, the idea is you are meant to elect people who know better than you to make the decisions for you, because a direct democracy would just be total chaos.
The real problem though is referendums are not like elections, for one they aren't even binding.
^^
I agree with this.
That is why I am so against a second referendum before the first one happens.
If the MPs do not want to carry out the 1st referendum they should just not enact it.
They did enact it so they now need to revoke A50 if that is what they want to do.
A 2nd Referendum by them in the hope the public vote to remain is daft.
We know their goal of asking for one is to revoke A50 so why not just revoke it?
Well I'd agreed with you a while ago that really they should revoke rather than do another ref if they wish to stop Brexit. But politically that will be harder to do, the only scenario where Article 50 will be revoked is as a last ditch attempt to stop no deal from happening. As it is though that's not too far-fetched a scenario to happen at some point.
Disagree. Nobody wants to stop it more than me but I don't accept Brexit is impossible; for politicians to revoke A50 would be a terrible indictment of themselves and the country. The buyers of it - the voters - have the option of returning Brexit before we make it irrevocable; and we must check that we still want to go through with it. Not that the result of a FinalSay referendum would heal the divided country entirely, but trying to please everybody is not a viable path, and the country should not be in thrall to an infantilised faction of the electorate who will always be angry anywy.
Brexit isn't impossible. The Brexit vision in the eyes of the people is.
Brexit to me in a nutshell is sovereignty and control of our borders ie destiny in our own hands, and not some bureaucrats and/or politicians we do not know and/or never voted for.
I also detest having to prop up the new EU members, and facilitate their economies and infrastructures courtesy of our annual net contributions who'd be our trade competitors in the future; not only are we financially negative being in The EU we do not/could not maximise what little opportunities in return eg how many British one knows are working in The EU compare to EU citizens working in the UK, and why? As far as I'm concerned no more than 5, and 3 are in Spain as their parents have moved there for the sun, sangria and less pacey life having sold their motor franchise business.
I also detest having to prop up the new EU members, and facilitate their economies and infrastructures courtesy of our annual net contributions who'd be our trade competitors in the future; not only are we financially negative being in The EU we do not/could not maximise what little opportunities in return eg how many British one knows are working in The EU compare to EU citizens working in the UK, and why? As far as I'm concerned no more than 5, and 3 are in Spain as their parents have moved there for the sun, sangria and less pacey life having sold their motor franchise business.
Brexit isn't impossible. The Brexit vision in the eyes of the people is.
Brexit is Hydra. The Brexit of the blue-collar guy who envisions his wages rising and labour becomes more scarce is different to that of, say, Tim Martin, who wants to scrap the minimum wage. That's why there should be a vote on the concrete terms of Leaving, as they are on the day of the referendum, versus Remain on the exact terms we now enjoy.
Brexit is Hydra. The Brexit of the blue-collar guy who envisions his wages rising and labour becomes more scarce is different to that of, say, Tim Martin, who wants to scrap the minimum wage. That's why there should be a vote on the concrete terms of Leaving, as they are on the day of the referendum, versus Remain on the exact terms we now enjoy.
unitedbiscuits
22 Apr 19 17:03
Joined: 27 Jan 02
| Topic/replies: 11,287 | Blogger: unitedbiscuits's blog
Brexit isn't impossible. The Brexit vision in the eyes of the people is.
Brexit is Hydra. The Brexit of the blue-collar guy who envisions his wages rising and labour becomes more scarce is different to that of, say, Tim Martin, who wants to scrap the minimum wage. That's why there should be a vote on the concrete terms of Leaving, as they are on the day of the referendum, versus Remain on the exact terms we now enjoy.
^
Even the head of the remain campaign said wages would go up if we left the EU.
Why do you think the greedy big businesses want to stay in the EU?
The answer is to keep their flow of cheap labour.
22 Apr 19 17:03
Joined: 27 Jan 02
| Topic/replies: 11,287 | Blogger: unitedbiscuits's blog
Brexit isn't impossible. The Brexit vision in the eyes of the people is.
Brexit is Hydra. The Brexit of the blue-collar guy who envisions his wages rising and labour becomes more scarce is different to that of, say, Tim Martin, who wants to scrap the minimum wage. That's why there should be a vote on the concrete terms of Leaving, as they are on the day of the referendum, versus Remain on the exact terms we now enjoy.
^
Even the head of the remain campaign said wages would go up if we left the EU.
Why do you think the greedy big businesses want to stay in the EU?
The answer is to keep their flow of cheap labour.
You're in favour of raising the minimum wage, IT?
I ask because many prominent Eurosceptics are in favour of reducing or scrapping the minimum wage. You normally take your cue from them so I'm interested to see what your view is.
I am in favour of setting a living wage depending on living costs in the area and scraping landlord subsidies (taxes breaks and housing benefit).
A national minimum wage is a terrible idea.
A national minimum wage is a terrible idea.
So minimum wage (terrible idea) to be superceded by "living wage" - at what level for London?
No idea to be honest. Not something I have done any research on.
It just feels wrong the level is set the same for London as it is areas like Crewe that are cheaper to live in.
It just feels wrong the level is set the same for London as it is areas like Crewe that are cheaper to live in.
The current London living wage is currently £10.55 ph. Source https://www.livingwage.org.uk/calculation
How much more do you think it should be post-Brexit?
How much more do you think it should be post-Brexit?
I'm here for a while but there may be something else on the internet. May I trouble you for a figure, Insider Trader?
No disrespect mr biscuits ,but you have a lot to say about nothing, attention seeker?
Yes. I am drawing attention to the Leave contradiction that Eurosceptics promise higher low-skill wages while intending to scrap minimum wage in UK.
Awaiting details of Insider Trader's vision.
Awaiting details of Insider Trader's vision.
UB tying himself up in knots talking his usual points on a cycle.
Min wage and living wage is nothing to do with Brexit.
It is one of the few things that can be set by the UK government.
Labour Brexitiers probably want it higher. Tory ones less so.
The same as Labour remoaners probably want it higher. Tory ones less so.
All you do is run the same points on a cycle hoping people will forget all already made that point before.
If you have nothing new to say why bother?
Min wage and living wage is nothing to do with Brexit.
It is one of the few things that can be set by the UK government.
Labour Brexitiers probably want it higher. Tory ones less so.
The same as Labour remoaners probably want it higher. Tory ones less so.
All you do is run the same points on a cycle hoping people will forget all already made that point before.
If you have nothing new to say why bother?
Min wage and living wage is nothing to do with Brexit.
It has everything to do with Brexit and, as Labour have no chance of power before '22, concentrate on the Blukip vision, for whom you Insider Trader is a mouthpiece. But has he thought it through? Again, what is the proper "living wage" in Brexit London?
It has everything to do with Brexit and, as Labour have no chance of power before '22, concentrate on the Blukip vision, for whom you Insider Trader is a mouthpiece. But has he thought it through? Again, what is the proper "living wage" in Brexit London?
IT MIA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jesaZl1ysU&t=13s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jesaZl1ysU&t=13s
The direction of this thread does expose the dishonesty of the Leave campaign. Promising higher base wages and scrapping min wage at once. You'd think after three years, one of the alt-Right sites would have reconciled the contradiction for InsiderTrader to copy and save face.
The economics of it don't even matter if you can't even agree on a basis for an exit. The UK can't even agree on a viable exit plan. Either "it's not Brexit" or it's not possible.
UB is trying to "twist" two non-mutually exclusive elements of microeconomics to facilitate his/her argument for 'Remaining' in The EU which is extremely disingenuous to say the least.
Minimum Wage and Living Wage can co-exist whether it is before or post Brexit or (prior to EU membership) eg countries which are outside The EU can still trade with The EU and/or internationally; the former is a legal requirement, the latter is not but demographic and geographic dependent.
Minimum Wage and Living Wage can co-exist whether it is before or post Brexit or (prior to EU membership) eg countries which are outside The EU can still trade with The EU and/or internationally; the former is a legal requirement, the latter is not but demographic and geographic dependent.
A national living wage is a misnomer as the cost of living in London and other cities must be far higher than in the countryside where food is typically about 30% cheaper. when ever I venture from rural Somerset to a city (very rarely theses days) I am appalled by the constant drip of money for transport, cups of coffee, etc etc. I often go a week without spending money on anything apart from fuel for the car and a supermarket shop. There are the background costs like electricity, telephone and TV package, council tax etc. of course but in terms of day to day it is very low compared to towns.
Indeed, that's why there's a London Waiting allowance added on to one's salary if working in London; the transport costs in London is absolutely mega even for short journeys using an Oyster Card. Having said that I was pleasantly surprised it only cost £6.60p travelling from Cheam (Morden Tube) to Woolwich Arsenal for a wedding at Woolwich Town Hall last month given the journey, time taken and at rush hour.
For instance, journey started at Morden Tube --> Bank --> DLR --> Woolwich Arsenal; the Underground was not fun, but the journey on DLR was pleasant and beautiful observing the massive rejuvenation happened to that area eg there's even a London (Emirates) Cable Car connecting The Royal Docks (Canning Town) and Greenwich.
For instance, journey started at Morden Tube --> Bank --> DLR --> Woolwich Arsenal; the Underground was not fun, but the journey on DLR was pleasant and beautiful observing the massive rejuvenation happened to that area eg there's even a London (Emirates) Cable Car connecting The Royal Docks (Canning Town) and Greenwich.
Waiting might be more appropriate but I think you mean weighting
Yep, that's the old head using modern technology ie mixing verbal (on phone) and typing (laptop).
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539