Brexit

by **ShahenshahG** Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 12:16

Funniest thing to happen in years. Have been following the craziness on the FT. Despite the implications if our current crop of retards manage to push it through I can't remember when I've read the news everyday without fail and learned something new. What does everyone think of the possibility that we stay in the single market, retain freedom of movement. Pay into the EU coffers and lose our vote ??

by Tattie Scones RRN Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 12:20

by **ShahenshahG** Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 12:25

You got any family over in the EU?

by dyrewolfe Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 12:41

Its an absolute outrage that anyone is even considering paying the EU to retain access to the free market. It smacks of attempted bribery.

Okay, I didn't for one moment believe the campaign slogan that our £350 million-a-week membership fee would go to the NHS, (how could they promise that before they even started to work out a budget?) but as long as that money stays within the UK economy, it has to be better than having it swell the coffers in Brussels.

Fortunately I think it will be a non-starter, as part of the EU's terms are that we also continue to allow freedom of movement (and if this isn't rescinded I will be absolutely furious).

I'm one of those that voted Leave and for me "Leave" should mean full political, economic and judicial separation.

I find it hilarious that Remainers continue to argue that leaving will mean the end of life as we know it...that it will somehow be a total disaster.

All it means is rewinding the clock back to the 1970s when you had to get a visa to live / work abroad and businesses wanting to trade with the continent had to pay additional export / import duties.

Inconvenient, certainly and an additional financial burden to bear, but since this already applies to any countries outside the EU, I don't see where the whole "disaster" thing fits in.

This was never going to be easy or painless, but I genuinely believe the long-term benefits will outweigh the short-term pain.

Also, I really don't get why migrants already here are suddenly complaining that they're feeling alienated and unwanted, because of the Leave vote. They've come over under our existing terms of membership, so unless they suddenly feel an urge to return to their country of origin, after we leave, I don't see a problem.

Fair enough there have been a few unsavoury incidents, but thats just the usual idiot minority, seeing an opportunity to cause trouble. I would hope most of the people who voted Leave don't want to see all migrants rounded up and shipped out.

However, according to the news last night, immigration to the UK reached record levels in the run-up to the referendum and we really need to establish some control over this, given we're already struggling to house, school, provide public transport and healthcare for the existing population.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/dec/01/immigration-to-uk-hit-record-levels-in-run-up-to-brexit-vote-latest-figures-show

by **ShahenshahG** Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 12:54

Don't forget the repatriation of a million or two pensioners dyre!

by dyrewolfe Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 12:59

ShahenshahG wrote:Don't forget the repatriation of a million or two pensioners dyre!

Only a short-term problem, as they won't be around too long. Wink

That sounds more callous in writing than it did in my head... Run

by **ShahenshahG** Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 13:00

Will type a better response later but you're glossing over the major details in particular the just in time supply chains which won't just be inconvenient it will be fat for those businesses on both sides. Some of our agreements will fail to apply to us once we leave and the necessity of establishing new trades will decimate our agricultural industry as the American force us to start accepting their hormone laden beef under WTO rules. We won't have the clout or the inclination to stop them. Also check out GATT and our ability to sell animal products etc etc. This is a hardcore sh*tstorm.

by **ShahenshahG** Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 13:01

dyrewolfe wrote:
ShahenshahG wrote:Don't forget the repatriation of a million or two pensioners dyre!

Only a short-term problem, as they won't be around too long.

That sounds more callous in writing than it did in my head...

Hahaha my sort of humour to be honest.

by dyrewolfe Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 13:19

ShahenshahG wrote:Will type a better response later but you're glossing over the major details in particular the just in time supply chains which won't just be inconvenient it will be fat for those businesses on both sides. Some of our agreements will fail to apply to us once we leave and the necessity of establishing new trades will decimate our agricultural industry as the American force us to start accepting their hormone laden beef under WTO rules. We won't have the clout or the inclination to stop them. Also check out GATT and our ability to sell animal products etc etc. This is a hardcore sh*tstorm.

Well most businesses operate on a JIT basis now, as stockpiling creates expensive overheads. But the exit process will take up to 2 years, which at least gives them time to plan for disruptions to their supply chains. Its not going to be an overnight switch.

As to agricultural agreements...I have yet to see any US beef (or any animal products, for that matter) on the shelves of my local supermarket. Its either British, Irish or from places like New Zealand. As it stands, we might lose the Irish produce, but I would be surprised if we couldn't make up the loss somewhere else.

British farmers seem pretty evenly split (going by the interviews I've seen). Some are actually looking forward and planning to export their produce outside the EU, while others aren't so optimistic. Again, there is time to plan, so the actual impact shouldn't be anywhere as dramatic as you describe. Things like Foot and Mouth, BSE and floods have devastated our farming industry in the past, but its recovered. I feel pretty confident they can overcome this as well.

I also think its dangerous to fixate on the US as a primary market, when there is the rest of the world to consider. Of course the US is important, but given we're supposed to have this "special relationship" I would hope we can gently nudge them in the right direction.

by TRUSSMAN66 Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 13:34

Seeing as the vote was so close and people were lied to and subjected to a campaign of hate..

I'll vote for any party that campaigns on a second referendum..Apart from the Lib dems.

Principle-less bunch of chancers.

by Derbymanc Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 13:47

That's the remainers problem for not seeiing it though Truss, and they're supposed to be the smart ones Wink

by **navyblueshorts** Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 14:14

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Seeing as the vote was so close and people were lied to and subjected to a campaign of hate..

I'll vote for any party that campaigns on a second referendum..Apart from the Lib dems.

Principle-less bunch of chancers.

Just out of interest, what myriad of U-turns do you base that sweeping statement on?

by **ShahenshahG** Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 14:25

Also may has u turned on every single thing she has promised so far.

by TRUSSMAN66 Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 14:31

navyblueshorts wrote:
TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Seeing as the vote was so close and people were lied to and subjected to a campaign of hate..

I'll vote for any party that campaigns on a second referendum..Apart from the Lib dems.

Principle-less bunch of chancers.

Just out of interest, what myriad of U-turns do you base that sweeping statement on?

Education policy..2010

No VAT rises..2010..

Opposed spending cuts 2010..

Against housing benefit cuts in 2010...

That do for starters....Or do you want more.. Cool

by SecretFly Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 14:31

Brexit?

Yeah, it's still a brilliant decision. Good luck with the full implementation of it.

by Derbymanc Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 14:41

I wish we could have another vote, get it voted for again and have the remainers even more bitchier than normal :-)

by TRUSSMAN66 Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 14:51

I'm not bitchy for myself...Bitchy because I want to see jobs and people doing well for their families..

It will be a disaster.....

by **ShahenshahG** Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 15:02

Not even for his own who it's probably going to be a lot worse for.

by TRUSSMAN66 Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 15:10

I wouldn't have minded Brexit had the whole thing been argued in a grown up fashion..

Remain has to take its share of the blame...

People didn't realise the importance of the question.....They can repent at leisure...

by **ShahenshahG** Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 15:17

I wouldn't even mind it now if they did it over 10-20 years not this bitchy, half baked zealot idea of have our cake and eat it. We could make changes to our supply chains, discuss potential treaties with others outside of the EU just to get an idea of what would be required. We have rank amateurs negotiating and a populace who doesn't realise that its extended austerity to another decade or more.

by Derbymanc Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 15:21

Problem is you've had lies on both sides and a campaign that was diabolical no matter which side your on. All heaped on top of the 'your racist if you vote out' brigade which also didn't help at all.

Wouldn't mind seeing another referendum done properly with both sides facing big penalty's for lying or what have you but other than that. What's done is done, you can't argue for democracy then complain it hasn't worked out the way you wanted, all the bitching, moaning and dragging it through the mud now is just going to make it worse and the uncertainty just hits the markets more.

by **ShahenshahG** Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 16:36

So what you're saying is that we should all get behind the hapless prime minister who has managed to mess up spectacularly by

- a hostile and impolitic speech Tory conference
- Threatening to force firms to list foreign workers
- openly said she would use immigrants as a bargaining chip
- Failed to adequately prepare her case
- Failed to defend the judiciary from abuse for doing their job
- Has been antagonizing the EU by trying to shift blame onto them
- Is bribing large global companies with taxpayer money so they won't relocate.

In the meantime, she's appointed Dr Liam Fox, who can't tell his a*se from his elbow, Boris who has already managed to piss both sides off by being the lying sc*mbag that he is and making political blunder after blunder, and getting other people to get the word out about his receptiveness to freedom of movement. and David Davis who has already managed to piss both sides off by offering to pay to be part of the market. As someone put it "Dear secretary of the golf club, I am sorry to announce that i am leaving, how much will I need to pay to be able to play and practice golf on your course?, Yours regretfully, David Davis""

You can go meekly along with it if you want but those who want to fight are as entitled to fight it as much as they want without resorting to violence.

by SecretFly Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 16:39

ShahenshahG wrote:So what you're saying is that we should all get behind the hapless prime minister who has managed to mess up spectacularly by

- a hostile and impolitic speech Tory conference
- Threatening to force firms to list foreign workers
- openly said she would use immigrants as a bargaining chip
- Failed to adequately prepare her case
- Failed to defend the judiciary from abuse for doing their job
- Has been antagonizing the EU by trying to shift blame onto them
- Is bribing large global companies with taxpayer money so they won't relocate.

In the meantime, she's appointed Dr Liam Fox, who can't tell his a*se from his elbow, Boris who has already managed to piss both sides off by being the lying sc*mbag that he is and making political blunder after blunder, and getting other people to get the word out about his receptiveness to freedom of movement. and David Davis who has already managed to piss both sides off by offering to pay to be part of the market. As someone put it "Dear secretary of the golf club, I am sorry to announce that i am leaving, how much will I need to pay to be able to play and practice golf on your course?, Yours regretfully, David Davis""

You can go meekly along with it if you want but those who want to fight are as entitled to fight it as much as they want without resorting to violence.

In short, you're saying you don't want to get behind a Prime Minister who is Pro-Brexit?

That's reasonable. But so is it reasonable that you wouldn't agree with a thing she or her cabinet are doing, have done or might do in the future. Different political ideologies are different political ideologies.

by **ShahenshahG** Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 16:44

SecretFly wrote:
ShahenshahG wrote:So what you're saying is that we should all get behind the hapless prime minister who has managed to mess up spectacularly by

- a hostile and impolitic speech Tory conference
- Threatening to force firms to list foreign workers
- openly said she would use immigrants as a bargaining chip
- Failed to adequately prepare her case
- Failed to defend the judiciary from abuse for doing their job
- Has been antagonizing the EU by trying to shift blame onto them
- Is bribing large global companies with taxpayer money so they won't relocate.

In the meantime, she's appointed Dr Liam Fox, who can't tell his a*se from his elbow, Boris who has already managed to piss both sides off by being the lying sc*mbag that he is and making political blunder after blunder, and getting other people to get the word out about his receptiveness to freedom of movement. and David Davis who has already managed to piss both sides off by offering to pay to be part of the market. As someone put it "Dear secretary of the golf club, I am sorry to announce that i am leaving, how much will I need to pay to be able to play and practice golf on your course?, Yours regretfully, David Davis""

You can go meekly along with it if you want but those who want to fight are as entitled to fight it as much as they want without resorting to violence.

In short, you're saying you don't want to get behind a Prime Minister who is Pro-Brexit?

ShahenshahG wrote:I wouldn't even mind it now if they did it over 10-20 years not this bitchy, half baked zealot idea of have our cake and eat it. We could make changes to our supply chains, discuss potential treaties with others outside of the EU just to get an idea of what would be required. We have rank amateurs negotiating and a populace who doesn't realise that its extended austerity to another decade or more.

That's reasonable. But so is it reasonable that you wouldn't agree with a thing she or her cabinet are doing, have done or might do in the future. Different political ideologies are different political ideologies.

by **ShahenshahG** Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 16:56

I'm willing to back an intelligent serious politician if it's done in a way where the scope for serious mitigation of the damage - I'm not saying that I support Brexit but I wouldn't for example abuse Hammond for what he did last week i.e. making the best of a bad situation. Unfortunately he is one misstep away from being chewed up by the rabid brexiteers in the government and May is egging them on for personal political gain. If It was me, I would first make the point that this is less like a divorce than it is two friends heading for the same destination using different paths and I would unilaterally agree to previous obligations and for the Eu migrants resident here to be able to stay. Then I'd flesh out what exactly I wanted before determining concession I'd be willing to give and arguments I could make. Yeah it's not in their interest to give us an easy ride but this doesn't mean they won't be willing to grant concessions where they benefit. As of yet, the only thing May and the cabinet has achieved is to p*ss off the Europeans, cool relations with India and China and bribe Nissan to stay in the Uk.

by SecretFly Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 17:18

ShahenshahG wrote:I wouldn't even mind it now if they did it over 10-20 years not this bitchy, half baked zealot idea of have our cake and eat it. We could make changes to our supply chains, discuss potential treaties with others outside of the EU just to get an idea of what would be required. We have rank amateurs negotiating and a populace who doesn't realise that its extended austerity to another decade or more.

The EU (such as that animal is - i.e. nobody knows who actually speaks for it but it still seems to always perfectly know the right way forward for everyone - always) - that EU is not prepared to do anything over 10 to 20 years.
So let's not be blaming the UK government totally for that one. 10 to 20 years is too easy of a ride to give a Nation that put the two fingers up to the Great Unifying Pathway chosen for Europe by that very EU. They can't be seen to give an easy Out to any Nation or else that will make an OUT option attractive for everyone else.
Shudder the thought of a rush to the doors for the EU. Wink

That scares the schidt out of the high earners in Brussels.
The very fact that the UK are being given hard talk by the EU establishment is proof of how worried they are that the UK could actually make a good go of existing outside their 'protective unbrella'. They want UK out quick to make the leaving as potentially difficult as possible. As I've said before, they're nice kinda people, until you say you don't wangt to be ordered around by them anymore. Then the real teeth show.

Plus... let's not pretend ignorance of how time plays on people's minds either. "Give us 10 to 20 years to get used to the idea of leaving....and sure then.... Whistle

well, we might by then have hopefully forgotten that we want to leave; we might have a different government in place that will want to forget we promised to leave - and we might have a new young electorate that could be motivated to keep voting in people that would try to keep us in"

The Leave camp may be stupid but they're not exactly dumb enough to fall for that 'long finger' approach. That's much too advantageous to the opposite side of the referendum debate. That's way too much territory and time given to the Remain camp to plot and plan a non-compliance to the wish of the majority.

by **ShahenshahG** Fri 2 Dec 2016 - 17:28

SecretFly wrote:
ShahenshahG wrote:I wouldn't even mind it now if they did it over 10-20 years not this bitchy, half baked zealot idea of have our cake and eat it. We could make changes to our supply chains, discuss potential treaties with others outside of the EU just to get an idea of what would be required. We have rank amateurs negotiating and a populace who doesn't realise that its extended austerity to another decade or more.

The EU (such as that animal is - i.e. nobody knows who actually speaks for it but it still seems to always perfectly know the right way forward for everyone - always) - that EU is not prepared to do anything over 10 to 20 years.
So let's not be blaming the UK government totally for that one. 10 to 20 years is too easy of a ride to give a Nation that put the two fingers up to the Great Unifying Pathway chosen for Europe by that very EU. They can't be seen to give an easy Out to any Nation or else that will make an OUT option attractive for everyone else.
Shudder the thought of a rush to the doors for the EU. That scares the schidt out of the high earners in Brussels.
The very fact that the UK are being given hard talk by the EU establishment is proof of how worried they are that the UK could actually make a good go of existing outside their 'protective unbrella'. They want UK out quick to make the leaving as potentially difficult as possible. As I've said before, they're nice kinda people, until you say you don't wangt to be ordered around by them anymore. Then the real teeth show.

Plus... let's not pretend ignorance of how time plays on people's minds either. "Give us 10 to 20 years to get used to the idea of leaving....and sure then.... well, we might by then have hopefully forgotten that we want to leave; we might have a different government in place that will want to forget we promised to leave - and we might have a new young electorate that could be motivated to keep voting in people that would try to keep us in"

The Leave camp may be stupid but they're not exactly dumb enough to fall for that 'long finger' approach. That's much too advantageous to the opposite side of the referendum debate. That's way too much territory and time given to the Remain camp to plot and plan a non-compliance to the wish of the majority.

Until we trigger that article Europe doesn't have a choice, though I can't deny that "long finger approach" would be a Very difficult sell but even 4 or 5 years would make it more palatable as they'd have time to recruit, time to identify large swathes of regulation, treaties that we can adopt wholesale and sort out later, then narrow down on the important bits that need immediate attention. What's going on isn't even p*ssing in the wind, it's lying down on your back and p*ssing straight up in the air.

by dyrewolfe Tue 6 Dec 2016 - 13:57

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I wouldn't have minded Brexit had the whole thing been argued in a grown up fashion..

Remain has to take its share of the blame...

People didn't realise the importance of the question.....They can repent at leisure...

This I do agree with.

It was ridiculous how little information was given in the build-up. Just scaremongering and jingoism from both sides.

They should have done a little homework and set out lists of possible pros and cons for leaving, with a bit of explanation behind them, instead of just springing the question. At least give people something to help make a decision.

But then the government didn't expect a Yes vote - we caught them with their pants down! Rolling Eyes

by **Pr4wn** Tue 6 Dec 2016 - 14:02

Yup, and now everything is wonderful, just as Herr Farage proclaimed.

by dyrewolfe Tue 6 Dec 2016 - 14:09

SecretFly wrote:
ShahenshahG wrote:I wouldn't even mind it now if they did it over 10-20 years not this bitchy, half baked zealot idea of have our cake and eat it. We could make changes to our supply chains, discuss potential treaties with others outside of the EU just to get an idea of what would be required. We have rank amateurs negotiating and a populace who doesn't realise that its extended austerity to another decade or more.

The EU (such as that animal is - i.e. nobody knows who actually speaks for it but it still seems to always perfectly know the right way forward for everyone - always) - that EU is not prepared to do anything over 10 to 20 years.
So let's not be blaming the UK government totally for that one. 10 to 20 years is too easy of a ride to give a Nation that put the two fingers up to the Great Unifying Pathway chosen for Europe by that very EU. They can't be seen to give an easy Out to any Nation or else that will make an OUT option attractive for everyone else.
Shudder the thought of a rush to the doors for the EU. That scares the schidt out of the high earners in Brussels.
The very fact that the UK are being given hard talk by the EU establishment is proof of how worried they are that the UK could actually make a good go of existing outside their 'protective unbrella'. They want UK out quick to make the leaving as potentially difficult as possible. As I've said before, they're nice kinda people, until you say you don't wangt to be ordered around by them anymore. Then the real teeth show.

Plus... let's not pretend ignorance of how time plays on people's minds either. "Give us 10 to 20 years to get used to the idea of leaving....and sure then.... well, we might by then have hopefully forgotten that we want to leave; we might have a different government in place that will want to forget we promised to leave - and we might have a new young electorate that could be motivated to keep voting in people that would try to keep us in"

The Leave camp may be stupid but they're not exactly dumb enough to fall for that 'long finger' approach. That's much too advantageous to the opposite side of the referendum debate. That's way too much territory and time given to the Remain camp to plot and plan a non-compliance to the wish of the majority.

Oh Fly - I think I wuv you! kiss

I don't think I could have said it better myself.

Still, the thing that scares me most is the Remain campaign's determination to ensure Parliament gets to wade into the debate over who has the authority to trigger Article 50. Surest way to stall Brexit - if not kill it stone dead.

Even worse, it seems the Scottish government may get to have a say - and we all know what they think.

This is why, if we are to have Brexit at all, I'm praying the government wins its appeal. Its the only way the will of the people will be done (well, the majority who voted in the Referendum anyway). Which is surely what matters in a democracy?

Makes me laugh, these Remoaners saying its undemocratic unless Parliament gets a say, when they openly admit to wanting to derail the whole process anyway (not MPs I hasten to add - just those who want Parliament to be given the power to invoke Article 50).

by dyrewolfe Tue 6 Dec 2016 - 14:19

ShahenshahG wrote:
SecretFly wrote:
ShahenshahG wrote:I wouldn't even mind it now if they did it over 10-20 years not this bitchy, half baked zealot idea of have our cake and eat it. We could make changes to our supply chains, discuss potential treaties with others outside of the EU just to get an idea of what would be required. We have rank amateurs negotiating and a populace who doesn't realise that its extended austerity to another decade or more.

The EU (such as that animal is - i.e. nobody knows who actually speaks for it but it still seems to always perfectly know the right way forward for everyone - always) - that EU is not prepared to do anything over 10 to 20 years.
So let's not be blaming the UK government totally for that one. 10 to 20 years is too easy of a ride to give a Nation that put the two fingers up to the Great Unifying Pathway chosen for Europe by that very EU. They can't be seen to give an easy Out to any Nation or else that will make an OUT option attractive for everyone else.
Shudder the thought of a rush to the doors for the EU. That scares the schidt out of the high earners in Brussels.
The very fact that the UK are being given hard talk by the EU establishment is proof of how worried they are that the UK could actually make a good go of existing outside their 'protective unbrella'. They want UK out quick to make the leaving as potentially difficult as possible. As I've said before, they're nice kinda people, until you say you don't wangt to be ordered around by them anymore. Then the real teeth show.

Plus... let's not pretend ignorance of how time plays on people's minds either. "Give us 10 to 20 years to get used to the idea of leaving....and sure then.... well, we might by then have hopefully forgotten that we want to leave; we might have a different government in place that will want to forget we promised to leave - and we might have a new young electorate that could be motivated to keep voting in people that would try to keep us in"

The Leave camp may be stupid but they're not exactly dumb enough to fall for that 'long finger' approach. That's much too advantageous to the opposite side of the referendum debate. That's way too much territory and time given to the Remain camp to plot and plan a non-compliance to the wish of the majority.

Until we trigger that article Europe doesn't have a choice, though I can't deny that "long finger approach" would be a Very difficult sell but even 4 or 5 years would make it more palatable as they'd have time to recruit, time to identify large swathes of regulation, treaties that we can adopt wholesale and sort out later, then narrow down on the important bits that need immediate attention. What's going on isn't even p*ssing in the wind, it's lying down on your back and p*ssing straight up in the air.

Well in fairness to the government, they are being somewhat distracted by the Remainers trying to hand the power to trigger Article 50 to Parliament...which would open a such a can of worms that Brexit may never happen.

Why do you think they are investing so much time and energy in appealing the High Court ruling? If they can successfully argue their case for having authority, then they can proceed with their plans for our glorious exit.

If Parliament wins, then the government can pretty much bin all its plans and start from scratch, to accommodate everyone else's demands.

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 6 Dec 2016 - 14:23

It hasn't got any plans..

That is the problem...

by dyrewolfe Tue 6 Dec 2016 - 16:02

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:It hasn't got any plans..

That is the problem...

Do you know something that we don't Truss?

Ya got an informant in the Commons? Wink

by **Pr4wn** Tue 6 Dec 2016 - 17:05

If you think that this government has a cohesive plan then you're delusional. Davis is a moron.

by CaledonianCraig Tue 6 Dec 2016 - 18:04

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Seeing as the vote was so close and people were lied to and subjected to a campaign of hate..

I'll vote for any party that campaigns on a second referendum..

Oh the irony.

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 6 Dec 2016 - 18:37

CaledonianCraig wrote:
TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Seeing as the vote was so close and people were lied to and subjected to a campaign of hate..

I'll vote for any party that campaigns on a second referendum..

Oh the irony.

Not still crying about 2014 are you mate...

Britain is better off in Europe...Scotland is better off in Britain..

No irony...Just thinking about jobs and well being.

by SecretFly Tue 6 Dec 2016 - 19:23

Obviously 'jobs and wellbeing' were high on the list of some people voting against remaining in the currently constructed EU.
Europe might indeed be a nice place to be - the EU though doesn't bequeath that identity. The EU is merely an admin model that's been tried. The EU isn't Europe. So many people fail to recognise the separation.
Let's try another European model. Let's reform the obvious problem rather than reforming the States that increasingly have a problem with it.

Oh don't be saying that, Mr Fly! That's a threat to the Big Plan. Nobody can stall the Big Plan.

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 6 Dec 2016 - 19:30

Have no doubts many well intentioned people voted for out.....Unfortunately the biggest section of outers were those who won't need to worry about things like jobs and family provision..

But we are where we are......If it is going ahead I'd rather it was properly supervised and scrutinized...

by SecretFly Tue 6 Dec 2016 - 20:14

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Have no doubts many well intentioned people voted for out.....Unfortunately the biggest section of outers were those who won't need to worry about things like jobs and family provision..

But we are where we are......If it is going ahead I'd rather it was properly supervised and scrutinized...

What about UK Remainers getting a media and social media large chant going along the lines of: "Reform the EU! Reform the EU!"
Why don't they start actually communicating WITH EU citizens (through modern networks) and being pro-active rather than being people who constantly talk to each other about the evils of being outside the club.
They are for the moment still inside the club. Start using their voices proactively and actually start applying pressure on the EU itself. The EU has gotten too easy a ride in the media for decades - it always does.
Always right.
Always the best option.
Always the bright future ahead.
Always more bonuses than minuses.

The truth is that that claim simply isn't true in the minds of the real citizens of the Nations that make up the membership - thus why so few referendums have been put to them when these Major sovereignty dilution Treaties came in waves; thus too why the EU has become a place where the difference between the Haves and Have Nots has merely shifted around a bigger geographic area - the eternal struggle between both hasn't remotely gone away in this Perfect Unified Construction for a New European Age.

Reform that which isn't working.

Nobody who has any connection to logic could remotely suggest the EU, as currently constructed, is working. If we were all compelled to revisit the entity of the EU in negotiations and agreed to hard-reset its political boundaries, then perhaps all the members of the EU could then agree to delaying a UK exit. There would then be a solid motive - a re-working of the fabric of the beast so that it might evolve to suit the Nations rather than the other way round.

There is a lack of creative thinking in the constant squabbles about the clock ticking on Article 50. There is a lack of genuine fight. There is a lack of smarts. The supposed problem is over-simplified and the UK, as a result, allows itself to be pushed into the corner.

by Tattie Scones RRN Wed 7 Dec 2016 - 14:36

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Have no doubts many well intentioned people voted for out.....Unfortunately the biggest section of outers were those who won't need to worry about things like jobs and family provision..

But we are where we are......If it is going ahead I'd rather it was properly supervised and scrutinized...

Where'd you get that from Truss?

by **Pr4wn** Wed 7 Dec 2016 - 15:23

Agree with Tattie. It's been proven that, especially in Wales and Northern England, it was the uneducated poor that voted out and ultimately won the vote for Leave.

The people that will suffer the most from loss of EU subsidies.

by TRUSSMAN66 Wed 7 Dec 2016 - 15:50

Yougov..

18-24............71-29 stay...
25-49............54-46 stay...
50-64............60-40 leave...
65+..............64-36 leave...

Agree with Tattie by all means...I'll stick with the data...

Uneducated poor people maybe less educated....But worth remembering Degrees don't give you common sense..

I work with "Educated" people every day.....Don't like all this patronising cheap-shotting.

Going on in the US at the moment with Trump...

by **Pr4wn** Wed 7 Dec 2016 - 16:04

Who is cheap-shotting? Sorry, not sure what you're on about.

Obviously older people were, on the whole, going to vote leave, if only for nostalgic purposes. Harking back to the "good old days" of sovereignty and all that other bollox.

What really won it for leave was the desperate poor. Exactly the same as with Trump at the moment. Those that will be harmed most from the outcome of the vote are those that came out in support of it.

by TRUSSMAN66 Wed 7 Dec 2016 - 16:30

"Desperate poor"...............You can't validate that remark......You don't know how many desperate people voted out....

Sure some did vote on raciallines but also sure not just the working class..

Old people were desperate were they ??...

So if your educated or old and voted leave that's okay.....But if you're uneducated and under funded you're too thick to look at the whole story before making up your mind....

You're turning into Tophat.....

by **Pr4wn** Wed 7 Dec 2016 - 16:39

It's been well-documented that the poorest areas in the UK voted to Leave. Just read the news?

I didn't say old people were desperate? I said something completely different Erm

I didn't say anything about it being ok to vote leave in certain circumstances either.

What I was trying to convey - which is difficult when someone is putting so many words into my mouth - is that it's a shame that the debate was so poorly informed that the people who will be hurt most by Brexit are the ones that ultimately tipped the balance in Leave's favour. The older generation were always going to vote leave on the whole, for the reasons I mentioned above.

Leave were undoubtedly spouting the most toxic false rhetoric but the Remain camp were too busy calling them racists to adequately defend their argument.

by Tattie Scones RRN Wed 7 Dec 2016 - 16:41

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Yougov..

18-24............71-29 stay...
25-49............54-46 stay...
50-64............60-40 leave...
65+..............64-36 leave...

Agree with Tattie by all means...I'll stick with the data...

Uneducated poor people maybe less educated....But worth remembering Degrees don't give you common sense..

I work with "Educated" people every day.....Don't like all this patronising cheap-shotting.

Going on in the US at the moment with Trump...

Cheers Truss - by the way, my comment wasn't a statement to be agreed/disagreed with....it was a genuine question.

I'm always a bit sceptical with percentages. There may have been only a few thousand who voted in the 18-24 group, whereas there might have been millions in the 25-49 (which was pretty close to half and half).

Stats look good, but I'm more into real detailed analysis rather than overall figures. I've learnt that from the Global Warming (sorry....Climate Change now that the figures aren't adding up) scam currently sweeping everyone up into hysteria.

by **ShahenshahG** Wed 7 Dec 2016 - 16:50

http://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/my_brawl_over_brexit_with_prime_minister_theresa_may_1_4807899

by **Pr4wn** Wed 7 Dec 2016 - 16:51

Climate change scam. You're serious?

by TRUSSMAN66 Wed 7 Dec 2016 - 16:52

Pr4wn wrote:It's been well-documented that the poorest areas in the UK voted to Leave. Just read the news?

I didn't say old people were desperate? I said something completely different

I didn't say anything about it being ok to vote leave in certain circumstances either.

What I was trying to convey - which is difficult when someone is putting so many words into my mouth - is that it's a shame that the debate was so poorly informed that the people who will be hurt most by Brexit are the ones that ultimately tipped the balance in Leave's favour. The older generation were always going to vote leave on the whole, for the reasons I mentioned above.

Leave were undoubtedly spouting the most toxic false rhetoric but the Remain camp were too busy calling them racists to adequately defend their argument.

Pull all the smileys you want....But I've given you the data and the biggest leave sections were 50-64 and 65+......

Statistically these people aren't as likely to be looking for social housing and competing with foreigners for jobs.....Younger people are..

As for Trump he did better in rural areas than urban ones........Why not pick on them instead of the uneducated...

You've lost this argument.........But I won't hold it against you.. Cool

by **Pr4wn** Wed 7 Dec 2016 - 17:00

No, you've just misunderstood me. There's no argument, chum. In terms of pure volume, of course the older generations had the highest numbers for leave. That's a given and hardly a point that needs to be made. My point was that, even given their large numbers, remain were expected to still win comfortably. The shock was that the poorer areas of Britain voted in such large numbers to leave the EU. Look at the numbers from Hull, for example.

I wasn't arguing against the fact that old people voted for leave in the largest absolute and proportional numbers. That was blindingly obvious.

by Sponsored content